AwaitingLaunch_1397728623369

The History of the Code
Another aspect of differences is the history of the two Codes. HCoC was
developed from the MTCR (Missile Technology Control Regime) framework
and designed to improve its implementation. This means that the objective
of HCoC was to enhance capabilities of the non-proliferation regime, but
not to establish a new framework of international governance. In other
words, HCoC was not created to prevent the actions of the states. Instead,
HCoC permits existing activities but demands the states to improve
transparency.
On the other hand, the ICoC was developed as a response to the Chinese
ASAT test in 2007. The ASAT test created a large cloud of space debris that
would increase the risk of collision with their space assets. This sort of
intentional creation of debris for any purpose was unacceptable for many
countries. Thus, in April 2007, as mentioned above, the UNCOPUOS
adopted the Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines. However, UNCOPUOS
and the IADC are civilian organisations that could not establish a rule for
military use of space. Since the Chinese ASAT test was believed to have a
military connotation, it was not enough to regulate the use of space in a
civilian forum. Thus, the delegates of the EU have, therefore, proposed a
Code of Conduct that might go beyond pure civilian domain of space.
The major obstacle for the EU in promoting this initiative was, by and large,
due to the objection from the U.S. Even though the Obama Administration
came into power in January 2009, the U.S. space policy was defined by the
65
National Space Policy of 2006, established during the Bush Administration.
This document emphasised that the U.S. “rejects any claims to sovereignty by
any nation over outer space or celestial bodies, or any portion thereof, and
rejects any limitations on the fundamental right of the U.S. to operate in and
acquire data from space,” and therefore, the U.S. space bureaucracy – NASA,
Department of State, and Department of Defense – were unable to show
any commitment to the EU CoC. However, after a number of intense
meetings, the U.S. officially announced its readiness to support negotiations
on an ICoC in January 2012, on the condition of taking the EU CoC as a
“draft” for the ICoC.
After the change of American policy, Japan and Australia joined to support
the promotion of the ICoC. Consultation processes for drafting the ICoC
90 | Awaiting Launch: Perspectives on the Draft ICoC for Outer Space Activities