Proceedings of the Workshop - United Nations Office for Outer ...

204 MAINTAINING THE SPACE ENVIRONMENTLet me first congratulate Professor Perek on hiscomprehensive report. I really do not intend tocomment on this report. I will do my best to offer myown perspective on the subject and propose a possibleway of making concrete progress. It is ambitiousenough!I believe - indeed we are all o f the same opinion -that we are at a crucial point on a specific andimportant issue affecting the near-term future of spaceactivities and that this is also the point to reconsiderand strengthen the role and scope o f internationalspace law and o f the COPUOS.Some factsI would like to emphasize the following in particularand the urgency for taking action.(a) Space debris is a natural and immediateconsequence of the exploration and use of outer spaceby man-made objects. It is created by and - untilperhaps new ways and means are discovered - goeshand-in-hand with the growth o f space activities, theincreasing number o f satellites, space objects andlaunchers. Space activities - like other high-technologypursuits - create risks; and first and foremost, forthemselves. All this we know and have always known.I cannot criticise the drafters o f the Outer SpaceTreaty for omitting to give a clear definition of spacedebris from the purely legal viewpoint (I do not knowwhether in other fields we have definitions of aircraft,debris; the question is not the same, some will say.)Any use of high-technology activity, anydiscovery, particularly that giving rise to a broadexpectation o f improved living conditions on Earth,has never been set aside in view o f the potential risks.We have been amply aware for a long time that thoserisks - on Earth and in space - are set to becomegreater and greater ( ”le temps des cerises...” hascome!)7. Some space agencies have, to their credit,7 ‘Cerise’: a French defence satellite that collided with an Arianeupper stage on 24 July 1996.undertaken studies and become engaged in takingmitigation measures.(b) What now?We now have more and more constellation-typesatellites, essentially operating in low earth orbit, andsmall (micro or nano) satellites. Those regions offeringthe biggest potential for commercial activities are themost polluted. The large increase in space traffic,p articu larly fo r com m ercial applications(communications, Earth observation, etc.), will furtherincrease the risk of damage.The international space station, its assembly andoperation, with humans on board, will dramaticallyraise the stakes. We are fully aware that the lives ofthese people will be at risk (on-board or during EVA,a very small piece o f debris impacting the spacestation, or what’s more an astronaut’s suit, could causeserious damage or injury). We know that already somemanoeuvres have proved necessary to avoid possiblecollision.(Note 1: 13 June 1999- a collision was avoidedbetween the ISS and a component part of a Russianrocket. The on-board computer of the Station hadrefused to obey the command sent by the ground;hopefully the element o f the debris o f the launchvehicle was on a trajectory more than was foreseen.)We know too that one ISS module launched has noprotective shielding and could encounter problems insurviving collisions.(Note 2: After the explosion of a proton launcherseveral seconds after its launch from BaikanourKazakhstan, large pieces o f debris fell to the ground)Is the space around our planet becoming a junkyard, with dramatic consequences on Earth itself (interms of pollution? There is light pollution,frequencies, ashes, and other envisioned activities likepublicity and tourism in space. Professor Perekunderlines this and I agree with him. All those types ofpollution which are impacting the objectives ofactivities in outer space are expressed in article 1. S1o f the OST.