International Security in Space: Presidential Leadership and the Future of Outerspace
Abstract
This work juxtaposes the history and current state of America’s involvement in militarizing outer space against the peaceful ideals that frame the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which was dramatically shaped by the United States and the space race mentality of the Cold War. This work seeks to shed light on the actual objectives and intentions of American outer space policies, past and present. Attention is focused on the influence of the office of the president and the prevailing attitudes towards the weaponization of space that seemingly contradict the peaceful ideals set forth in the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. By analyzing the early years of American space exploration, a distinct pattern of American exceptionalism can be seen. This pattern, when viewed in light of more recent American space policies that have consistently chipped away at the international agreements concerning the weaponization of outer space, clearly predicts the eventual withdrawal of the United States from the Outer Space Treaty in favor of strategically unilateral defensive posturing.
References
Harold Hongju Koh, “On American Exemptionalism,” Stanford Law Review 55, no. 5
(2003):1482
Sumit Majumdar, “Institutions for International Co-operation: An Analysis of the United Nations
Law of the Sea Conference and Convention,” Economic and Political Weekly 25, no 48/49 (1990)
-2683
Geroge S. Robinson and Harold M. White Jr, Envoys of Mankind: A Declaration of First Principles
for the Governance of Space Societies (Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1986), 196-197
Christopher Joyner, “Legal Implications of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,”
The International and Comparative Law Quarterly 35, no. 1 (1986): 190
Ibid, 191-192
David Callahan and Fred I. Greenstein, “The Reluctant Racer: Eisenhower and U.S. Space
Policy,” Spaceflight and the Myth of Presidential Leadership, ed. Roger D. Launius and Howard E. Mc-
Curdy (Urbana: Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois, 1997) 21
Dwayne A. Day, “Cover Stories and Hidden Agendas: Early Americna Space and National Security
Policy,” Reconsidering Sputnik: Forty Years Since the Soviet Satellite, ed. Roger D. Launius, John
M. Logsdon, and Robert W. Smith (Washington DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
, 162
Ibid, 163
Ibid, 162-165
Ibid, 167
Ibid, 171-172
Ibid, 173
Ibid, 173
Eilene Galloway, “Organizing the United States Government for Outer Space, 1957-1958,” Reconsidering
Sputnik: Forty Years Since the Soviet Satellite, ed. Roger D. Launius, John M. Logsdon, and
Robert W. Smith (Washington DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1997), 312-313
Testimony of Loftus E. Becker, Astronautics and Space Exploration, Hearings before the Select
Committee on Astronautics and Space Exploraiton, House of Representatives, 85th Cong., 2nd
Sess., on H.R. 11881, April 15-May 12, 1958, pp.1269 et seq.; National Aeronautics and Space Act,
Hearings before the Special Committee on Space and Astronautics, U.S. Senate 85th Cong., 2nd Sess.,
on S. 3609, May 6-15, 1958, pp.315 et seq. (reprinted in part in 38 Department of State Bulletin 962
(June 9. 1958)); Relative to the Establishment of Plans for the Peaceful Exploration of Outer Space,
Hearing before the Subcommittee on National Security and Scientific Developments Affecting Foreign
Policy of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, 85th Cong., 2nd Sess., on
H. Con. Res. 326, May 20, 1958, pp.23 et seq., quoted in O. J. Lissitzyn, “The American Position on
Outer Space and Antarctica,” The American Journal of International Law 53, no. 1 (1959): 127
Ibid, 127
Ibid, 126-128
Day “Cover Stories and Hidden Agendas,” 184
Galloway, “Organizing the United States Government for Outer Space,” 309
Galloway, “Organizing the United States Government for Outer Space,” 315
Ibid, 315
Day “Cover Stories and Hidden Agendas,” 186
Galloway, “Organizing the United States Government for Outer Space,” 315
Callahan and Greenstein, “The Reluctant Racer,” 37
Galloway, “Organizing the United States Government for Outer Space,” 316-317
Lyndon B. Johnson, Final Report of the Senate Special Committee on Space and Astronautics,
Pursuant to S. Res. 256 of the 85h Congress. 86th Congress, First Session, Senate Report No. 100.
March 11, 1959 quoted in Galloway, “Organizing the United States Government for Outer Space,” 319
Ibid, 319
Ibid, 321
Day, “Cover Stories and Hidden Agendas,” 190
Ibid, 191
John C. McAdams, “Eisenhower’s Farewell Address to the Nation,” http://mcadams.posc.
mu.edu/ike.htm
Roger D. Lannius, “Kennedy’s Space Policy Reconsidered: A Post-Cold War Perspective,” Air
Power History, (Winter 2003): 20
Michael R. Beschloss, “Kennedy and the Decision to Go to the Moon,” Spaceflight and the
Myth of Presidential Leadership, ed. Roger D. Launius and Howard E. McCurdy (Urbana: Board of
Trustees of the University of Illinois, 1997), 56
Ibid, 56
Kennedy, John F. Memorandum for Vice President. http://www.c-span.org/PresidentialLibraries/
Content/Kennedy/JFK_LBJ_Space.pdf
Ibid, 57
Ibid, 57
Launius, “Kennedy’s Space Policy Reconsidered,” 21
Ibid, 21
Ibid, 22-23
Ibid, 23
President’s Statement on the Convention of the Law of the Sea, 18 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc.
, 887 (July 9, 1982) quoted in Carlyle E. Maw, “The United States and the Law of the Sea after UNCLOS
III,” Law and Contemporary Problems 46, no. 2 (1983): 56
Antonia Chayes, “How American Treaty Behavior Threatens National Security,” International
Security 33, no. 1 (2008): 69
Ibid, 69
James F. Lee. Star Wars: The Strategic Defense Initiative. Ottowa: Library of Parliament, Research
Branch. (1990): 1-6
James Clay Moltz, “The Past, Present, and Future of Space Security,” The Brown Journal of
World Affairs 14, no. 1 (2007): 190
S. Rep. NO. 164, 100th Cong., 1st Sess. (1987); 133th Cong. REc. S12,498 (daily ed. September
, 1987); and 82 ICJ, p.151 quoted in Chayes, “How Americna Treaty Behavior Threatens National
Security,” 70
Moltz, “The Past, Present, and Future of Space Security,” 190
Col. John E. Hyten, USAF, “A Sea of Peace or a Theater of War? Dealing with the Inevitable
Conflict in Space,” Air & Space Power Journal, (Fall 2002): 81
Sami Fournier, “U.S. Test-Fires ‘MIRACLE’ at Satellite Reigniting ASAT Weapons Debate,”
Arms Control Today 27, (October 1997)
Hyten, “A Sea of Peace or a Theater of War?” 81
Eric Schmitt and Steven Lee Meyers, “Clinton Lawyers Give a Go-Ahead to Missile Shield,”
New York Times, June 15, 2000 quoted in Chayes, “How American Treaty Behavior Threatens National
Security,” 70-71
Hyten, “A Sea of Peace or a Theater of War?” 79
Moltz, “The Past, Present, and Future of Space Security,” 190
Ibid, 191
Eric M. Javits, “A U.S. Perspective on Space,” Future Security in Space: Commerical, Military,
and Arms Control Trade-Offs, ed. James Clay Moltz (Monterey, CA: Center for Nonproliferation
Studies, 2002) 52, http://www.cns.miis.edu/pubs/opapers/op10/op10.pdg quoted in Moltz, “The Past, Present, and Future of Space Security,” 191
Ibid, 191
Joan Johnson-Freese, “The New U.S. Space Policy: A Turn Toward Militancy?” Issues in Science
and Techonology (Winter 2007): 33-34
Ibid, 33-34
Ibid, 34
Ibid, 33-34
Ibid, 33-34
Jeff Foust. “A Change in Tone in National Space Policy.” The Space Review. Last modified July
, 2010. http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1660/1.
Ibid.
Michael Bourbonniere and Ricky J. Lee, ‘Legality of the Deployment of Conventional Weapons
in Earth Orbit: Balancing Space Law and the Law of Armed Conflict,” The European Journal of
International Law 18, no. 5 (2007): 876
Ibid, 876
Ibid, 878
Ibid, 878
Koh, “On American Exemptionalism,” 1499
Chayes, “How American Treaty Behavior Threatens National Security,” 47
Koh, “On American Exemptionalism,” 1501
McAdams, “Eisenhower’s Farewell Address to the Nation”
Jack L. Goldsmith and Eric A. Posner. The Limits of International Law. New York: Oxford
University Press. (2005): 1-13.
Joyner, “Legal Implications of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,” 198
Goldsmith and Posner. The Limits of International Law. 83-84
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
All works published in The Owl are published under a Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial, Share-Alike (CC-BY-NC-SA) license. The author retains copyright.
