In the early days of space exploration, there was a prevailing notion that space belonged to everyone. A world far above our own with no borders, boundaries, or limits, this was a realm of science, of understanding, of the secrets of the universe slowly revealing themselves.
Since those early days, it has become essential to everyday life, to global connection and communication, to the internet, and to economic expansion. It has also become increasingly clear that the objectives of space exploration are not solely scientific or for the benefit of humanity.
An orbital battlefield
Technological and scientific advances have opened the door to military opportunities and threats beyond our atmosphere. To some degree, space is already militarised. For instance, certain early warning systems for nuclear missile launches depend on satellites. The growing threat of these satellites being targeted is a national security priority for nuclear powers.
In recent years, the explorers and utilisers of space have not been limited to states. Private companies backed by billionaires are playing a bigger role in an ever-evolving landscape as they work with governments on a range of objectives.
Today, space can sometimes feel like an extension of Earth’s geography and a new battleground for geopolitical competition. In an era where information is a key strategic asset, eyes and ears in space are now vital for many intelligence operations.
Although international agreements grant all nations the right to scientific exploration in space and prohibit any country from claiming sovereignty, this has not stopped major powers from competing for dominance. This competition influences international relations, especially as the number of countries with a space presence grows—nearly 80 nations are now engaged in space exploration.
Private companies have played a crucial role in lowering the cost of manufacturing and launching spacecraft, driven by major scientific and technological advances, not least the re-use and re-launch of spacecraft. Whereas states once monopolised the technology required for space missions, companies now increasingly do so. Governments have even come to rely on their resources, such as those of the Starshield programme from Elon Musk's SpaceX.
Cold War space race
It all feels a far cry from the origins of the so-called 'space race' that began in 1945, following World War II, with US-USSR space competition forming an element of the Cold War that stretched to the early 1990s, as both superpowers sought to use their technological prowess to assert dominance on the global stage.
Initially, space was not a focus for investment, as the rivals tried to weaken each other economically and politically, yet it soon emerged as a new frontier for intelligence gathering and an arena to exploit.
In 1957, the Soviet Union stole a march by launching the intercontinental ballistic missile Sputnik-1, the first satellite to orbit the Earth. The West feared any Soviet ability to launch nuclear missiles that could threaten both Europe and the United States, prompting a new era of competition.
In 1958, the US launched its first satellite, Explorer-1. Later that year, President Dwight Eisenhower signed a decree establishing the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), a federal agency dedicated to space exploration. Although NASA's focus was scientific, Eisenhower also initiated programmes that focused on national security. Many were designed to gather intelligence on the Soviet Union through satellite surveillance. From 1961-64, NASA's budget grew to compete with the Soviet Union's lunar landing ambitions. A generation later, the end of the Cold War transformed the landscape. The USSR had broken up, and global peace seemed attainable.
Entering a new era
Since 2000, astronauts from all over the world have continuously lived and worked there, conducting various experiments in its orbital laboratory. Despite this collaboration, the immense costs involved in manufacturing spacecraft have remained major obstacles for nations aiming to send humans deeper into space.
NASA ended its Space Shuttle programme in 2011 after the US government could not commit to the substantial funding it required. In 2014, NASA revived the programme by working with two private companies: Boeing and SpaceX. Ever since, private companies have spearheaded a remarkable leap in space research, significantly lowering the cost of spacecraft manufacturing by reusing large parts of spacecraft that return to Earth.
Boeing was awarded $4.2bn to develop the manned spacecraft Starliner, while SpaceX got $2.6bn for its Dragon space shuttle, which it successfully launched to the ISS. In the past four years, Dragon has completed more than a dozen manned missions to orbit, compared to only half a dozen missions by Boeing's better-funded Starliner.
Even with the funding disparity between Boeing and SpaceX, the latter successfully launched the “Dragon” shuttle to the International Space Station about four years ago and has since completed around 14 private missions to orbit, carrying astronauts. In contrast, Boeing’s “Starliner” had only one manned mission, which faced multiple delays due to technical issues. The spacecraft eventually launched to the ISS on 5 June for a mission that was supposed to last eight days. However, additional problems surfaced, with five of the 28 control engines malfunctioning and helium leaks discovered in its propulsion system.
It took NASA and Boeing several weeks to try to resolve these issues, and on 24 August, it was announced that the astronauts would not return aboard the “Starliner.” Instead, they would remain on the International Space Station until February of the following year, when SpaceX’s “Dragon” spacecraft would be sent to safely bring them back to Earth.
Although this development is far from ideal for the stranded astronauts or Boeing, SpaceX has emerged as NASA’s last resort for rescuing Boeing’s astronauts. This situation has undoubtedly damaged Boeing’s reputation and cast doubt on its future plans for manned spacecraft missions.
A recent investigation published by the scientific journal Ars Technica asked why. It found that Boeing's management did not create an environment conducive to success in space, given the sensitivity and complexity. It also found that Boeing prioritised profits over the pursuit of scientific innovation that could help the US reach the moon's farthest point—the South Pole. The report concluded that Boeing's lack of familiarity with fixed-price contracts led it to allocate fewer resources than necessary to the Starliner programme.
Reliance on satellites
On the other hand, SpaceX has significantly outpaced Boeing in the US and globally. It now appears to dominate space, owning 6,648 out of the 10,000 satellites in orbit and is expected to have around a million in the near future. In December 2022, it introduced its Starshield programme, offering secure communication services and remote sensing capabilities through its satellite network. This enhanced its position and control within the space sector.
Starshield lets SpaceX provide a range of logistical services, including satellite control and management, satellite maintenance and cybersecurity, encrypted data processing, launch services, and, most notably, operating systems. Its permanent infrastructure and extensive satellite resources mean many companies in the space sector rely on these SpaceX services and satellites since they save them the expense of launching and providing their own. This breeds dependency.
The situation is not unlike cloud computing, where big tech companies provide infrastructure, such as massive servers, that require specific conditions for construction, enabling the rapid processing of vast amounts of data. These companies then sell their infrastructure services to clients who cannot afford to build and maintain their own data centres. While Starshield has streamlined satellite-based services, it has also given SpaceX a virtual monopoly.
Flying to the moon
These days, China is the United States' primary competitor in space exploration and control. Beijing wants to use the moon as a launch platform for missions to Mars and is eyeing its natural resources after discovering metal oxide deposits on the moon's surface, including silicon, titanium, and aluminium.
Chinese interest in space began in 2013 when President Xi Jinping declared that the nation's achievements were a natural outcome of its technological advancements. The most recent demonstration of its ambition came in April with the launch of the unmanned spacecraft Chang'e-6. It reached the moon's South Pole, a region yet to be explored. This is part of China's broader plan to send manned spacecraft, establish a Chinese space station, and identify areas rich in minerals essential for industries like microchips.
Read more: Chinese lunar mission peels back hidden layers of the moon
Chang'e-6 collected nearly 2kg of rock and soil samples to study volcanic activity in that lunar region. This made China the first (and so far, only) country to bring samples from the far side of the moon back to Earth. Scientists think these samples could aid our understanding of the formative history of both the Earth and the moon. This week, they revealed more details of their analysis of the basalts and lighter elements such as feldspar and glass.
The moon's South Pole is challenging terrain, not least because of the basins and crates created by asteroid impacts, which result in ridges that make it difficult for spacecraft to land. Controlling a spacecraft in such a remote region also involved huge communication challenges.
Less benign interests
The success of the Chinese mission enhances the country's space exploration capabilities, which is of increasing concern in America, particularly Beijing's plans to land astronauts on the moon by 2030. Beijing also wants Helium-3, a key element for generating nuclear fusion energy, which could address global energy demands for decades.
In May, NASA Administrator Bill Nelson cited concerns about the moon's South Pole, with its narrow ridges and limited suitable landing spots. He said the area contains water and ice—vital for fuelling future space missions.
America's greatest concern, however, is the military dimension of China's space programmes, which has allowed China to defy international laws governing space operations. China has launched 18 satellites to establish a network to provide internet access to remote areas in the country and is trying to develop a 14,000-satellite rival to the SpaceX network, which has been banned from operating in China.
Branching out, Beijing could offer its satellite network to developing countries by way of advancing China's strategic interests on the world stage. This would improve local internet access and carry serious implications for international relations. There was recent consternation over Ukraine's use of the SpaceX satellite network to continue its digital communications throughout Russia's invasion. Now, the West thinks Beijing's own network could be used to assist one side or another in future conflicts.
Forming space alliances
Washington wants key Middle Eastern states to align with its vision for the safe and peaceful exploration of space while also promoting its use for the benefit of humanity. In July, Nelson signed a cooperation agreement with Mohammed bin Saud Al-Tamimi of the Saudi Space Commission. This fosters a bilateral US-Saudi scientific collaboration and emphasises the crucial role that emerging space powers, particularly in the Middle East, are now playing.
The US is working to build an international alliance to counter Chinese ambitions in space advancements. This alliance, known as the Artemis Accords, which Riyadh signed in 2022, comprises 43 countries. It outlines a set of best practices for member states to follow when conducting manned or unmanned space missions, and in some ways is akin to traditional military alliances, like NATO, given that space is now so essential to modern international relations.
Yet space competition extends beyond the US, China, and Russia. India successfully launched its first spacecraft to the moon last year, while Japan made history in January by becoming the fifth country to land on the moon.
It did so after launching its Smart Lander for Investigating Moon (SLIM), specialising in highly precise landings in extremely tight spaces. Successfully reaching the moon is an undoubted historic achievement for India, China, and Japan. It also intensifies competition for space dominance and information security. The risks are as high as the costs, with satellites seen both as critical security infrastructure and viable military targets. Any state or alliance of states whose satellites are attacked may deem this to be a declaration of war by the attacker, not least because satellites play such a crucial role in early warning systems for nuclear weapon launches.
As competition for space dominance intensifies, the notion that space belongs to everyone seems ever quainter, but as the risks of miscalculation grow, there are calls to regulate space activities in line with states' own interests. It underscores the urgent need for international legislation. The world above our heads is too precious to be a war-triggering Wild West.
