tv Public Affairs Events CSPAN November 9, 2016 4:00pm-6:01pm EST
discuss coordination of their activities in key areas where we're leading in space. i mentioned a few of them because it has been, i would saw, a relatively successful decade of starting to build this confidence. i mentioned the interagency space debris coordination committee. 13 major agencies that get-together and a great detail discuss the way that space debris is being tracked, is being handled, is being mitigated. most of you know about the ibc guidelines, the guidelines that nonbinding guidelines that sort of guide space actors as to how to mitigate against more, adding to the space debris. we have, well, a very classic one is the international space station. that has built confidence amongst the major states in operating together in space.
we have two new committees coordination committees consulting committees dealing with asteroid threats. the international asteroid warning network and the space mission planning advisory group, both came out of the plus 50 and copious activitiesings which are now being on a regular basis, to learn how to work together as nations to ensure that we can react to a possible asteroid threat. the icg, international coordination group, on global satellite systems is another very good example how countries are getting together. all those countries who now have interest in global navigation systems, us talking to each other about compatibility, how they are not going to jam each other's signals, how we can share. it came out of copious is and
uni space plus 50. and great leadership has been shown there to build this confidence in the way that we can work together. so i think that we are on a good track. we need to do more. the long-term sustainability is -- the activity is an extremely important one. we have now, as simonetta has mentioned, achieved a level of success. we have much more work to do. the first 12 guidelines have hopefully been put in the bank and we are going to be working over the next two years at the next set. and there are some very sensitive issues. and peter will, i'm sure, mention some of those issues as we move forward. it is not going to be easy, but we have to work together. now, as this meeting is why we're here, we have to start to talk about these guidelines
because these are going to affect the way that nations do their business in space. a safe and responsible use of outer space is the key. we need now to move forward. i'm really pleased to be here. i'm really pleased we are discussing these in such an open forum with all the stakeholders. one of the challenges that we have is copious is made up of states. i repeat, we have 83, 84 states. the commercial sector, the academic sector are not members of copious. how do we bring these extremely important parts of the community into the discussions? how do we listen to them? how do we ensure we have their ideas incorporated into these guidelines as you move forward? and the agenda of copious as we
move forward. this is part of the high-level forum that of course simonetta just mentioned. i will stop there. but just to say that over the next two years, i am now the chair and take the chair for the next two years of the committee, i give you my commitment this will be the highest priority of course i'm concerned to bring these long-term sustainability guidelines to the general assembly, to get them approved in 2018, and to move forward with the agenda to increase these -- the sustainability activities through uni space plus 50. so thank you so much for your attention, and i look forward to hopefully sharing with some of you the rest of the day. thank you. >> thank you. [ applause ]. last, but certainly not least, peter martinez.
he really had quite a job herding all the cats. congratulations, peter, and thank you so much for coming to speak on this. >> thank you, victoria. thank you, ladies and gentlemen. it's a great pleasure to be here to participate in this special event organized by the state department and the secure world foundation to discuss the very important work of sustainability. i would like to thank the organizers of this event for the participation in this panel and for giving me the opportunity to present the progress of the u.n. copious working group on the long term sustainability of outer space. it is predicated on the notion that estates bear international responsibility and liability for outer space activities conducted by entities under their jurisdiction and/or control. the number and diversity of
space actors is increasing rapidly and the space environment is becoming increasingly congested in earth orbit with increased possibilities arising in orbit to the detriment of a wide variety of space actors. the actions are the single actor in the united states could have serious consequences for many other space actors. converse conversely, no single actor a group of like-minded states can-can adopt to mitigate entirely the risk posed by the congestion in the earth orbital environment. david the showed you how it is the multilateral body to address such questions. at the same time, the nongovernmental space sector is growing in size and importance and any multilateral solution to sustainability must take into
account the experience, capabilities, and concerns of nonstate actors. the private sector is a lot of experience in the conduct of space activities. it also has a vested interest in the space, stable, and conflict-free space environment with clear rules for the orderly and predictable behavior of all space actors. copious has been addressing aspects of the long-term sustainability of space activities or lts as we refer to it in the committee for quite a number of years. it is only in the past few years it has taken a more holistic approach to this topic. and i would like to recognize this morning the presence among us of a gentleman who set in motion the process that led to the creation of this working group. building on the previous efforts of gerard, in 2010, skaoeupbt
parallel. expert group a addressed sustainable space utilization and explored the linkages. i would like to recognize among us the presence today richard meineke one of the co chairs of that group. it addressed issues and affects of space on space systems. the regulatory regimes and space actors in the space arena. we are privileged to have one of the co-chairs of that group, professor sergio marquiseo. scientific policy experts nominated by the member states.
i would like to thank the member states for supporting the participation of the experts in these groups for quite a number of years. most of the guidelines that we adopted in june this year were the ones that had reached a high level of maturity, particularly because of the inputs of the experts in the early discussions and the proposals of those guidelines. so thank you to all the members states who contributed their experts for quite a number of years. in contrast to the diplomatic negotiating format of the discussions, the expert groups were deliberative in which the experts exchanged their views and proposed draft guidelines for the consideration of the working group. inputs from nonstate actors were received through the relevant member states for the permanent observers to the committee. he's included intergovernmental such as itu, the office of
disarmament affairs, coast guard or the iaa, international entities such as iso and the iaf, and industry associations of several countries. in addition, in 2013, a long-term the sustainability workshop was organized during the 56th session of the scientific and technical subcommittee where representatives of national private sector entities and industry associations were providing with an opportunity to share their experiences and perspectives with members of the working group. by 2013, the working group had before it, a compilation of candidate guidelines composed by the four expert groups. in 2014, the working group consolidated the guidelines to reduce duplication and overlaps. during 2014 and 2015, several member states also proposed
additional draft guidelines for consideration by the working group. it was clear that the various guidelines were at different levels of maturity with some being largely agreed, while other draft guidelines still the needed substantial further discussion build consensus. time does not permit me to give you a detailed blow by blow account. suffice it to say, in june, the working group reached 12 of the 29 guidelines. it noted that this set of guidelines was now ready for states and international governmental organizations to consider implementing on a
voluntary basis. the committee also agreed on a work plan for the period 2016 to 2018 to the tomorrow its discussions of the remaining guidelines and preambler texts for long-term sustainability to be referred to the general assembly in 2018, the same year as 2015. the first 12 agreed guidelines had the low hanging fruits of the discussions but marked a is significant step forward in that they represent the tangible progress that has been made in addressing space sustain blts. the first set of agreed guidelines create aid foundation for further consensus build anything copious. time does not permit me to the describe these in details here. indeed, they are readily available on the website for outer space affairs in the annex to the report of the 59th
session. broadly speaking, the agreed guidelines addressed the adoption and updating of national regulatory framework of space activities, the supervision of national space activities, and the rational and equitable utilization of radiofrequency spectrum and orbital approximately it addresses matters of orbital data on space objects, the sharing of information, models, and expertise on space whether or not phenomena and established practices for the mitigation of adverse whether it affects space systems. lastly, some of the agreed guidelines address matters of awareness, capacity building, and research on ways to support space sustainability and to manage the space degree
population in the long term. of the remaining draft guidelines still currently under discussion, some were closer to consensus than others. they include exchange of contract operation of spacecraft operators, exchange of information on orbital events, objects and orbit and prelaunch conjunction assessments. there are guidelines on enhances proposed guidelines, on enhancing registration process, on conducting space activity solely for peaceful purposes, on ensuring the security and integrity of ground infrastructures used to support space activities and also proposed guidelines on active debris removal and in very exceptional circumstances of space objects in orbit.
technology safeguards and intellectual property safeguards in the areas of international cooperation and information sharing. it is entirely possible that although the working group may not achieve consensus on some of the proposed guidelines in the current extended work plan, it may reach consensus on the need to continue discussions on those topics without copious in future. indeed, one may identify topics currently not under discussion which could be addressed by copious under the general context of lts in future. perhaps issues arising from orbit servicing or large scale constellations in earth orbit could be the subject of such future discussions and possibly future proposals for guidelines. i would like to report that in the period since june when the
first 12 guidelines were agreed, we had a very successful meeting in vienna, in late september. and we're very hopeful that this has created fertile ground for making further progress in agreeing on additional guidelines in the coming sessions of copious in 2017. i would like to end my statement with a few reflections on the way forward both in terms of the progress and the lts discussions. i would like to point out that as the lts process gathered momentum. during the expert group stage of the discussions, it was mainly the countries with established space capabilities that contributed to the initial drafting of guidelines professionals. but as the process entered the negotiation stage, more states started participating actively in the discussions.
currently this stands at 45 member states. this is a very encouraging trend for a process that can only achieve results by consensus of the growing number of copious member states which stands at 83 and soon to be 84. working by consensus is slow, difficult work. but in the absence of legally binding international instruments to promote sustainability, the lts guidelines provide a pragmatic way for the global space community to take urgent action now to preserve outer space for future generations. from substantive perspective, the working group will need to ensure it brings a balance of the interest of nations at different levels of development of their space capabilities. the barriers to space activity are being lowered. many more actors are entering the space arena. it is in no one's interest for
emerging space actors to repeat the lessons learned in the first 50 years of the space age on how to conduct safe and sustainable space activities. therefore the guidelines is should be seen as for accumulated experience in space activity toss share appropriate experience, establish best practices and relevant information with emerging space actors to the benefit of all users of outer space. this accounts for the strong thread on international cooperation, information sharing, and capacity building that runs through the guidelines. of course the guidelines will only be effective if they are implemented by the member states to the greatest extent practicalable. ism. ations of the guidelines will be the litmus test as to where the voluntary, nonbinding
instruments can be an effective means to promote space sustainability. in this regard, the implementation experiences of states will be useful to establish the effectiveness of the guidelines as well as to mend them if necessary. here again the implementation experiences of stphopb state actors will be a valuable source of information for the lts process going forward. we will also need criteria for the consideration of proposals for new guidelines and the amendment of existing guidelines in the future. it is worth emphasizing that although they are voluntary and nonminding it doesn't mean they are nonlegal. in the states may implement the guidelines at national level in a way that has legal character for entities under jurisdiction or control. the speakers before me have highlighted the linkages between the lts discussions and the uni
space plus 50 priorities. so i will not repeat what i have said. however, with regard to the future of lts discussions, the run up period to uni space plus 50 would be a good time to think about how we would like to structure the lts discussions in the future. in the immediate were post 2018 period, the emphasis and the discussions will probably shift from negotiation of new guidelines to implementation experiences, the sharing of implementation experiences, and discussions on procedures for the revision of guidelines or the introduction of new proposals for guidelines in future. the point is that we should make think about lts as being an activity of copious rather than under the scientific and technical subcommittee as is the case at present. this will offer improved coordination and dove tailing of relevant lts activities under the agenda of the two
subcommittees. the challenges are inherently multilateral challenges. it is my genuine belief that in multilateral space diplomacy, the international community has an ability to work together to find ways not only to expand access to the benefits of space to more nations but also to ensure that the space environment is preserved and protected for use by future generations. thank you for your attention. and i forward to hearing from other participants at this event. thank you. [ applause ]. >> okay, great. that gives us time for q&a. i would like to use the power of the chair to start off the discussion. peter, your presentation raised a question in my mind. do you envision guidelines, discussions to be a permanent part of copious or at least of the tls work.
>> thanks, victoria. well, i think this is something we will have to discuss in the next few years as the focus of course is necessarily on wrapping up the discussion of the guidelines that are currently on the table. but as i said in my remarks, the implementation stage is going to be key. so we need to figure out a way in which the implementation phase of lts will be discussed the. and whether this is through an agenda item or some other mechanism is something we still need to discussion and agree on. >> i think from my perspective, that we do have to find a way to ensure that this activity is not stopped or is not slowed down through -- after 2018, which is the extent to which the committee has extended the
working groupon the long-term sustainability. i think, though, there is very good signs that states are members of the committee understand the importance of continuing this work, as simonetta mentioned. there are quite a few linkages between the priorities we are discussing now and the current primary issues that we're dealing with in the future. space debris, mitigation, and certainly remediation is one that comes to mind straight were away. and that is part of where i think uni space plus 50 is moving through some of its priorities. space weather is another one that simonetta mentioned that is clearly something which we need to continue to work on and to
strengthen the governance i would say, global governance of this activity. so yes, i'm very hopeful we have a good path forward to ensure that we will continue the important work. and as peter mentioned, share now hopefully practices that where these guidelines are being implemented by many states which i think is absolutely crucial to ensure that that dialogue is -- there's a mechanism for that dialogue moving forward. >> and then following up on that, everyone mentioned that copious has 83, soon to be 84 members. that's a lot of different viewpoints and perspectives. i wonder if you envision the organization to a majority vote
organization. >> thank you, victoria. well, i won't respond directly to the question you just asked. but i will give you a perspective from the lts we are very mindful that there is a danger of reopening guidelines that have been agreed to by consensus in the past. these guidelines we agreed to in june, there was an understanding those would not be touched again in the period before 2018. we may need to harmonize to address issues of terminology or whatever. but there is an understanding we
would not reopen the guidelines. as chair of the working group, i would hope we could reach a set agreement on guidelines in this 2016 to 2018 period, we could agree to bank the guidelines is and not reopen them and focus our discussion on the remaining body of material. >> having reached consensus with certainly different outlooks on the way the world functions, it is certainly a challenge. but also a great benefit.
because once you do reach that consensus, you do, you have put off the table the issue that states said i never agreed to that. you have finished debate. you have a signed from 83 states who all agreed to move forward in a certain way. getting there is tricky, yes. but in the end states in the committee understand that. what we have achieved is an excellent example of how consensus can be reached in some very, very sensitive areas. and so i think that personally, as i would not like to see the modus operandi change because of the advantages one receives, one gets at the end of the process.
>> i can keep asking questions. but maybe -- are there any audience questions at this point. raise your hands. could you please wait for the mike and then identify yourself. stephanie. >> chris johnson from secure world foundation. you say there's some draft guidelines which you finalized, some which were closer to consensus and others further away from reaching consensus. can you kind of give an outlook on the challenges in finalizing those ones which are closer, the ones that are further away, and then within the u.n. what is the destination for those guidelines once they're finalized by copious, the referral to general assembly and in what type of forum in the u.n. are they finalized. thank you.
>> thank you for the question. so as i mentioned in my remarks, the guidelines where we are closer to achieving consensus are those dealing with, for example, the sharing of information on contacts of operators, orbital events, conjunction analyses. there are a number of open issues there. but i'm fairly cautiously optimistic that we will be able to reach agreement on those guidelines. guidelines where we are further from reaching consensus at this stage are dealing with more sensitive issues, cyber security, removal of objects from orbit.
we will continue in terps of the mode of discussion. we will continue to discuss all the open guidelines in the upcoming sessions of the main committee and scientific is and technical subcommittee. we have also in recent years followed interesting intercessional meetings. we had an intercessional meeting in vienna in the pen ultimate week of september, which was characterized by a remarkable spirit of flexibility and cooperation on the part of all the member states present. and it was a very well attended meeting. so i'm optimistic we will continue to make progress on all the guidelines, even the ones where we are further from consensus at this point. and we may not reach consensus on all the elements.
but i'm optimistic we will reach consensus on many if not all of them. we may continue those discussions in an yon going lts process of some sort. with regard to how the guidelines will be taken forward in the general assembly, there is a general understanding of the working group that the guidelines, once the guidelines is compiled in 2018, that this will be referred to the general assembly in some appropriate form. that form has to be decided by the working group and endorsed by the committee. that decision hasn't yet been taken. but it is the intent that these will be referred to the general assembly in 2018. >> i'll just add to that. yesterday the report, the 2016 report of copious the general assembly was approved by the fourth committee of the general assembly.
the report includes an annex which has all the guidelines, those intended to be reapproved and those still being worked upon. there is a note, though in the resolution that says the annex is not part of the formal approval process. all states, all 193 states of the united nations now has before them a document which shows the current status of the long-term sustainability activity, although as noted it is not part of the formal approval of the report for this year. note the report does note that the process that peter just mentioned where we will be bringing forward to the general
assembly a full couple pend yum is the plan. the general assembly is aware of the process, has approved the report without the annex but is aware of the annex and the process. >> well, i actually have a question for you. slightly shifting focus a little bit. but it has been in the news lately with having signed agreements in nevada. i wonder if you can explain about those agreements and what you hope to get from them and what the status is on that. >> for sure as i mentioned in my statement there is a need in the preparation of uni space plus 50 to look at the entire broader space community and also to look at new ways on of fulfilling our mandate in a way. so under the umbrella of the
human space technology initiative which started in 2010, we have been signing in particular three agreements recently. one with jexa for a project which is dealing mainly with development of principle investigators, proposals from principle investigators from developing countries. and we just made an announcement of opportunity last year together. we made the selection together. and we just selected the first set from the university of kenya, which is going to fly, deploy from the module on the international space station next year. that is the first part. and it is already a first step in order to start doing capacity building in developing countries in a different way.
so not only anymore. only capacity building, training, workshops, technical that is still very important. we continue to do that. but there is also another way of helping developing countries that benefits space activity thes for their own develop. the second agreement which has been signed back in march. the one last year has already advanced in a certain way. and we just issued the second. it is an opportunity where we were in guadalajara for the isc. and the second agreement, as i said, under the umbrella which is ti, is an agreement i signed with the chinese space agency and is in agreement in order to allow developing countries to some experiments in lower orbit through the chinese space
station. we are in the process of let's say hire someone to do this job. and we hope that the advancement of opportunity could be out second quarter next year, maximum beginning of the summer. period next year. and then we had recently signed the agreement with sierra nevada corporation. there is a strong push in order to develop a more and more collaborations with the private sector. this specific case, sierra nevada is very unique development, the dream chaser. so the idea is to have by the 2021 the first u.n. space mission with dream chaser where we will like to give open access to lower orbit to all countries. so particular attention to developing countries again but to the all countries.
what we are doing in this case is to look for sponsors and contributors in order to have autonomation date. we have interesting dialogues going. the target should go out july next year if everything goes well. in any case, as i said, for the time being, the target launch date is end of 2021. and for a mission in orbit. so unmanned mission in orbit, 14 days. the agreement was signed last year. and that's the first agreement that the office for outer space signed with an outer company. they are a renowned company in
the world for providing high resolution images, which is quite important for our activities. so the man goal of this agreement is to develop a platform mainly for the u.n. system but more in general for all the potential users. the agreement we have that we have to provide requirements to them in order for them to develop the better platform, the best platform possible. and in order to prepare them for this development, we have been working together. and up to now we had what we call discovery days. already three discovery days. the first one was last year with fao. the first one, as i said, was in december last year in rome with fao. then we had another one back in may was in geneva together with
geo. and the third one was just last week mainly organized with undp. this is because what we want to do is really to explain how good is this idea we have been developing. and we want to acquire all the user needs for the u.n. entities. and i have to tell you as a minimum 40 people attending in 20 different entities in new york. so i expect in the next coming months to be able to provide a requirement document to digital globe to develop this platform. thank you. other questions? i can keep going. anything from the audience? sorry. >> my name is audrey schaeffer.
i have the privilege of being involved in the u.s. delegation on negotiating lts guidelines. in that time, political dynamics shifted quite a bit in ava right of ways, both in the committee as well as the world. and that has affected the negotiation of the guidelines during that time. so i'm wondering from your perspectives, as we look toward 2018 there is quite a bit of optimism which i share that we'll be able to complete negotiation of a second set and send the full couple pend yum. i wonder having watched the process the last six years how you think the politics will shape up and what the signs are that we can look toward to be optimistic that we'll be able to have a great success in two years. thank you. >> well, i will start off by not mentioning the u.s. presidential election. >> thank you.
>> i'm always an optimist. i believe that through the process and you know very well as being a very key member of the team who has worked so diligently over the past six years under the remarkable leadership of peter to get us to this stage, that often needs negotiations and discussions rely on a certain amount of personalities. and i believe the last six years as developed a certain relationship between the various actors to -- that has developed basically confidence in the process. i've been personally very -- i would say pleased at the way that the team works so
collegially. clearly there are differences in opinion. these differences of opinion, as you point out, stem from geo plat but again the sraevarious states have given to various groups who have gotten to know each other and each other's way of working and the u.n., while imperfect, again, i just go back to unique platform. if we didn't have the u.n., we would probably have to reinvent it. where else do we get-together to discuss issues that are critical to the security and safety of outer space activities for all actors? so a bit of a long answer to a second question. and i am optimistic that although who knows what tomorrow will bring in the geo-political
arena. but i believe the major actors are working diligently toward the same area, same direction effectively. the one thing, let me be quite blunt with you, is the discussions not in copeous but more in the security area that tends from time to time, i believe, to lean over towards the discussions in the peaceful arena of outer space affairs. there's many more experts than i -- that follow this much more closely. and i believe that although there is a bit -- there continues to be a stalemate in that area, there is open -- there is dialogue going on in these areas.
it was mentioned i think this morning, it was mentioned this morning about discussions between the u.s. and china, for example, on aspects of security in space. these are very positive. and i think that there is a willing -- i hope there is a willingness to continue those across the major powers in order to ensure that we have understanding. and, again, going back to the phrase that i used at the beginning of my intervention transparency and confidence building which is the key to where we need to be. thank you. >> thank you, david. well, david has just said much of what i would have said. so i guess i will be very brief. audrey, i think you and all the others in this room today who have worked so hard in the development of these guidelines, and i'd like to knowledge -- too many to mention by name.
but it's been a fantastic privilege to work with such professional colleagues in the past few years in developing these guidelines and continuing our discussions. what i've perceived as chair of the working group is a willingness by the member states -- first in appreciation by the member states that we really cannot fail in this, that it has to succeed. we may differ on views in terms of the process going forward. there may be differences of opinion on different substantive matters. but there is a lot of common ground where we can make progress. it is my function as chair to identify and build this common ground where we can build consensus and develop that as rapidly as possible so we can focus our discussions on the more difficult issues.
i've seen a great willingness on the part of delegations to really listen to the each other's perspectives and concerns and also witnessed quite a lot of flexibility in terms of the discussions certainly that took place in june and more recently in september. and to go back to the point that david mentioned about tcbms, i think the very fact we were able to reach agreements on these first 12 guidelines is in innocence tcbn, it shows copeous can reach consensus on very difficult issues and builds confidence for the process going forward. thank you. >> yeah. more on the process. because all the other points have been touched the. first of all, there was something you were asking and i would like to clarify that currently the office for outer
space affairs is drafting a conference room paper which will be presented for the first time in a technical subcommittee in the 2017 cycle which means next year at the beginning of next year where we are going to present some ideas for discussion and final decision by member states on the organization of the activities for uni space plus 50 which will be a segment of the normal session in 2018. where we expect to have two documents, one in june 2018, one being the usual report which will then produce in the usual way, let's say in the information document for the
resolution and the forth coming general assembly, final approve. but the general assembly as usual. and then another document which could be probably resolution to be discussed by member states in february of next year. which will have a life which will deal mainly with uni space plus 50. 2018 is really an important milestone. and i would expect member states will look at june 2018 as a lending point overall. because from that point on, i am sure they would like to see -- to look at the future with different perspectives. so i'm quite confident that it will be with all the players working together towards the same goal. i'm quite sure that june 2018 will be a success is overall. >> we have time for probably one
more question. all right. okay. i will ask the last question then. it seems like there is a rather complimentary between the guidelines that exist. i'm curious if you think that the national committee will move back towards treaties for space issues, or permanently doing soft law responses to this? >> i think this is absolutely somewhat legal subcommittee and legal committee to discuss maybe profess professor marquiez can discuss this later in the day. my view is everybody would like to see some more teeth in what we're doing. i think that there is general consensus on that point. but nobody really sees a clear path on how to get there.
and as audry pointed out, the geopolitics is going to be more and more, well, it is all part of what we are working with everyday in the committee, and the complexity of reaching a treaty with the 83 state, i wouldn't say overwhelming, but close to be overwhelming from the perspective i have, unless there is a break through. i think the break through would only really come if -- if the very top leaders of the major states decide that this is something which they really need to move forward on, and currently, i do not see through the g7 or g20 exercise. i think that's what it will take to make a break through at a
treaty level. >> thank you. agree with david. i think it will require leadership at that level to move copuos back to the treaty level mode. we all know that there is not at the present time great appetite for negotiationing new legally binding treaties. so soft law instruments like guidelines and tcbms are pragmatic measures we can take. however, i would like to remark that tcbms and guidelines, if they are observed or implemented to the greatest extent prack particular c -- practical, practice of states and that might in the long run create fertile ground. for the time being, i think the
tcbms and guidelines are the pragmatic route forward to address pressing issues of immediate importance. >> thank you. yeah, just to say that it has been already mentioned by the end of the year, we will get -- we will reach 84. i can anticipate i got already couple of preliminary information that at least other two countries could ask for becoming members. at the very end, i believe this is the proof that we are few filling our mandate quite well. the mandate is to bring space to human kind. the more country weiss get ies board, so if you look at the positive side of the story, the more we are, the more we can go
together, i mean, and be sure that what we do is not only, you know, important guidelines in the long time sustainability, but overall, the entire broad spectrum of space activities is taking care. but the max number number possible at united nation states. >> very well put. all right. >> perhaps if i could just make one other remark. you know, even quite apart from talking about new legally binding instruments, perhaps we should strive universal adherence to the existing body of space and there are members at copuos that haven't ratified some of the basic instruments. so i think that's another area that we should pursue within co po copuos of the existing space
treaties. >> good point. all right, with that, we're out of time. please join me in thanking this panel for a fascinating discussion. [ applause ] we continue with the space cooperation conference, as representatives from russia, china, france, brazil, britain and the united states talk about space debris, weather and operational guidance for their space programs. hello, if everyone will take their seats please. we have a very crowded afternoon, and i want to make sure everyone has time for all the speakers. please come up to the front and take their place. you can see that we have a lot of people who are glad about that. i don't know how to share, so to start the proceedings,
everyone's biography, with the exception of our colleague, alexander ermolaev, his biography isn't in the pack right now, but we'll have it provided to you all at a later time. so everyone else's bio is in the packet, and we're going to go down in the order in which people are seated. so we're going to start with pascal. and simply go on. each of you have ten minutes, and as i just said about time, please, please do keep the time. don't make me have to jump up out of the seat and point at you, okay? >> i'll try my best. thank you very much. i am grateful to speak with such a distinguished audience. i would like to thank the audience for inviting me. i got the honor as a french in
support of the french ministry of foreign affairs, and participating for the last five years to the working group on the long-term sustainability. and previously, as a member of the expert group b, co-chaired by dick bernaci on space debris and space awareness. serious interest to the long-term and active role in this working group. in particular, i would like to record that the idea of creating such a working group was proposed by the french in 2008, when he was chair of the committee. we all know the necessity here of strengthening the long-term sustainability, and separating space. it is for all peaceful nations
to encourage the use of space and minimize debris to protect any admitant of spacecraft. today, we are all convinced here that this first set of 12 concerns were guidelines agreed last june vienna in outer space. however, there is still much work to be done. additional guidelines, probably the most difficult ones, still need to be discussed over the next two years. with the guidelines and rereturn to the general assembly in 2018. it will coincide, as it was mentioned before, uni plus 50, and this extraordinary conjunction, requires the group to phase thface this new challe
the next two years. please, let me now focus on what we're doing in france, in terms of best practices for space sustainability. first, the french space agency founded in 1961s a major for oug outer space. shipping in europe, the agency is under the ministry of education and research, along with the ministry of defense. the agency's 2004 strong work force, some 1,800 engineers and executives, 40% of who are women. innovative in its forward looking vision, they are helping to foster new technologies that will benefit society as a whole, focusing on five priorities.
access to space. we've already done. telecommunications, observations, science, and the last, domain security and defense. in the domain of space for outer sustainability, awareness of highly dynamic and complex of space environment seems indefensible for space assets, assuring access to space, and contributing to the sustainability in the long run. the increasing pressure on such and gee yo and leo. i would like to explain here the words strength and efficiency of our ssa organization in france that is military character. there is a full french and space
agency. this means in europe, we are convinced the best way to proceed to address national issues, as well as international cooperation ones for outer space sustainability. we want to share withous partners of the vadvantage. the french organization consists of four different levels, decision-making levels, and the research and development level. the decision-making level, the french space agency, the french joint space command and french arment procurement agency for many years have joined. the french mods,
[ inaudible [ inaudible ] operational since 2005, designed by the french and operated by the french. it is capable to take care on a daily basis 3,000 objects of one square meters. unique in europe, only available at the moment. it provides first level to me for large objects in france. at the professional level, we have two operations in france. the military center of the french force low is for air and space different in front of the prime minister according to the french code of defense. the kinis operational center consists of 24/7 team of ten
specialists for assessment, outlets and recommendations to onus. 23 satellites are currently protected from risk of collisions, 13, free mod satellites and geo, and seven, five in geo. it is connected to the operational center to exchange classified information, in particular, in particular, performed the french using measureme measurements in a classified room around 3,000 orbits performed each day. as a result, kines are better able to, our own conjunction messages. of course, we also retrieve another city of this book, approximately 100 per day at
seven days. the french center is internationally recognized for its expertise and conjunction, sensitivity analysis of d disbursion. we have demonstrated skills for most in space. other research and development level, it is located at kinis in toulouse, and provides expertise for system studies and development of algorithms for future. space revolution modeling, which is used within the agency to investigate and consider new measures in the long-term. today, we believe that there is a need to assess small
satellites and make considerations on the future space environment. we believe that international and corporation are of primary importance for sustainability. two subjects should deserve specific attention in the future. exchange of information and space objects and extreme space events. in terms of the corporation, france has developed a long-standing corporation with the u.s. during the last two years, the french ministry and the u.s. signed two ssa agreements, in with which kines is fully involved. also signed an agreement with nasa on collision risk assessment in june 2015. in europe, following the decision of the european parliament establishing and tracking work. most of it is in building this
initiative together with the united kingdom, germany,-itely and spain. supported by the commission. i can conclude this presentation from french practices for outer space without addressing space variations. the french space act in june 2008 imposes strategy space degree. the technical regulation in 2004 enforce since march -- 2011, and applicable to launch operations, in orbit and end of life mission disposal operations. on behalf of the ministry of higher education and research, our national regulatory
framework in place today france activity contribute to the long-term about outer space. distinguished participants and colleagues, in conclusion of this presentation, efficient in france is an advantage to contribute and improve the security and stability in space. the domain is too important to few countries to face the borden alone. i'll our goal is to share the burden and betterment of our elections. that's the reason why our decisions in coordination with our partners, because space is a global challenge we have to overcome altogether. thank you for giving me the possibility to share our french experience. [ applause ] good morning, it is a real pleasure and honor to be
participating in this event. i would like to thank the secure world foundation as well as all of the speakers who have joined us today as well as all of you in the audience. because this is a fairly significant achievement. i would like to take a different approach, though, in terms of my remarks. what i would like to do is put what we've achieved in perspective and talk about the process on the united states side. i've been involved in the outer space committee since 1980. so i was, guy he is, around 11 years old when i started. and it has been -- it is interesting to see how the committee and how it works has evolved. when i -- the reason i mention how it works is because we have reached a stage with these long-term sustainability guidelines where this was in f
inconceivab inconceivable, not only the nature, but also the actors involved. now, on the committee, we develop treaties in the 1960s, because there was no space law. we had to develop this from whole cloth. there was this victoria asked if we'll see any other new binding treaties, and i don't think so, because it is not kind of the political dynamic nor the appetite to develop the binding treaties. but the five that we have has withstood the test of time. so we had these global negotiations setting the rules of the road, if you will, for space activities. but we came up -- but then there were specific issues that we needed to address, and the committee showing its great flexibility decided, well we'll
address some of these issues with principles, not necessarily binding treaties. so we negotiated the remote sensing principles that were adopted in 1986 that set the stage for not only civilian remote sensing, but also commercial remote sensing. what's interesting about the remote sensing principles is it en shrined a number of fundamental principles if you will that most state news follow-through their regulatory regimes and commercial activities, commercial entities also follow. that is, making data available on a public nondiscriminatory basis. either free of charge or for a cost. but it just meant that everybody could share in the -- in this technology which has been hugely beneficial to the goal gloe balance scientific and
commercial field. the second set of principles, we're dealing with nuclear power sources in space. we had ussr nuclear powered satellite crash in canada. we didn't want to ban the use of nuclear power, but wanted at least some minuimum standards that those who chose to use nuclear power, those in space would follow. that built confidence in the general public and the world community that if states were to use nuclear power, that they would at least on a voluntary basis look at these principles. then we had the guidelines on debris mitigation, which relied heavily on work done by the space agencies, and the iadc. but we're able to make these guidelines that kind of universal, again on a voluntary
basis, and adopted by the general assembly. so we have that, we have that legacy. then the next, kind of the next phase of what we've been doing on the committee, is not necessarily developing new guidelines, but looking at what states do to implement the treaties as well as the -- as well as the principles and other agreements within the committee. so we've had review of national legislation, the legal subcommittee, which looked at what states are doing to give effect to their obligation under the outer space trees. what that does is provide a model for other states who are contemplating, you know, their own space programs or who believe that they need some kind of national legislation to ensure that they're providing the proper supervision and authorization to their
government as well as nongovernmental entities. so we have this kind of tradition of looking at different ways of accomplishing specific issues, specific work dealing with specific issues. so for the -- in the case of the long-term sustainability guidelines, this was really a new phase for the committee and a new paradigm in terms of how we did our work. specifically, we wanted sustainability guidelines that were universal, that were applicable to all space activities, but recognizing that the new reality, which is private activities are dominating outer space, which is from my perspective, is a good thing. but we could not do -- we could not develop these guidelines in a vacuum. we needed to have not only government experts and we had, noy, audry and dick on the u.s.
said as well as amber childworth from the state department who formed the core of our negotiating team, but it was a whole government effort. we had many other agencies involved in terms of providing input for these guidelines. but more importantly, we were able to -- we were able to get the support in active participation of experts from industry and academia to participate in these four expert groups, and the four expert groups was again, something new to the committee, where we had co-chairs who work on a voluntary basis, pretty much doing -- yeah without -- without direct u. nunchtn. support. we organized the expert groups, they were quite active, and had a real cross-section of
developing countries participating as well as individual experts. on the u.s. side, not only did we have the inner agency process, but we also -- we were also able to get the support from industry through organizations like secure world foundation, space foundation, aiaa, american astronautle, and what that did is gave us a reality check on what we were trying to accomplish in the u.n. it was a confidence building and transparency measure for domestic purposes, and it provided -- it provided what i would say a degree of credibility, at least in terms of what the u.s. was seeking to accomplish for the long-term sustainability guidelines
exercise. so the, i guess that -- i just wanted to make sure that you all fully appreciate the scope and nature of what we were able to accomplish with these 12 guidelines. it was not a simple, you know, u.n. exercise that involved -- it involved civil society as well as industry. and i will just conclude by saying for me, this is a big achievement. one of the hallmarks of the president's national space policy was not only promoting international cooperation, but also, promoting the safe and responsible use of outer space, and this is really -- these two guidelines are the cornerstone of that policy at least for our purposes. thank you. [ applause ]
good morning. ladies and gentlemen, i'm glad to be invited to tend to this workshop, and my colleagues and i, we all learn more about at this workshop. and now i worked at -- worked on space debris field, and in this rts events, i worked as chinese delegate for work expert group b, space debris for three years. and now we are -- i worked continuous to support the working group's work for the
rts. now i give brief remarks of our work, chinese work, on the space debris mitigation, and space debris counter measures. now, hyper velocity of space debris in orbit spacecraft, and space debris will impact human and assess 50. population increase of space debris critical effect outer space long-term. now i give six expect our work in china. first is in space policy, china has consistently adhered to maintain peaceful use of outer space and sustainable development of aul the space
activity. our policy file white paper on china space activity in 2000 first point out that the issue of space debris is a challenge to space activities. the white paper of 2011 point out that china will continue to stress its work on space debris observation and mitigation, and the spacecraft protection. besides, china will develop technologies for monitoring space debris and the conjunction and the risk assessment. and small earth object observation. it will set up a design and assessment system of space debris mitigation. and to take measures to reduce space debris left by post
mission, spacecraft and launch vehicles. the space legislation. in july 2015, the national security law of the people's republic of china was promulgated in article 32, it states that persists in the peaceful exploration and use of outer space stressing international cooperation and preserving the security of space activity and assess. now, on this law, the china's national space law is being formulated and it will be give about next year. third expect is our space activity regulations.
to stress the management on space activity and space operations, reference to the u.n. copuocopuos, the interim measures on spadebris space management in 2009, in accordance with this requirement, the rocket and post mission gee o satellites have contacted and operative measures for example, launch 2 c and 2 d vehicle implementing the orbiting measures, and the rocket preservation to the final stage. and 28 and 2 and 3 and the bato
satellites implemented that the orbit operation as required. outer works, all the work have laid a good foundation for spacecraft security design and application. space debris conjunction analysis was conducted actively. in the serious of mission, which ensure the safety of the spacecraft flight. this measure was revised in last december. its names have been changed to two measures, space degree mitigation and space management. in this measure, which further specify the space entity responsibility and clarify the requirements of space debris mitigation.
according to the complete process, causing disabilities that is, design, development and manufacturing launch in orbit and disposal. space debris mitigation and protection was proposed. meanwhile, the measure was co compatible with the other three, administration of registration of space objects. and the interim measures for the administration for civil space launch project, and the interim measures for satellite, engineering administration. the last one, which is issued by this year, at -- in august. the fourth spot about work standard. chinese national space
administration promote to research and establish space debris mitigation and the protection standard for supporting implementation of the measures, all of the three, four measures. the technical standard have been adopted by some of spacecraft missions. they were applied into the process of spacecraft design launch and/or b-- and orbit. the technical implementation mitigated space debris production. and reduce in orbital risk as well as protect space safety. and in fifth, about organization establishment. nsa founded a new agency, new organization. it is named the space debris
operation and the data application center, stokes. i am the director of general of this center. deputy director, yeah. it is funded last year. this agency has founded by chinese academia of science. technical supportive as well as management agency to ensure satellite in orbit, and conduct international cooperation on space debris and the near earth object. in sixth, about international cooperation chinese government cooperate and communication in space debris research, and technology field with other states. for example, participate iadc
organization activities, and work together with other members agency to promote the joint observation activity to the space debris and conduct work, and other research work. and now i give some summary of our work. china positively participates in rts working group, and export group work from 2011. next several years, we will continue to stress bilateral dialogue in constructive manner, and work with other countries. and other members, member states to study and exchange
development practice that promotes the long-term of outer space activity and actually promote the development of the modernization of all the space governance and the role of law within the framework of the united nations. we believe that with the concert effort of all countries, the international community will have enough wisdom and courage to solve the common challenge faced by mankind in outer space and issue the peaceful sustainable development of outer space activity and create efficiency and fairness. thank you. [ applause ] >> all right, so we are pressed
for time. noy, as i was sitting here, thinking this is a very busy session, panel, we are very cramped here. this is what a satellite in one of those orbits full of space debris must feel like. they can't really move around without bumping into one another, you know. well, i'm going to use my smartphone to check for time. you guys here cannot see, ken is really classy. he has a pocket watch. >> you can use that in. >> no, no, i don't trust those things, you know. i'm evolving. well, thank you. i would like to thank the secure world foundation and the department of state for the invitation and their support. i hope my participation can justify the expectation they place on me. i have been told i have to be brief. and this is a particular challenge to a brazilian, you know. probably more difficult than getting our guidelines approved, peter. brazilians are not known for
their concision. my views, based on my own personal exchanges with other developing nations, particularly other countries. as such, my views should not be understood as generalizations. they could apply to you'll merging actors. i believe they're more than just educated guesses, right, they could inform our discussion here. well, when we started discussing the gruilic proposals, one thing we realized is different degrees of understanding of what implications of the lts prospects were or are, because we're still working on them. as we work together, i gain some insight on some of the challenges faced by these different emerging space actors, and you know, and challenges that affect the participation. and which i believe will also affect the implementation stage. which is something we are
discussing here. one thing, for example, the decision in policymakers in each country, you know, they may have limited awareness of the importance of maintaining and preserving sustainability of outer space activities. if i put it bluntly, they don't realize the far reaching consequences of our discussions sometimes. right? and then it is often the case that developing countries have limited resources and in the whitest sense, resources of all kinds to handle these tasks that will stem from the implementation of guidelines. oulk, this fact, you know, can be attributed in part to the lack of awareness i just mentioned, you know, because they don't realize with whatis involved. they do not devote enough resources, enough time. enough funds to develop these resources. and now, this is of course, followed in terms of human resources, right? smaller countries may simply do
not have enough expertise to handle such issues. and another problem that we face, and this is something that stemmed from my personal experience, is that decision-making on space matters is fragmented sometimes. there may be either too many actors involved, sorry, there may be too many actors involved and poor coordination among them. and then when you don't have really established governance and roles, discussions and implementation space policies, space issues, discussions seem to shift from the military to the scientific to the diplomatic community, back and forth. it makes it difficult to consolidate national positions, right. you realize this when you are discussing, for example, some issues there in the lts when we meet. you have this consultation going back and forth and positions tend to change from one session to the next. for no apparent reason, right.
well, this limitations, they have very interesting consequence. as they have, noyou know, technical and regulatory matters, it means they tend to get involved with conceptual aspects of the guidelines of the discussion. right, and to some extent, this was the case in the proposal of brazil and grulic in the beginning, sharing a conceptual, rather than purely practical nature, right. then obviously as got involved, familiarize ourself with technical aspects, things like, you know, information launches, et cetera, and then, you know, we as diplomats in this case, other colleagues, specialists, technical. this makes, again, the negotiation process much more complicated. right. and again, your challenge will be to identify who the interlocker is.
who will you be speaking for support, okay. and then appoint that i would say that does not apply only to the merging space countries or developing countries, i think it applies to all of us, but in our case, you know, this is perhaps used often as an excuse. and overlooked, we need to handle internal criticism about the progress of the discussions. we all do. right. but in a case of emerging space actors, this criticism sometimes is used to justify, you know, justify limited or no participation. why are we doing this, you know. this kind of thing. because they don't -- they are just the same guys, and we're being called to, you know, kind of check, you know, offer a check mark and say okay, everything is okay, because it is consensus based. and i have heard officials ask me why we were involved in the process all. this is not something we should
be dealing with. our concerns are much more mundane, you know. this is not true, of course, but it is an opportunity to educate these people in a sense. but in countries of smaller space programs, this is not always possible. right, it is something that we have to be aware of. and another point for concern is that you know, some of these countries are worried about contributing with the process. they may create technical and financial barriers who may burden space program which could be limited. no consideration is given to that, but i'm saying that in many of these countries, people don't have an understanding, and out of concerns, okay, we are not going to get engaged, we're not going to implement this, or do that. so this is more or less what the scenario is. how do we handle this, you know? i think the answer is precise.
how do we address the question i just mentioned. one thing i would say is a permanent one. i know peter wants to finish, okay. and you know, and i want to see the lts guidelines as a living document. i do not mean reopening the discussion. that's not what i'm saying. we need to finish, agree and have a document ready by 2018. we have to agree i think it would be a good idea to agree that the documents should be open, to periodic revision, we could sit down and agree and assess what has worked and what hasn't. and the thing is not only making the guidelines more effective, but when we reopen the discussion, we will be creating opportunities for more people to get engaged. this is not a finished process like what happened with the debris guidelines, you know. you have the surge of interest, a lot of people get involved and then after that, you tend to --
need to work very hard. make sure that more and more people get involved. in the case of copuos for example, you have many new states that join cope pus in recent years and they did not participate in the discussions of space debris document. and so they just say okay, this is a document, they don't know what it is about. i've said that, right. and this is related to the fact that they don't have enough experts and people who can handle that, right. now, another point. we must create opportunities and programs to have establish an emerging space actors work together, right. emerging space actors cannot be consumers of guidelines and rules, right. they have to participate actively in joint initiatives, right. and the lts process presents the possibility, right, as the preservation of sustainability that the whole concept is only effective if countries agree to
work together. so the process must not follow the logic, you should do this, should adopt, right. but rather, you know, let's work together to see how we can implement the guideline in your country, right. you can learn something from us. i can learn something from you. so this should be an active process, right. and those are more experienced in expertise have, i'm sorry, i should say to reach out, you know. i think the initiative will largely rely on them, right. but i do not mean only established actors, even countries like brazil have a role to play. we have some degree of formzation governance that would help us, allow us to do that, right. now, in the same vein, programs are needed to develop the necessary knowledge and expertise. and we need to bring more opportunities from specialists at different stages of development to work together in the process of implementing the guidelines, and perhaps one idea i had, i don't know if this is
feasible, but u.n. regional centers. we could establish programs. this would allow us to reach out to large areas, sections of the globe. also, if i have to summarize these observations, i would say the key answer is joint work in the implementation stage, right. we have to learn the ropes together. and if we work together, we increase our share of understanding and how to handsel them. by increasing cooperation, we help a growing number of space actors realize that the preservation is in the interest of all of us. then in closing, i would like to say that challenging is the lts process may be, i share david's op tow mi op t
optimistic. thank you. [ applause ] >> so i appreciate the invitation of your foundation and the state department to join, as i joined this panel, important panel, the very last moment, i presents present myself. i'm alexander ermolaev, russian embassy. and i color all the areas of scientific corporation, including space that are not explained by today. not by russian initiative. so we consider very important this event that attempt to highlight the topic of long-term sustainability of outer space activity. there is no doubt that the liberation within the copuos of the guidelines remain one of the
key points. that's why the result reached in vien vienna, so far should not be estimated. we're welcoming the subset of 12 guidelines agreed to, but there is a little work to be done in order to satisfactorily achieve by 2018 the task of drafting the entire set of the guidelines that would provide for the aggrega aggregate. we consider this entire integrated state of the guidelines extremely important. we surely do not want to make optimistic assumptions, but we have to say that there isn't meeting in the working group in
vien vienna. finally, attempting to agree substantive space security issues may be achieved. the russian side was diligent in going to its share for work as regards to pragmatic updating of russia proposed gradraft guidelines. to compromise existing differences, and in position of various delegations adhered to. recent discussions in vienna and the fact that the delegates under the guidance of chairman working group, mr. peter martinez, succeeded in achieving a balance served to prove that a consensus of pertinent safety and security issues not to be so difficult after all. we believe that the sets of guidelines that have been drafted gives an excellent
opportunity to provide for an actual framework to deal with challenges to safety and security in outer space. we also hope if approved to be very meaningful and self-sufficient in the long-term. to ask attempts to take more expansive approach to visualizing potential legal regulations in this domain will hardly be a successful in the absence of development practice of space operations. the success in achieving this goal will be core elements in the process of validating of space traffic management. we believe the important idea of establishing united nation platform is an instrument for
accumulating multi supports institutional information. as apart of national effort to implement the guidelines, russia is currently working on create ang open information service, intended to increase awareness of states and other users. so here, russia has self-motivation and methodology. also, we have more than 20 research centers, and institutes under the umbrella of russian academy of science, and the space state corporation that conducting serious research and development on space topic. we have for other development several spacecraft dedicated
observing solar activity. and the detailed technical presentation you may found at the website of world secure foundation, as we present, make representation, earlier this april, in the fantastic space event, organize would by world security foundation and hosted by the u.s. state department. so expansion of reliable space situation situational information, it will remain the size factor of ensuring space operation. speaking of space traffic management in general, russia is not against this topic deliberate dimensions. but we are rather unhappy with the trend we notice, when stm
artificially branded a number one political issue. crucial questions arise when one attempts to visualize and agreeable organization pattern for the related institutional operational aspects of space traffic management. there are many questions for states to address. for example, it would be important to understand the sources of legitimacy or super imposing of states criteria for acting in prescribed way, as well as the mechanism of for securing. we cannot help but notice the current ideas on expressed publicly are those that are based on assertions and important dramatic change of condition for current space
activity. some experts go as far as proposing to defy new, which would be between airspace and near otter space. advancing this idea or this do recognize that the basic norms of international space law related to non-placement of nuclear or other weapons, in outer space, it will not apply to the newly identified. we strongly oppose such, this idea. we're not also supportive of the idea that the right to self-defense could be invoked in outer space. here, some states do not refer only to article 51, they deem to
provide for preventative and even preemptive self-defense in outer space. the charter of the united nations does not provide for such types of self-defense, either on earth or anywhere. it would be prudent to attempt to arrive a common understanding of preserving the concept of the u.n. charter. working paper presented by the russian federation within copuos specifically on this issue contains among other things a question that could prove to be very useful to start meaningful discussion on this topic. and it will be much better to arrive at universal understanding, and have it approved by the u.n. security council, and the general assembly.
finally, russia invites the united states and all the partners participating in the process to give a good thought to and act constructively to achieve a task of drafting by 2018, the entire integrated set of the guidelines for regulation for safety of space operations to secure space availability. thank you very much. [ applause ] >> thank you very much. thank you very much for giving it back to me. it is very interesting. my i am the director of the space policy. so to begin with, i would like to previously explain japanese activity of the space as well as the space. japan is now conducting our own
space program, and those who special committee. and it is also international cooperation, especially corporation. japanese intelligence space station program, in cooperation with the united states, russian federation, and canada and european countries. we decided to cooperate for this program, a project by the year 2024. also, the next round of the international space exploration forum and possibly in 2017. that is why our space activity have become much more diverse. the secure and safe outer space activity is become much more important. so always it was importance in
outer space. in this context, rts, a long time university guideline can play a very critical and outer . in this context lts has long-term guidelines and can play a very critical and important role to share and promote this concept in the world. actually, japan participates in the support of this process from the beginning. during the six years of the negotiation process we contributed from the point of associates to this process of the chairman of the committee itself and the chairman of the sdsc and chairman of the working group such as space weather. but however, until now, we are
also face iing agreements to conclude on this point, but finally in this june we could agree with the first set of guidelines. this is a quite important step for the rule of law in outer space. actually, we couldn't have had any kind of agreement, legally binding agreement, for this 40 or 50 years, but now we need to have some kind of legally binding document. so this first set of guidelines, we emphasize the importance of going to outer space and the importance of the rule of lawton
the process of rulemaking. so at this stage, i would like to explain fin detail japan's effort with regard to this first set of guidelines. for example, the issue of guidelines one, two, and three, these guidelines deal with the national registration favor and supervision until now. japan doesn't have any kind of concrete comprehensive space law but in complying -- in order to comply with these guidelines we are now preparing new legislation, so called japan space activity law. under this law, the supervision
and control of launch and the operation of space objects can be made by only one law. this law makes much more clear for japan's space activities and also guideline 12 and guideline 13. these guidelines deal with sharing information about space objects and space debris. also for japan we put the importance on the issue of the space situational awareness ssa and cooperation for the best policy on space. now japan is implementing our effort to cooperate with space activity as a country including the u.s., and also we tried to compact this. currently we have only to look for the ssa activities but we are now developing much more comprehensive pictures of japan's ssa activities.
a space faring nation, japan is always implementing our cooperation project basically in the region. for example japan established the framework of the japan regional space agency forum. we deal with so many projects in the area of prevention and global issues such as the implementation issue and also the engagement of international space activities by asian countries through a project that
was mentioned. at the same time japan tried to make these activities to disseminate the concept of importance of rule of law in outer space to these countries. so for the future, what is necessary? as we discussed amongst the panelists, the most important thing is to cooperate and implement the first set of guidelines. that way it shows the very important best practices for the future. at the same time we may have to develop compromises in the discussions about the remaining set of guidelines. actually, there are some draft guidelines that fit the
discussion, but the point is always very conflicted. but we have some other issue which we may have to address urgently such as the conjunctional assessment. japan will be flexible and try to be flexible to make an agreement by 2018. but the most important thing for now is how to implement the guidelines that we have, that we make a clear message to the world. thanks very much. [ applause ] >> good morning, everyone. thank you for allowing me to join this very distinguished panel. i'm be very quick as i'm going to be eating into our 12:00
lunch hour. we want to welcome the consensus reached in june on the first set of guidelines. and we really appreciate the efforts of the chairperson for guiding us to that point. this human activity in outer space is making an important contribution to improve the human condition on earth. as a well established spacefaring nation, the u.k. has long experience developing implementation practices of this first guidelines. rather than going through the guidelines one by one, i have grouped them into five themes. looking at guidelines one, two, and three. it provides the u.k. government with a rigorous framework for
authorizing space activity. we consider things like health and safety requirements, the environmental impact, as well as compliance with our international obligations. we use quantitative and equ qualitative analyses. qualitative analyses will focused on the organizational attributes of the applicants such as launch safety procedures. the committee for space data systems, the british standard
institute, the interagency space committee, and the space debris mitigation guidelines of the community. as human space activity is increasing rapidly, we have to periodic ensure our policies fit the present and future circumstances. to that end, we published a new space policy issue in december last year. the u.k. space agency is currently trialing a traffic light approach. turning now to the second theme of guideline four. it operates on a legal basis provided by the communications act of 2003 as well as telegr h telegraphtelegrap telegraphy act of 2006.
the u.k. space agency works together to promote the sustainable use of the spectrum. when authorizing space activity we carry out technical analysis to make sure space objects do not pose any long-term interference in orbital regions. we ensure the orbital lifetimes are compliant with the 25-year recommendations in the guidelines. we require space operators to boost their spacecraft at end of life into an orbit of the go region so they don't interfere or return and become part of the graveyard orbits. we regularly check with u.k. operators to ensure the