Governmental Proposals

The main venue for governmental space arms control proposals is the United Nations (UN). More specifically, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) votes on all proposed resolutions and within the UNGA, the UN First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) provides a forum for plenary discussion on disarmament and security issues. Multilateral disarmament negotiations based on issues that are brought forth during UN First Committee meetings occur within the Conference on Disarmament (CD) in Geneva. Decisions are made in the CD by consensus. Occasionally, space arms control issues are also raised in the UN Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization), although its space discussions are usually limited to space exploration.

Since 2002, there have been two primary space arms control proposals discussed within the CD: a treaty banning space weapons and the creation of an ad hoc committee to either negotiate such a treaty or simply discuss space arms control issues. China and Russia have led the initiative for a treaty banning space weapons. China, in particular, has insisted in the past that any PAROS (prevention of an arms race in outer space) ad hoc committee must include the creation of such a treaty as its mandate. In order to check potential U.S. weaponization of space through missile defense, China also previously tied its agreement on negotiations for a Fissile-Material Cutoff Treaty (a treaty the United States supported) to the negotiation of a PAROS treaty.[3] The United States is the key opponent to a treaty banning space weapons, but does favor the creation of a PAROS ad hoc committee, so long as the committee's mandate is broad. Although there is general agreement on the need for a PAROS ad hoc committee, differences over its proposed mandate have continuously stalled consensus within the CD. In 2002, the Five Ambassador's Initiative (A5 Proposal) attempted to resolve the issue of the committee's mandate. In an attempt to engage the United States, China has relaxed its stance on the tie between a committee and a treaty in both 2002 and 2003.

Besides negotiations at the CD, deliberations on PAROS within the UNGA have led to the annual adoption (since its 23rd session in 1968) of what is known today as the PAROS resolution, calling on parties to use space for peaceful purposes and oppose its weaponization. In the UN First Committee in December 2005, 160 countries voted in favor of adopting PAROS resolution A/RES/60/54, with Israel abstaining and the United States the sole country to vote against it, much to the surprise of the council.  The United States chose to vote against the PAROS resolution, despite having abstained since the resolution was first introduced in 1995, explaining that the current system governing outer space use is sufficient since there is no arms race in space.[4]  Due to the continuing stalemate on the PAROS work program within the CD, any PAROS resolutions adopted in the UNGA provide little more than a reflection of the consensus on the need to address the space arms control issue.

In October 2005 the Russian delegation introduced a new resolution (A/C.1/60/L.30/Rev.1) to the First Committee, "Measures to Promote Transparency and Confidence Building in Outer Space," which enjoyed similar support from the international community.  However, the United States voted against the draft and Israel again abstained.

For space arms control announcements that have been made since 2002, please click on the given link to find statements listed by country.

Listed below are the main arms control proposals relating to outer space that have been made in the CD.

• Treaty Banning Space Weapons
• PAROS Ad Hoc Committee

Treaty Banning Space Weapons

On June 28, 2002, the Chinese and Russian delegations submitted the working paper entitled, "Possible Elements for a Future International Legal Agreement on the Prevention of the Deployment of Weapons in Outer Space, the Threat or Use of Force Against Outer Space Objects," (CD/1679) to the CD. The working paper provided the framework for a new international agreement and was co-sponsored by Belarus, Indonesia, Syria, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe. Opposition came mainly from the United States. Former U.S. Permanent Representative to the CD, Ambassador Eric Javits, declared to the CD in June 2002, "The United States sees no need for new outer space arms control agreements and opposes the idea of negotiating a new outer space treaty."[1]

Since the introduction of this working paper, Russia and China have invited suggestions, which have been gathered and form the basis of a paper entitled “Compilation of comments and suggestions to the working paper CD/1679.” This paper was originally released to the conference in July of 2003.  Additionally, they have presented three non-papers that address various aspects of the proposed treaty.  “Existing international legal instruments and prevention of the weaponization of outer space,” “Verification aspects of PAROS,” and “Definition issues regarding legal instruments on the prevention of the weaponization of outer space” are all intended to generate further debate and have been suggested as a possible basis of work for the PAROS Ad Hoc committee.

[Top]

PAROS Ad Hoc Committee

The Five Ambassadors' Initiative (A5 Proposal)

On August 8, 2002, ambassadors representing Algeria, Belgium, Chile, Columbia, and Sweden proposed to the CD the establishment of an ad hoc committee on PAROS "to identify and examine, without limitation and without prejudice, any specific proposals, which could include confidence-building or transparency measures, general principles, treaty commitments and the elaboration of a regime capable of preventing an arms race in outer space."[2] The Five Ambassadors' Initiative (CD/1693), or "A5 Proposal", was introduced at the end of the 57th session of UNGA in 2002, and due to the fact that proposals still requiring consensus are not carried over between work sessions, the A5 Proposal was put on the shelf until the 58th UNGA convened and it was reintroduced in 2003. The Five Ambassadors' Initiative attempted to break the deadlock in the CD mainly by providing a compromise for the Chinese and U.S. delegations.  The A5 Proposal was notably revised in June of 2003 (CD/1693/Rev.1) to include reference to "the possibility of negotiating relevant international legal instrument."  This revision is the basis of current debate for the A5 Proposal.

Chinese and U.S. Stalemate

The deadlock between the United States and China is the primary reasons space arms control proposals have stalled the work program of the CD. China has historically demanded that a new treaty be clearly stated as one of the goals of any future ad hoc committee established on PAROS. However, according to Ambassador Javits, the United States "cannot support any draft mandate that attempts to bias the work of the future ad hoc committee toward a particular goal or outcome...."[1]

In June 2002, China no longer insisted on a negotiating mandate for the ad hoc committee on PAROS and proposed instead that relevant work should be conducted "with a view to negotiating a relevant international legal instrument" (contained in CD/1682).[4] However, the United States did not agree with this approach, and the CD could not reach consensus.[4] On August 7, 2003, Ambassador Hu Xiaodi stated to the Conference on Disarmament,

"In order for the CD to restart its substantive work and taking into consideration the concerns of relevant sides, China would like to demonstrate flexibility once again. China accepts the mandate of the PAROS Ad Hoc committee as proposed and tabled by the Five Ambassadors on June 26 and is prepared to join the consensus on the A5 initiative on the program of work (CD/1693, with the new wording as amended on June 26). It is our hope that other relevant sides respond positively to China’s constructive attitude, so that the CD could start substantive work as early as possible."[5]

Despite the compromise by the Chinese delegation, there was no immediate response from the U.S. delegation, and the stalemate has persisted.[6]

Attempts to break the stalemate

In September of 2005, Peru, CD President at the time, put forth a proposal (CD 1757) similar to the A5 initiative that drops the clause related to negotiating an international legal instrument.  It appears that it does not enjoy as widespread support as the revised A5 Proposal, and China has indicated it cannot support the proposal given the weakened language and the concessions it has already made.

[Top]