AwaitingLaunch_1397728623369

As COPUOS and CD seem not to be a feasible forum to negotiate ICoC,
there are not many multilateral alternatives for ICoC. Within the framework
of the UN, the General Assembly is the only alternative as a political option
for negotiations. Nevertheless, the initiatives taken by various informal
groups that have proliferated in recent years on issues such as disarmament,
nuclear supply, trade, including The Wassenaar Arrangement, The Australia
Group, The Nuclear Suppliers Group could be the light at the end of the
tunnel.
Certainly the results of the open-ended consultations and the inclusion of
the views and criticisms of countries as well as the intensive promoting
process of the EU has allowed ICoC to become an initiative that is a little bit
more transparent with its intentions, allowing access to an open and
participatory process to all interested countries to facilitate negotiations.
Whilst at the moment there is strong European optimism, based on the
success of the last consultations in which government representatives from
countries were more constructive, generating a more positive environment, it
is clear that EU still has much work to do in the field of high level political
consultationsand the promotion of the proposal in order to reach an
acceptable text to most members of the international space community and
thus pave the way for the start of the negotiation process.
The clear evolution between the first version and the latest version presented
by EU in September 2013 offered a new opportunity for reflection by all
countries to sit down and negotiate a more comprehensive and inclusive
document on these issues, which are related to outer space TCBMs. These
161
may affect both civilian activities and dual-use space technology, carried out
for defense and security purposes, a complex issue that arouses legitimate
suspicions from countries with a strong pacifist orientation.
The consultations in Kiev faced opposition from countries such as China,
Russia, Brazil and India, which recommended an obvious impasse, that the
code should be reviewed in a multilateral forum. These countries also
criticised the text due to the prevalence of some ambiguous concepts such as
"self-defence", "national security" and destruction of objects in space. The
references to collective security and the right to self-defence is justified in
those cases where space objects may be used for hostile or threatening
162
purposes. This showed a code will impact security, and not just technical
140 | Awaiting Launch: Perspectives on the Draft ICoC for Outer Space Activities