Page 1 of 2 No Chinese rockets for US satellites - yet
By Peter J Brown
At the end of February, at a time when North Korea began grabbing most of the
Asian satellite-related headlines, a Paris-based global satellite operator,
Eutelsat Communications SA, announced that it intends to use a Chinese rocket
in 2010 to launch a new communications satellite built by Thales Alenia Space,
a European satellite manufacturer, without US-built parts.
Both companies are US defense contractors - Eutelsat is a major supplier of
satellite services to the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan - and both find
themselves at the heart of a heated debate over the future of US-China
relations in space. This debate
centers on US export control policies which have remained virtually unchanged
for a decade.
Bear in mind that no US satellite has been carried into space aboard a Chinese
rocket since the late 1990s, and in effect, Chinese rockets remain off limits
to any satellite containing US-built parts. Numerous US companies active in the
global space sector support reform efforts and want them to happen rapidly.
However, outspoken conservative members of the US Congress in particular who do
not want US national security interests to be shoved aside are mobilizing, and
framing this debate in a very direct way.
"We need to remain vigilant that our advanced technology doesn't end up in the
hands of nations who proliferate weapons of mass destruction. We know exactly
who these nations are, and we must make absolutely sure that whatever changes
we enact, that these scofflaw and rogue nations are barred from receiving our
high tech systems," said Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher of California.
"Chief among them is the Peoples Republic of China."
Rohrabacher added, "Clearly, this is the beginning of a game of chicken between
Eutelsat and the Barack Obama administration. If the Obama administration does
nothing, the message is clear - transferring technology to proliferators of
weapons of mass destruction like the Peoples Republic of China is a perfectly
acceptable business model."
Japan is watching the tone and outcome of this debate closely, too. Katsuhisa
Furukawa, a fellow at the Japan Science and Technology Agency's Research
Institute of Science and Technology for Society in Tokyo said Japan is unhappy
with Eutelsat's announcement.
"Any change in US policy involving [China's access to satellite communications
technology] needs to be coordinated with US allies and friendly space-faring
nations, including Japan," said Furukawa. "Japanese defense [officials] as well
as its space community view the EU [European Union] as a window of technology
proliferation to China. While Eutelsat insists that they avoid the
proliferation of military-related technologies to China, few in Japan believe
this. China's PLA [People's Liberation Army] relies upon this as part of
information network-centric warfare."
Just as the news of Eutelsat's plans started to circulate, a hearing
entitled,"Impacts of US Export Control Policies on Science and Technology" was
held by the US House Committee on Science and Technology.
This hearing addressed the US International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR)
which include the US Munitions List (USML) of "regulated guidance and control
equipment ... and spacecraft systems and associated equipment". ITAR also
encompasses "technical data, including data for the design and development of
defense articles, and defense services, and assistance [including training] to
foreign persons ... ". The Export Administration Act, as implemented through
the Export Administration Regulations (EAR), is a concern here as well.
Another US regulatory mechanism in the spotlight is the so-called "Strom
Thurmond Act" enacted in the late 1990s; this act placed "advanced" US
satellite technology on the USML. In effect, it is this Act which has
terminated all US satellite-based transactions with China. Whereas ITAR and
USML-related matters are administered by the US State Department, EAR falls
under the US Commerce Department (DoC).
One goal of reform proponents is to shift any satellite export-related
decision-making away from the State Department and back to the DoC, which has
been viewed traditionally as more friendly and open to the needs and best
interests of the US satellite industry. Proponents also want many satellite
components to be downgraded in terms of their technological sophistication, and
tagged as generic items rather than as "advanced" pieces of space hardware
warranting any complex certification and time-consuming approval processes.
The US Department of Defense's (DoD) Defense Technology Security Administration
(DTSA) also plays a significant role here. Thus far, however, the DTSA has
remained very quiet during the debate.
According to Kerry Scarlott, a partner with the Boston-based law firm Posternak
Blankstein and Lund LLP who is a top expert on US export control policies,
Eutelsat's selection of an "ITAR-free" satellite, and its desire to use China's
Long March rockets, should not come as a surprise.
"These actions are the natural next steps in the EU's long-standing commitment
to decoupling itself from its historical dependence upon US satellite
technology and launch capabilities," said Scarlott. "At the same time, it is
certainly a stark reminder of the ongoing erosion of US satellite manufacturing
and launch activities, and the danger of a complete erosion of that business if
significant ITAR reform is not legislated and implemented relatively soon."
Scarlott does not see any substantive ITAR reform taking place quickly, "beyond
the reactive nature of the limited regulatory reforms implemented to date,
including by former president George W Bush near the end of his final term".
"Substantive reform, particularly vis-a-vis the jurisdictional scope of the
ITAR, such as removing certain components from the USML or returning commercial
satellite controls to the Commerce Department, will require legislative action.
To my knowledge, no such legislation has been introduced to date," said
Scarlott.
Eutelsat simply chose to buy an ITAR-free satellite in order to use a cheaper
Chinese rocket, according to Dr Laurence Nardon, head of the Space Policy
Program at the Institut Francais des Relations Internationales in Paris. Most
experts estimate that such a move can reduce total launch costs by at least
40%.
"This is interpreted in Europe as the choice of a better price over European
'loyalty'. Europeans have expected the ITAR rules to be loosened so often - it
was after all a goal of the Bush administration - that they may think that,
again, things will not change," said Nardon. "However, the Obama administration
and the Democratic majority in Congress may make the change effective this
time. If so, US companies will be back in a field that was left to non-US
actors since 1998. Non-US companies have used that time to develop domestic
components. It remains to be seen whether they can compete with US components
once the latter can be used for exports."
Eutelsat is no stranger to controversy, by the way. Its dealings with China
were called into question well before the company's latest announcement. (See
New Tang Dynasty TV takes on China, Asia Times Online, Feb 14, 2009.)
During his campaign, President Obama made it clear that the new administration
would, "direct a review of the ITAR to reevaluate restrictions imposed on
American companies, with a special focus on space hardware that is currently
restricted from commercial export," according to his white paper entitled,
"Advancing the Frontiers of Space Exploration".
"As a nation, we cannot, and should not abandon well-conceived efforts to keep
dangerous technology and scientific know-how out of the hands of those who
would use this knowledge to create weapons of mass destruction and other,
equally dangerous military systems. However these represent a very narrow and
limited set of goods, technology, and knowledge. Our former unilateral strategy
of containment and isolation of our adversaries is, under current conditions, a
self-destructive strategy for obsolescence and declining economic
competitiveness," declared a new report by the US National Academies - "Beyond
'Fortress America': National Security Controls on Science and Technology in a
Globalized World" - which was discussed at length during the hearing.
The report recommends, among other things, the creation of an "economic
competitiveness exemption" that "eliminates export controls on dual-use
technologies where they, or their functional equivalents, are available without
restriction in open markets outside the United States", and the establishment
of "a coordinating center for export controls that would receive license
applications, determine the appropriate jurisdiction for those licenses, ensure
the efficient processing of licenses, and manage an appeals process."
A witness, A Thomas Young, also presented the findings of the Working Group on
the Health of the US Space Industrial Base and the Impact of Export Controls
which is based at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in
Washington, DC.
"We found not only that the intent of current export controls was not being
realized, but it was also having an adverse impact on
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
