​Against domination: On the U.S. attitude towards space programmes

Just as Firefly Aerospace became the first private entity to soft-land a robotic lander on the moon on March 2, NASA acting administrator Janet Petro said “the way that we keep America first is by dominating in all the domains of space. And the domain … we’re going to capture … is going to be on the surface of the moon, and around the moon”. The comment was objectionable in its essence, but also carries a lesson for the rest of the spacefaring world. The U.S. space programme remains the wealthiest and most farsighted in modern history. But like U.S. President Donald Trump, she seems to have lost sight of the difference between leadership and domination. Just as the conduct of Mr. Trump and the U.S. Vice-President at the White House meeting with the Ukraine President clarified the U.S.’s self-serving priorities, so too does Ms. Petro’s comment reveal a nakedly aggressive streak in American policy — in this case, what the U.S. sees as its rightful place in humankind’s aspirations about space.

The moon and cislunar space, and the material and intellectual resources required to access them, are part of the Great Commons and they are already suffering the effects of a growing tide of protectionism worldwide, exacerbated by gaps between the evolution of law and the pace of innovation. Regulatory clarity is emerging very slowly and is often stunted. The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recently said that it cannot be held responsible for the fragments of a SpaceX rocket that fell over Poland because the FAA lost oversight once SpaceX had lost control of it. Given the bent of the FAA’s and Ms. Petro’s statements, there is no reason these commons will escape the U.S.’s reckless visions of domination without proactive decision-making. In the absence of the ability to defy its government’s orders, NASA’s position risks endangering international cooperation — an enviable edifice assembled over decades in the face of an expensive, perilous, time-consuming affair — in space flight, often with NASA input. Irrespective of Ms. Petro’s tenure at NASA, her words indicate that the helmsperson is not beyond being expected to further Mr. Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric, if not agenda, in space and as well as on the ground. The cooperation must resist this. Given the Trump administration’s attitudes towards other cooperative efforts, such as the fight against climate change, which demand internationalism over provincialism, it is imperative that national and supranational space bodies, including the Indian Space Research Organisation, come together to cultivate mechanisms to resist unilateral action in space, if not prevent it altogether.