Galileo – Same programme, different language?
- Paper number
IAC-06-E3.3.03
- Author
Ms. Jasmina Lijesevic, University of Wales, United Kingdom
- Year
2006
- Abstract
Since its inception the European Galileo programme has been surrounded by controversy. Its potential uses have caused concerns amongst some member states and have raised a debate as to what precisely constitutes military use of a space asset. This creates particular difficulties for the European Space Agency, who are heavily involved in Galileo. The ESA Convention specifies that the organisation should engage in “peaceful purposes”. With the emergence of potentially dual-use programmes such as Galileo and GMES (Global Monitoring of Environment and Security) within the context of ESDP and CFSP, this paper examines how ESA is reconciling its own charter with the potential militarization of space. The controversies surrounding the Galileo system have recently appeared to diminish. The language of “security and stability” as opposed to “military and defence” may have gone some way to alleviating the concerns of some member states opposed to militarization of space. A 2003 ESA commissioned report states that non-aggressive use of such technology that helps secure peace and defends stability confirms the compatibility of the two positions. However, there is still much to debate concerning the extent to which ESA can claim to be engaging in peaceful purposes if the role of Galileo shifts from use by emergency services to servicemen engaged in peacekeeping activities. This paper discusses the political difficulties the Galileo programme has encountered and looks at controversies surrounding potential military applications of the system. It will also focus on the US reaction and the potential impact on GPS and their response to Chinese involvement in the programme.
- Abstract document