Category Asian Space Race: Rhetoric or Reality?

The commercial space market is in existence since 1970. At present, the world mar­ket for satellite-based services—including telecommunications, television, global positioning systems and Earth observation (weather, environmental, search and rescue)—is valued at nearly US$90 billion. The problem with the commercial space market is that it has not been large enough to attract private investment in the technologies needed to lower the cost of access to space. Space tourism holds great promise as an economic ‘driver’, leading to market competition to lower launch costs and space travel and stay costs which could in turn attract other customers to the space market.[337]

All these years, sending a human to the space has remained a costly affair, and it costs around US$ 25-30 million per trip. Countries in the region have depended on the USA and Russia to send their astronauts to the space. In the recent past,

Malaysia and South Korea had sent their astronauts via this mechanism. India also has inked deal with Russia in this regard, and as a commercial activity, two Indian space travellers would be flying the non-reusable ‘Soyuz TMA’ ship to be piloted by a Russian cosmonaut.[338] However, all these efforts should be viewed form a point of view of using space travel as a tool to enhance country’s international image, popularise space science and generate feeling of nationalism amongst its population. Couple of years ago, China succeeded in sending men to the space using its own spacecraft.

However, coming years may witness a significant change in attitude towards space travel in form of a shift from state sponsored to private activity. Burt Rutan’s SpaceShipOne, the winner of the Ansari X-Prize, is helping open a new frontier of economic development. In cooperation with Richard Branson and other entrepreneurs, a new space market is likely to emerge. Few Japanese companies and individuals are keen to invest in this industry and have already made business plans to that effect.[339] Various new ideas are being discussed, and even businessmen from states like Singapore are working towards possessing next-generation space vehicles which could offer a 5-min trip to fly 100 km above Earth surface. Space Tourism Society in Malaysia feels that building space tourism vehicle would be more expensive, and Third World countries should enter this business as administrative supporters in the space tourism activities and organisations. They may also invest in programmes like training astronauts and so on [15]. Abu Dhabi is also likely to emerge as a major commercial centre and could materialise as a hub for commercial space activities.

Asia may not take a lead in space tourism in the next couple of decades, but a few private entities from Asia may join the global bandwagon. The major uncertainty in this field could be the approach of governments. Different governments would try to regulate the industry based on their perceptions about passenger safety standards offered by private companies and the overall impact of having private spacecrafts on national security.

In the post-Cold War world, Asia is rediscovering itself both economically and strategically. A new sense of identity is getting revealed by this multicultural, multilinguistic and multireligious community. The geopolitical scenario in this region is assuming greater importance for major powers in the world. The superior position of the Europeans and that of the United States (US) in the global affairs since the nineteenth century is been challenged by few Asian powers. This is mainly happening because these states have succeeded in rapidly increasing their economic and strategic might. It is also important to note that in Asia along with various ‘islands’ of prosperity and peace also a vast ‘landmass’ of poverty and conflict exists.

This overall transformation of Asia is being viewed as a ‘Rise of Asia’. It is argued that the overall growth of economies in Asia is shifting the balance of world economic power away from the Europe and the USA. An optimistic view is that this ‘civilisation in making’ may take the entire world under its sphere of influence in coming years [3]. It is expected that the economic growth of the region may ultimately get translated into power. However, for this to happen, it is essential that the sustained economic development of the region takes place. Any assessment about the future of Asia needs to factor various facets augmenting and limiting the rise of Asia.

The likely rise of Asia is expected to bring in a significant global transformation. The process of the modernisation of Asia (substantial parts of Asia) is almost getting completed by the beginning of twenty-first century. Half a century ago, there appeared to be mainly two modern societies in Asia, namely, Japan and Israel. However, the states within the region particularly the states geographically and culturally close to Japan were quick to learn from the Japanese success. South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore started emulating Japan [4]. On the other

hand, China also understood the advantages of modernising. The growth of China since 1980s has been unique, and by beginning of twenty-first, it became the fastest growing economy of the world. By 2011, China overtook Japan and became the second largest economy in the world. With this, the second and the third (Japan) largest economies in the world are now residing in Asia. Along with the rising China, another country to witness the exponential growth in the region is India (fourth position in terms of purchasing power parity in 2010 estimate).

The stride of Asia towards prosperity and development has become possible be­cause of the opening of their economies, creation of global market for their projects, engaging Western states in economic activities and creating Asian dependence, developing a science and technology base, making trained employable manpower available catering of both regional and global needs. The biggest advantage the Asian region has is the availability of English speaking people[1] which is helping in enhancing their overall global footprint. In strategic realm, Asia is the most ‘happening’ continent in the world. The most significant military conflicts of the twenty-first century like Iraq and Afghanistan are being fought in the Asian theatre. Also, political conflicts like Iran and North Korea are being fought from the Asian soil. Like the rest of the world, Asian region is also marred from threats of terrorism, climate change, natural disasters, piracy and drug trafficking. But, in spite of such limitations, the Asia as a whole is found rising.

The future of Asia will depend on Asians and their efforts to assert themselves. A significant number of Asian Diaspora staying outside Asia is also contributing towards brightening this future. Asian inventiveness, Asian industries, Asian man­agement skills and Asian governance needs to make their presence felt at global level and should be in a position to provide the ‘Asian models for prosperity’ to the rest of the world. Asia has potential to contribute towards to the growth and development of continents like Africa and Latin America.[2] Post-1990s, it has been observed that few Asian states have made significant inroads into various areas of technologies like electronics, nuclear technology, information technology and biotechnology, etc. In few spheres of technology like electronics and information technology, the domination of Asia is global. Space technology is another area where some Asian states have developed themselves into a major spacefaring nation (nations with capability to launch their own satellites to orbit) and have also established various bilateral and multilateral initiatives with developed spacefaring nations. Few of the Asian states are also engaging the African and Latin American states and are helping them for the developments of their space programme. Asian

states have commercial interests attached to their space journey. The present level of achievements by few Asia states in space arena and their roadmaps for the future indicates that the prospects of growth in Asian space industry are very encouraging. Also, once the ‘space tourism’ becomes a reality, Asian states are expected to develop in this sector too.

Asia’s response to space epoch needs to be understood at the backdrop of the appreciation of the overall growth of technology and the political/governmental support received by the scientific community in this quest for technology.

In 1963, India’s entry into the space field made a nascent beginning from a small church in Thumba village in the southern parts of India. It started with launching of sounding rockets in 1963. At that time, the purpose behind investing in space technologies was for scientific investigations of the upper atmospheric and ionospheric phenomenon above the geomagnetic equator. In India, the geomagnetic equator passes through Thumba village (Kerala state in India). During 1960s, the only suitable building to start this job was a church in this village [1]. From this village, India launched its first sounding rocket on November 21, 1963.1 Over last four to five decades, India’s space programme has made significant progress and is today globally reorganised as one of the most successful programmes in recent times. India’s initial progress in the space arena was slow in comparison with the progress made by in the later days. Limited technological expertise and being an underdeveloped economy lack of financial resources were probably the key reasons for this slow growth.

Initial journey of India in this field was founded restricted to sounding rocket experimentation. Such experiments continued almost for a decade. Subsequently, India placed its first satellite in orbit with the help of the erstwhile USSR on Apr 19, 1975. Aryabhatta was India’s first satellite, named after an ancient Indian mathematician of the fifth century AD. It was launched[72] [73] from Kapustin Yar, a rocket launch and development site close to Volgograd in the then USSR. Further, India became a spacefaring nation on July 18, 1980, when it demonstrated that it could send a satellite to orbit by using its own rocket launching system. This was the launch of satellite Rohini 1 with the help of Satellite Launch Vehicle (SLV) rocket from its own launch site located at Sriharikota in South India.

Initially, India’s space programme started under the aegis of Department of Atomic Energy[74] in 1962 with creation of Indian National Committee for Space Research (INCOSPAR). The mandate to the committee was to oversee all aspects of space research in the country. Work began on the establishment of the Thumba Equatorial Rocket Launching Station (TERLS) in 1962.[75] The first sounding rocket was launched with the help form National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) which provided Nike-Apache rocket along with other hardware and training aids.

India’s former Prime Minister Ms. Indira Gandhi dedicated TERLS to the United Nations on Feb 2, 1968. On that occasion, INCOSPAR Chairman Dr. Vikram Sarabhai articulated India’s aspirations in space programme. He stated that India’s programme is civilian in nature, with focus on the application of space technology as a tool for socioeconomic development of the country. The basic aim of India’s space programme was described as a programme capable of using space technologies in the vital areas of development such as communications, meteorology and natural resource management [2]. It is important to make a mention over here that Dr. Vikram Sarabhai gave the initial vision to the Indian space programme, and it was Prof Satish Dhawan (1972-1984) who made this dream a reality.

Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) was formed under the Department of Atomic Energy in 1969 and was subsequently brought under the Department of Space in 1972. A Space Commission was also setup in the same year which reports directly to the prime minister. The Department of Space along with ISRO operates four independent projects: the Indian National Satellite Space Segment Project, the National Natural Resource Management System (NNRMS), the National Remote Sensing Agency (NRSA) and the Physical Research Laboratory (PRL). The depart­ment also sponsors research in various academic and research institutions.5

Presently, the ISRO has various operating divisions all over the country. These divisions deal with space systems, propulsion, communications, telemetry and tracking, research, launches and other facets of the space programme. The major achievements of the space programme have been in the area of the domestic design, production and launching of remote sensing and communications satellites. Over the years, ISRO has established a strong infrastructure for remote sensing and communications satellite systems with launcher autonomy. In 1992, the ISRO established its commercial outlet called the Antrix Corporation (this word is from

ancient Indian language ‘Sanskrit’—meaning space). This organisation markets space and telecommunications products of ISRO.[76]

Initially, the Indian Space Programme had focused on mainly experimental, low-capability projects that allowed Indian scientists to gain experience in the construction and operation of satellites and launch vehicles. ISRO built (with some foreign assistance) the Bhaskara Earth observation satellites, a communication satellite (the APPLE satellite), and conducted four flight tests on its SLV-3 satellite launch vehicle between 1979 and 1983 [3].

Subsequently, from mid-1980s, India focused on more capable, mission-specific systems. During this period, ISRO started designing and developing the PSLV (polar orbiting satellite launch vehicle) and its successor the geostationary satellite launch vehicle (GSLV). These vehicles were required to launch the indigenously developed Indian Remote Sensing (IRS) satellite and a meteorology and telecommunications ‘Indian National Satellite’ (INSAT). PSLV commenced its operational launches in 1997 and since then has gained an image of most dependable workhorse with ten consecutive flights till April 2007.[77] On September 2, 2007, India successfully launched its INSAT-4CR geostationary satellite with GSLV F04 vehicle. This launch proved India’s capabilities to put satellites weighing around 2,500 kg into the geostationary orbit. First two stages of these GSLV vehicles are derived from PSLV.

Further, ISRO has plans of designing and developing the Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle mark III (GSLV Mk-III) vehicle which is an entirely new launch vehicle and is not derived from PSLV or GSLV Mk-I/II. In April 2002, Indian government approved Rs. 2,498 crores (US$ 520M) for development of GSLV Mk-83 III, a rocket system capable of launching 4,400 kg satellite to GTO with a designed growth potential towards a 6,000 kg payload capability through minor improvements.[78] It may take another 2-3 years to make this vehicle operational.

India has one of the most robust remote sensing satellite programmes. In the area of satellite-based remote sensing, first-generation satellites called Indian Remote Sensing (IRS) satellites, respectively, named as IRS-1A and 1B were designed, developed and launched successfully during 1988 and 1991 with multispectral cameras which had spatial resolution of 72.5 and 36 m, respectively. Second – generation IRS-1C and 1D were launched during 1995-1997. These satellites had improved spatial resolutions of 70 m in multispectral and 5.8 m in panchromatic bands. These satellites have become main components of National Natural Resource Management System, and the data is being used for agriculture, forestry and water resources management.

Another type of remote sensing satellite called RESOURCESAT-1 was launched into polar orbit in 2003 with sensors useful for land use and resource studies. The system provides 5-m resolution of terrain features. India’s cartographic series of satellites, namely, CARTOSAT 1, 2, 2A and 2B, are satellites with one of the

finest resolution in the world. They offer stereoscopic imagery and make terrain mapping easier. CARTOSAT-1 was launched in May 2005 into polar orbit with two panchromatic imaging cameras, each with 2.5-m resolution. The stereoscopic imaging by the two cameras facilitates the construction of three-dimensional terrain maps. These systems are meeting the demands of terrain visualisation, updating of topographic maps, generation of national topographic database and other utility planning.[79] The resolution of recently launched satellites (2A and 2B launched during 2008 and 2010, respectively) matches the best in the world and offer sub­metric resolution (the American satellite QuickBird is the world’s highest-resolution commercial satellite and offers a resolution of 60 cm).[80] [81] Such satellites have significant defence utilities too.

Satellite communication is one arena where India has made significant invest­ments since the beginning of its space programme. It is difficult to delineate the exact investments made by India in the satellite communication sector since inception of its space programme because India started with the doctrine of developing multipurpose satellites. While most satellites fulfil a single, well – defined mission, INSAT series satellites were initially developed as multipurpose geostationary satellites. Its peculiar design arose partly from very unusual design constraints placed on it by India’s insistence that the satellite carries at least four different payloads.

The most significant of the payloads on INSAT was a package that could receive television programmes. Its importance arose from its special ability to transmit educational television programmes. The second package was designed to provide telephone, facsimile, data, telegraph, videotext and other communication services amongst metropolitan areas. The third was a remote sensing package built to survey the nation’s resources and thus help in its development planning. The last payload was a meteorological system capable of transmitting pictures of cloud-cover imageries and collecting weather information from several thousand unmanned data collection points on the ground; it served to trigger selected disaster­warning sirens in isolated coastal villages under the imminent threat of cyclones (hurricanes) [4].

INSAT-1 series (four satellites) constituted of mixed payloads (communication and meteorology). First two satellites of INSAT-2 series are multipurpose satellites, while 2C and 2D had only communication payloads. The same was the case with the INSAT-3 series in which 3B and 3C were dedicated communication satellites.11 INSAT-4 series of satellites has been initiated. It is proposed to have seven satellites in the series. INSAT-4A, 4B and 4CR satellites of this series are already operational.

These satellites are essentially meant for communication purposes with C and Ku band transponders.12 India has also launched a satellite called EDUSAT in 2004 in geostationary orbit. This is the first Indian satellite built exclusively for serving the educational sector. Over the years, the multipurpose INSAT satellite series are found carrying instruments for meteorological observation and data relay purposes too. However, in 2002 for the first time, an exclusive meteorological satellite called KALPANA-1 was launched. India has opened a new chapter in its weather forecasting and atmospheric research capabilities by positioning satellite called Megha-Tropiques in an orbit of 867 km during Oct 2011. It is India’s first major joint space project with France. This satellite has been launched to fill the void in regard to the atmospheric data in the equatorial region. This mission is also expected to provide boost for aerospace research in Indian universities.

Mini-satellites are more in demand in twenty-first century. Modern-day satellites are coming in various shapes and sizes like micro, nano and pico satellites. ISRO has sensed that investments in this arena have greater commercial viability. With increasing global demand for such satellite systems, ISRO is concentrating on nano­satellite market and has already launched few small satellites for various other countries. On their own, ISRO has launched two small satellites called IMS-1 (previously referred to as TWSat-Third World Satellite weighing around 83 kg) and IMS 1A also known as YouthSat. ISRO is encouraging and helping the educational institutions within and outside the country to design and develop small satellites. Some of the future Indian investments are expected to revolve around development of small satellites and clusters of nano-satellites.

India’s space programme has grown significantly mainly during last one or two decades. Presently, after reaching a certain level of proficiency in various areas of space technologies, Indian scientists are looking for fresh challenges. In November 2006, India’s space scientists and technologists held a brainstorming session at Bangalore to explore the viability of undertaking a manned mission to the Moon by the end of the next decade (2020) and were ‘unanimous in suggesting that the time is appropriate for India to undertake a manned mission’.

Over the years, India has followed the path envisaged by Prof. Vikram Sarabhai in 1970s of the socioeconomic application-oriented space vision for the country. For all these years, countries’ investments have mainly revolved around remote sensing and multipurpose application satellites and related launcher technologies. However, now the state is looking beyond Prof. Sarabhai’s vision of harnessing ‘space’ for the economic and social development. India’s ‘moon dream-a manned space mission’ is a case in point. During 1970s, Prof. Sarabhai had argued that India does not have the fantasy of competing with the economically advanced nations in the exploration of the Moon or the planets or manned spaceflight. This change in India’s policy should be viewed as a midcourse correction. It also demonstrates India’s increasing ambitions in this field.

On Apr 28, 2008, with the success of the PSLV-C9 mission, ISRO succeeded in placing in space ten satellites in the space in single mission. Some of India’s other missions also constituted of multiple satellite launching in a single launch. This indirectly demonstrates the possibility of India’s progress towards to developing multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles (MIRVs) technology.13 Such technology when fully developed could add teeth to India’s nuclear deterrence. This technology has the potential of making any missile defence configuration employed against the incoming nuclear threat meaningless.

The year 2008 demonstrated India’s reach into deep space by undertaking its first Moon mission. On Oct 22, 2008, India successfully launched its first satellite probe towards the Moon, named Chandrayaan-1. India’s lunar probe succeeded in finding the presence of water molecules on the surface of the Moon. Even though the mission was able to fulfil all its operational objectives, still it is important to note that this mission could stay on its course only approximately half of its designed lifetime. India is expected to launch its second Moon mission in collaboration with Russia by 2014 when a rover (robotic instrument) is expected to land on the Moon. India also has plans for developing its own regional navigational system by launching satellites in to the geostationary orbit in near future.

Apart from deep space missions like the Moon mission, India also has also invested into few other interesting programmes. On Jan 10, 2007, India had successfully launched a recoverable spacecraft into the orbit (mission was known as SRE). This mission was of far greater importance to India because it was for the first time India had tested the reusable launch vehicle technology. The capsule was placed in orbit at an altitude of 625 km and was successfully recovered after 11 days. The last phase of the mission was critical, and the indigenously developed re-entry technology proved its worth. This mission provided precious knowledge about navigation, guidance and control for the re-entry phase (from the outer space to Earth’s atmosphere). Also, this capsule had an indigenously developed thermal protection system essentially in form of silica tiles which proved its worth by withstanding extremely high temperatures during re-entry. This mission could be viewed as a first step towards fulfilling the dream of human space programme. However, India’s plan for a human space flight programme still remains in very early stages of development. Surprisingly, after the success of SRE mission, no other attempts have been made by ISRO to validate this technology by undertaking few more missions. All this clearly demonstrates that human space mission is not on the agenda of the India’s space programme, at least in near future.

India plans to launch its first dedicated astronomy satellite called ASTROSAT in near future. This would be a multiwavelength astronomy mission on an IRS-class satellite into a near-Earth, equatorial orbit by the PSLV. This nearly 2-ton satellite will sport three X-ray instruments that can collect hard and soft X-rays. A fourth instrument will be able to catch X-ray bursts coming from incredibly powerful

eruptions, such as those from giant stars. It is expected that the ASTROSAT’s twin ultraviolet (UV) telescopes will be the best instruments available to astronomers for viewing such objects as young galaxies glowing hot with the light of bright new stars.14 Primary emphasis of ASTROSAT would be to conduct studies of X-ray- emitting objects. This would be India’s first observatory wherein X-ray observations can be taken. However, this Indian programme appears to be running much behind the schedule (the planned launch was in 2008).

The basic limitation for the Indian space programme comes from the fact that the country is still devoid of cryogenic technology. For launches of heavier satellites, a third stage called the cryogenic stage is required. India has yet to mature this technology. In 1992, the then Russian President Boris Yeltsin was to transfer this technology to India but was pressured by the then US administration not do so, fearing that India could divert this technology for its missile programme. Subsequently, Russia had sold six cryogenic engines to India.

It is this cryogenic engine technology required for the GSLV launches that is giving ISRO a few nightmares. The year 2010 witnessed two unfortunate failures for ISRO. On Dec 25, 2010, ISRO’s GSLV-F06 mission with the GSAT-5P satellite onboard failed. The vehicle broke up 53.8 s from liftoff. Surprisingly, the launch failed in the ‘first stage’ of the launch process itself. Earlier on Apr 15, 2010, its first attempt to use an indigenously made cryogenic engine with its GSLV-D3 to launch the GAST-4 satellite had failed. It may take ISRO some more time to test this technology again. Unfortunately, almost for last two decades, India is working towards the development of this technology indigenously; however, the success has still eluded them.

Because of these two major failures in 2010 with GSLV system, India’s capacity of having operational satellites in space and also the transponder capability has reduced significantly. Along with this, two of India’s operational satellites in space are found not able to perform to the fullest of their potential. INSAT-4CR (launched on Sep 2, 2007) is facing problems because of the launching glitches. During the launch, the third stage of the carrier rocket had underperformed, resulting in the satellite being placed into a lower than planned orbit. To put the satellite back in the designed (actual) orbit, much of the fuel onboard of the satellite was consumed, and this in turn had probably reduced the designed 10-year life of satellite to almost the half. Also, INSAT 4B which was launched during March 2007 is being reported to have facing problems since July 7, 2010. There appears to be a power – related problem in one of the solar panels resulting into switching off 50% of the transponders onboard the satellite.

The positive aspect of ISRO’s space programme is their proficiency in launching satellites in the 1- to 2-ton category. PSLV has launched more than 40 satellites

(more than half of them are for other countries) into a variety of orbits to date. Last 21 consecutive missions by this vehicle have been successful.

One important reason behind the significant achievements by the Indian space community is the reasonable budgetary support provided by the government for all these years. ISRO has not faced problems in getting resources and has tended to receive steady governmental support. This is one field where generally bottom-up approach has been found in regard to the growth of overall space programme. It is ISRO which normally decides what projects to undertake and how to proceed. The governmenthas so far been supportive of most of ISRO’s plans. The value of ISRO’s overall assets today is approximately Rs. 100,000 crores ($25 billion) [5]. Since independence, India’s science and technology policies have more or less remained unchanged irrespective of the government in power. India’s space programme is placed directly under the prime minister and hence could be said to be relatively free of major bureaucratic delays.

ISRO has immediate plans for the upgradation of various technologies from propulsion to power systems. Like any other spacefaring nation, India is keen to induct lightweight composites and fibre structures into their platform systems which are expected to bring in major revolution towards weight-carrying capacity of the satellites. ISRO has interest in the ongoing research in this field. By 2025-2030, India proposes to reach the level of technology that they would be in a position to send a spacecraft to the outer space and recover it like an aircraft (on the same lines like the US sends its ISS missions like Atlantis, Discovery, etc.).

The narrative of Indian space programme mostly carried out by developed states (read Western) could be viewed as case of ‘asymmetric ignorance’. Their evalua­tions (particularly during early years of development of India’s space programme) have reflexively been grounded in assumptions about why a poor nation should have a space programme at all. Because the mission of space exploration has been a normatively Western idea, Indian space programme (other Asian programmes too) is understood in relation to aspirations for a Western modernity. Interestingly, the manifestation of Indian space programme does not represent a modernity that is completely Western nor fully postcolonial. It could be viewed as a modernity that is decentred, globalised, constantly transforming and at times even conflicting. India’s scientific and political community links the space programme with the alleviation of poverty, help in education and the requirement for reforms in social sector. Hence, by overcoming any disagreement within the state, India has succeeded in changing the perception from ‘why poor India should not have a space programme?’ to ‘India should have a space programme precisely because it is poor’.[82] By the beginning of twenty-first century with the ‘rise of India’ becoming imminent and the significant progress witnessed by India’s space programme, the perceptions are showing change. Also, the West has started realising the broader commercial relevance of space market in Asia context.

The thrust given by India towards expanding its space programme indicates that the state has major exceptions from its space agenda. It appears to be addressing issues related to space by giving due cognizance to geopolitical, technological and economic realities. From geopolitical viewpoint, India’s success with its space programme has boosted its ‘soft power’ status. In near future, dependence of devel­oping nations interested in space activities is going to fall more on India because of its space infrastructure and economical commercial launching facilities. In the imminent future, India is expected to play an important role towards the formulation of a global space regime which would involve not only the disarmament agenda but also formulation of a policy towards international technological collaboration over areas of mutual concern.

Rocket technology is likewise for both civilian and military applications. There are certain fundamental differences in regard to technology appreciation between space launch rockets and ballistic missiles. However, the similarity in basic science and technology makes it impossible to separate them completely or permanently. Scientists in various parts of the world (mainly Germany, erstwhile USSR, the USA and few European Nations) during the early 1920s and 1930s were attracted to the rocket development because of their interests in idea of space travel. In order to continue to develop these ideas, the scientific community engaged military sponsors in those periods.

Scientists and military leaders realised that rocket is a dual purpose system. It can launch a scientific payload (satellite) into outer space or can launch a warhead (conventional or nuclear) towards a target at distance of thousands of kilometres. The technology needs minor modifications for such purposes. In short, various civilian rocket programmes raise possibilities for missile development. Almost, every country capable of building large rockets has used their early models interchangeably for civilian and military role. The rocket used for the launch of first satellite Sputnik (1957) was derived from the first ICBM made by the erstwhile USSR (SS-6/R-7). Similar trend was observed with various states like Briton, France, China, India and Israel with the exception of Japan.1 Over a period of time, all these states have started developing specific task-based vehicles, be it space or missiles.

It has been always difficult to judge the exact intentions of a country—whether their objective is to launch a satellite or a missile, based on the knowledge of their expertise in rocketry field. It has been always possible for proliferators to conceal their military intentions. Formulations of some of the international arms control and non-proliferation systems did incur debate on such issues. In the event of Missile Technology Control Regime (MTRC) negotiations, the issue was raised ‘whether [163] space launch vehicles should be treated differently from offensive missiles in light of their legitimate civilian applications’. The USA was of the view that ‘civilian space launch vehicles had to be viewed as strictly equivalent to military missiles because they were technologically indistinguishable’ [1]. However, subsequently during negotiation phase, the USA was not able to maintain this position due to international pressures.

The purpose of this chapter is to highlight the politics behind undertaking space launches to actually demonstrate the missile development capabilities. This chapter also examines the interdependence of space regime on nuclear matters. The issues related to missile defence, a system ‘advertised’ as an alternative to nuclear deterrence mechanism or a system to negate the incoming nuclear missile threat, also have certain connotations in regard to space affairs. Various concerns in this regard are also discussed over here.

In China, scientists from the Chinese Academy of Sciences are looked upon as the nation’s pre-eminent scientific community and are also respected in society. They play a major role in deciding country’s strategic investments. They have influenced the Chinese leadership thinking towards development of its nuclear and space programme. In recent past, a core group of scientists have played a major role towards convening the military and political leadership in the country to make significant investments in satellite navigation system (Compass) and Moon programme [2]. China has successfully completed its first lunar mission and has launched its second robotic mission, Chang’e-2 on October 1, 2010, to celebrate 61 years of communist rule.

China has devised its lunar exploration project—known as Project Chang’e as three-stage project [3]. These states are:

Stage One—The work began on March 1,2003. This stage was aimed at building and launch of Moon probe satellite. This satellite was launched on Oct 24, 2007 (Chang’e-1), and the mission was scheduled to continue for a year. The mission was extended for some more time.

Stage Two—Here, China is expected to launch a Moon car and make a successful soft landing, patrol and explore the Moon and lay the groundwork for further Moon research. Chang’e-2 is scheduled to be launched in 2011 (actually the launch was done 1 year in advance).

Stage Three—China would be launching a small module and Moon robot to collect necessary samples, return safely, research the samples, provide data for a manned Moon landing and choose a location for China’s Moon base.

The Chinese conceptualisation regarding the Moon mission has the following broad objectives3:

• Three-dimensional survey of the Moon’s surface and analysis of the distribution of elements on lunar surface: This would be done by undertaking detection and analyses of the content and distribution of useful elements and types of materials on the lunar surface.

• Investigation of the characteristics of lunar regolith and calculation of the depth of lunar soil on the surface.

• Exploration of the circumstance between the Earth and the Moon: Aim is to explore the space environment between the Earth and the Moon and to record initial solar wind data and study the effect of solar activities on Earth-Moon space environment.

China has successfully completed the stage one of its Moon mission. Cheng’e-1 fully completed its mission on March 1, 2009. This spacecraft was de-orbited, and it impacted the Moon.

Water is fluid, soft, and yielding. But water will wear away rock, which is rigid and cannot yield. As a rule, whatever is fluid, soft, and yielding will overcome whatever is rigid and hard. This is another paradox: what is soft is strong.

Lao Tzu

Chinese philosopher (604 BC-531 BC)

The term soft power has become a part of popular security discourse since 1990, when it was first used by Prof. Joseph Nye in his book titled Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power [1]. Prof. Nye has developed this concept further in some of this subsequent works.

This chapter is in three parts. The first part outlines the theory, the concept, the notion as well as the critic of soft power in broad terms. The second part analyses the geopolitics of space technologies as a source of soft power. The third part explores the meaning of soft power in context of China’s space programme.

Asian states are working on various areas of technology from astronomical satellites to heavy lift launchers to space food and space clothing (for Moon travel) to asteroid mining. Any significant developments in fields like smart materials, robotics, communication systems and power and energy devices are expected to bring in

revolution in various aspects of space research. Japan is working on ambitious projects like space solar power with an intention of collecting solar power in space and zapping it down to Earth, using laser beams or microwaves. They propose to achieve this within the next two decades but will need a strong economical and tech­nological support. Japanese scientists are working on innovative concepts like space elevator. Significant breakthroughs in carbon nanotech technology are expected to boost this project. India has a major interest in reusable launch technologies. During the next two to three decades, states in the region are expected to enhance their expertise in such fields by using ‘step by step’ approach. Development of the technology leading to ‘launch on demand’ has significant strategic relevance, and various developed Asian states also would have interest in that arena.

Scenarios

As the above discussion underlines, there are various drivers which could decide the future of space programmes of Asian states. Each driver could have different connotation towards shaping the trajectory of individual state’s space programme. Also, relative importance of these drivers vis-a-vis each other will play a role towards determining the future direction of each country’s space programme.

Technology development is crucial for the growth of nation-states. Globalisation has made technology central to the process of development. Technology helps to improve leaving standards, increase productivity, generate new industries and employment opportunities, and create more competitive products in world market. In general, technology is knowledge applicable to the practical problems.[3] Technol­ogy development necessitates investment from both the public and private sector. Particularly, the public sector Research and Development (R&D) has played a vital role in developing some of the key technologies of the twentieth century both globally and in Asia, including aeronautics, electronics and nuclear power.[4] It has also played a significant role in the development of space technologies. The bulk of the space technologies in various parts of world have been developed in response to the explicit and strong government support.

Technology programmes are as vulnerable to the pulls and pushes of politics as other socioeconomic programmes. The governmental stake in developing tech­nologies indirectly plays a role to decide the future of these technologies. Both political and financial backing is essential for any large-scale development of technology. It is important for the space agency managers (technocrats) to control their political environment or their programmes become its victims. It is important for them to negotiate the process of developments of technical programme with the political system. For this purposes, many a time they engage in certain metaphorical and coalition-building strategies. The metaphorical strategies allow them to garner wide public support by making a technology compatible/comparable with some overarching value that is easily understood. The strategies of coalition building also involve expression of another kind where an idea and requirement of collaborating with other states is presented to the political authorities [5, p. 64].

Developing a new technology is mostly a complicated affair, given the myriad technical uncertainties. The expense of large-scale technologies increases economic uncertainties. When a technology has government as its primary developer, a host of political uncertainties arise. This could happen mainly when various government departments are involved simultaneously in the process of technology development. Such situation at times ends up in making design of technology problematic. Also, political conflict can stop a technology from being successfully developed or, if developed, productively applied. A process of technological change is also dependent on political decision-making concerning that technology [5, p. 47].

It is important to appreciate that certain technological experimentation has faced the favour from of the world, and in certain cases, the world has overlooked few inventions. The availability of technology with one state has brought in a paradigm shift into the policies of others. The ‘Space Age’ was born with the launch of first artificial Earth satellite Sputnik by the erstwhile USSR in the autumn of 1957. The only event in recent history which can match Sputnik in general public awareness was the exploration of atom bomb in 1945 [6, p. 555]. Sputnik launch had shaken the USA’s confidence about their technology and military strength [6, p. 570].

It perhaps reversed the foundations of the post-World War II international order. ‘The launch promised imminent Soviet strategic parity, placed the US under direct military threat for the first time since 1814, triggered a quantum jump in the arms race, and undermined the calculus on which European, Chinese, and neutralist relations with the superpowers had been based. The space and missile challenge was then mediated by massive state-sponsored complexes for research and development, in the US and throughout the industrial world, into institutionalized technological revolution and, hence, accelerating social, economic, and perhaps cultural change. Space technology altered the very proportions of human power to the natural environment in a way unparalleled since the spread of the railroads’ [7, p. 1010]. This concept of having a technology which could view the Earth dispassionately from a distance brought a momentous change in both policy and scientific thinking. The idea of operating and experimenting in negligible/zero gravity was caught on by the scientific community. It probably made a major impact in regard to growth of natural sciences.

The four areas most often cited as the loci of revolutionary change in the Space Age are ‘(1) international politics (2) the political role of science and scientists (3) the relationship of the state to technological change and (4) political culture and values in nations of high technology’ [7, p. 1011]. In early years after the launch of first satellite, the growth of space technologies was rapid. During 1961, with the first human visiting the space, the USSR supremacy in this field was restated. Yuri Gagarin’s space flight came as a ‘bolt from space’ for the USA. This ‘loss of face’ forced the USA to significantly increase NASA’s budget. One positive outcome of the superpower rivalry in space was the Apollo programmes, which led to the overall development of space and rocket science. When Neil Armstrong became the first man to reach the moon, the USA believed that it had stolen a march on the USSR in the space race. It could be said that in the Cold War era, the relevance of space supremacy had social, political and scientific tenets.

In present era, the interest of various governments towards supporting any technology development is essentially dependent on its assessment about its utility mainly for socioeconomical progress. The Cold War era race was the outcome of the superpower rivalry and the investments in technology were made from the one – upmanship standpoint. In the post-Cold War era, particularly in Asian context where the developments in space technologies started much later, such compulsions were non-existent. The political support in Asian context towards the development of space sciences emerged mainly out of the social and scientific reasons. In twenty – first century, this development is also found taking place for the economic and military reasons. Also, states are attempting to find the availability of resources on the other planets, and certain space efforts are directed in that direction too.

East (Eastern) Asia is an extremely important region of Asia. Almost one fourth of the world’s human population live over here. The world’s second and third largest economies reside over here, and the region comprises of the only Asian state which is the permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. This chapter and following two chapters discuss the space polices of few important states within the region. This chapter highlights on the space policies of the two Koreas and Taiwan, and subsequent chapters discuss the space policies of China and Japan.

The future of two Koreas has great influence on the security landscape of the East Asian (North-east) region. For many years, the two Korean regimes are found facing both internal and external challenges and opportunities [1]. The future of Korean peninsula mainly depends on the management of internal contradictions within the North Korea and the level of their engagement with the outside world. North Korea’s approach in deciding the future of its nuclear policies would play an important role towards deciding the geopolitical and geostrategic future of the region.

In regard to North Korea, only time would tell whether the mercurial and enigmatic North Korean leader Kim Jong Il’s death during Dec 2011 could lead to greater instability on the divided Korean peninsula or brighten the prospects of peace in the region. A new era of political rapprochement and economic opening could strengthen and broaden the global development partnership in the region.

The growth of science and technology in both the Koreas during last few decades could be viewed as a mixed bag of intense growth as well as stagnation and failures. The strategic requirement of both Koreas appears to have played a significant role towards deciding the trajectory for the technology development.

North Korea

North Korea is perhaps the world’s most militarised, isolated and strictly controlled communist state [2]. The state has naturally harsh terrain and experiences various natural disasters frequently. The country’s corrupt political (military) system is

A. Lele, Asian Space Race: Rhetoric or Reality?, DOI 10.1007/978-81-322-0733-7_6, 69

© Springer India 2013

unwilling to undertake any major economic reforms, and their entire focus remains to make investments in technologies of strategic significance. Albeit being viewed as an isolationist country, they have (limited) association with states like Russia and China. These states may not be called as North Korea natural allies, but they do have some influence on them. North Korea also has connections with Iran and Pakistan and over the years has looked at these states for a mutual defence technology and hardware business.

Being a state driven by military ambitions, their investments in the military hardware are significant in nature. North Korea believes that as a pariah state, they need to arm themselves ‘expansively’ to make their ‘presence’ evident regionally and bring in the element of deterrence upfront.

For last two decades, the North Korean government has promoted its nuclear and missile programmes as strong pillars of national defence and prominent symbols of scientific nationalism. This is probably because universally such military technolo­gies are being used for showcasing country’s greater scientific accomplishments. Such technologies along with space technology also become the basis of nationalis­tic pride. For North Korea investments, such programmes are representative of the national effort to build a ‘strong and prosperous country’ (kangsngdaeguk) under the political and military leadership of the country. The term kangsngdaeguk first appeared in August 1998 in reference to Kim Jong Il having provided ‘on-the – spot guidance’ in Chagang Province in February 1998 and is now established state doctrine.1

Prior to the 1980s, North Korea had a clear military advantage over South Korea, but the balance of conventional forces has turned against Pyongyang, especially after the end of the Cold War. During the famine of the mid-1990s, the North Korean leadership increasingly relied on the military to manage government affairs, and it introduced a ‘military first’ policy in 1998 to coincide with Kim Jong Il’s official rise to power. Since economic woes have made it impossible to compete with neighbours in conventional forces, Pyongyang has had a strong incentive to retain and expand its asymmetric capabilities.2 North Korea’s investment in space arena needs to be viewed at the backdrop of military influence on the policy-making practices of North Korea. As discussed elsewhere in this book, North Korean space programme is generally perceived as an offshoot of its missile programme. There is no clarity yet in regard to the future road map of North Korea’s space programme. Space programme could be useful for North Korea in some sense to expand its missile capability mainly in the medium-range missile arena. However, it could be prudent to study their space programme and missile programme as separate domains in order to have better understanding because few issues beyond missiles also demand attention.

It is important to note that the state has established the Korean Committee of Space Technology (KCST) probably sometime during 1980s and is agency responsible for various activities in space from research to satellite manufacture and launching. The agency also manages the country’s rocket launch sites.

On Sept 04, 1998, the Korean Central News Agency broadcasted a report claiming the successful launch of the first North Korean artificial satellite, Kwangmyongsong-1 (Brightstar-1). This very small satellite was launched into the orbit on Aug 31,1998. The initial claims by Russian military space forces about the success of the launch were very encouraging. On Sept 06, 1998, they confirmed that the satellite was in orbit [3], but these claims were subsequently withdrawn. Various civilian and military agencies in the world (particularly in the US) track various activities in space, and they failed to observe the presence of this satellite into the space. It is generally perceived that this was the test of North Korea’s first medium-range Taepodong 1 ballistic missile.

Including the 1998 test, till date (early 2012) North Korea has done three attempts to put satellite in the space, and as per various international assessments, none of them have succeeded. However, North Korea has made certain claims of success particularly with its 2009 test which is found tenuous.

In 2000, the North Korean authorities had unilaterally decided to observe a mora­torium in missile flight testing. However, on the occasion of the US Independence Day on July 4, 2006, North Korea had undertaken multiple missile tests (probably six in number). It has been identified that one of the liftoff was the first Taepodong – 2 rocket, perhaps topped by a satellite. The rocket was launched on a minimum energy-saving trajectory close to 41° out of the launch sit heading in a direction of the Pacific Ocean and Hawaii islands. This was a typical satellite launch trajectory. However, the launch failed after around 50 s of flight. The satellite was presumably named Kwangmyongsong-2.

On April 5, 2009, North Korea proceeded with its announced satellite launch against the increasing international pressure for not to do so. International com­munity, particularly its neighbours Japan and South Korea along with the USA, was of the opinion that this so-called satellite launch was a facet and North Korea has actual plans of testing the Taepodong-2 ICBM. It was announced by the North Korean government that an Unha-2 rocket had carried the satellite. The launch was a failure, and the rocket had landed into the Pacific Ocean.

Interestingly, North Korea had claimed that the three-stage rocket had put a satellite into space, and it was circling the Earth transmitting revolutionary songs. They had reported that their scientists and engineers have succeeded in sending satellite Kwangmyongsong-2 into orbit by way of carrier rocket Unha-2.[83] But, various agencies from South Korea, Japan, Russia and the USA declared this test as a failure. The negative impact of this test was that the North Korea withdrew from six-party talks. They cited the criticism by the US President Barack Obama about this test as a reason for their withdrawal. Obama has expressed opinion that test has violated the international norms and action must be taken against North Korea for this violation.[84]

Politics has always been at the forefront of the North Korea’s space programme. Probably, the origin of the North Korea’s space programme has not been rooted as a need for social reasons but more as a response to the South Korean space programme. Another possibility is that they could have attempted to follow the Iran model to use space agenda as a means to exhibit the missile capabilities. Particularly, during the last decade after undertaking the nuclear tests, probably North Korea appears to have become more ambitious in space arena to use it as an instrument for power projection.

Understanding the importance of engaging North Korea constructively in the past, the US administration had attempted to use the space card as one of the option. During 2000, the then President Clinton had offered a satellite launch deal in exchange for terminating their ICBM programme. However, during his first term of presidency, President Bush had dropped the idea due to verification issues [4]. In the year 2009, Russia had also shown readiness to launch North Korean communication satellites and assist its space programme.[85] Particularly after the withdrawal of North Korea from the six-party talks, now it looks unlikely that the state would accept any international assistance in this regard.

The satellite imagery assessment based on the Feb 2011 images indicates that North Korea has developed a new sophisticated satellite launch side.[86] It could serve the double purpose, either for launching a satellite or it could be turned into an ICBM facility. North Korea has also announced its intentions to undertake manned space flight and Moon mission in the future. Nonetheless, the current status of their space programme indicates that they would have to overcome many hurdles to reach that level of technology sophistication. The basic question which arises at this point in time is: ‘Is North Korea’s space agenda a mere propaganda or they have interest in reaching higher heights in space realm’ ? The answer to this question is probably both.

Since, the World War II the issue of nuclear weapons and nuclear technology has dominated the global strategic calculus. Various issues related to space regimes and nuclear regimes have mostly been linked (directly or indirectly). More so because the global security discourse has been dominated by nuclear issues for all these years the matters related to space security occasionally get debated under the nuclear shadow. Hence, it is important to examine the interconnection amongst nuclear and space issues.

Under the rubric of Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), China is the only Asian nuclear weapon state (NWS). However, states like India and Pakistan have demon­strated their nuclear weapon potential during 1998. Also, North Korea has tested nuclear weapons during 2006.[164] Israel is also known to have developed (but not tested) nuclear weapons during 1970s. However, Israel’s nuclear policy is of nuclear ambiguity/nuclear opacity, total non-acknowledgment and secrecy [2]. Apart from these known nuclear weapon states, few other states in the region have certain (covert) interests in investing into nuclear technology from the point of view of making a weapon. Particularly, Iran’s investments into nuclear technology for the purposes of energy are being viewed with suspect, and also some doubts are being raised about Myanmar’s nuclear intentions.

Interestingly, all nuclear weapon states (official or unofficial) are not spacefaring nations. States like Pakistan have made significant investments in the nuclear and missile arena, but in comparison their investments in space field are minimal.

North Korea has made certain claims in regard to successful launch of satellite, but their claims have been disputed. The other nuclear weapon states from the region, namely, China, India and Israel are established spacefaring nations. Few states within the region (with no nuclear weapon aspirations) also aspire to become spacefaring nations.

For understanding this interdependence in Asian context, it is important to reason it under the global settings. This is mainly because disarmament and arms control issues both in nuclear and space arena have certain commonalities, and any Asia – specific discussion needs to have the global backdrop.

Various treaties in space field actually have ‘nuclear’ origins. Majority of analyst and policy maker community since the 1940s generally never have viewed space as an ‘independent’ entity. Particularly, during Cold War period, the NWSs mostly looked for the ‘nuclear’ relevance of space technology—meaning how satellites and launch vehicles could be used effectively to carry forward the nuclear agenda. They realised that space technology could help the process of putting weapons of mass destruction in space and also testing of nuclear weapons could be undertaken in outer space. This made arms control and disarmament lobbies to work towards stopping/restricting likely ‘nuclearisation’ of outer space. Hence, various space security agendas got formulated mainly under nuclear settings.

The most prominent space treaty, the Outer Space Treaty (OST 1967), is more about restricting the presence of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in space than addressing the issues related to space. The UN Moon Treaty (1979) also emphasises that the state parties shall not put nuclear weapons on or around the trajectory of the moon. Various debates and discussion in the UN bodies like Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS-set up by the General Assembly in 1959) and prevention of an arms race in outer space (PAROS) highlight that space issues are difficult to bifurcate from nuclear issues.

Another area where space regime is being held hostage to the nuclear issues is negotiations on the FMCT (fissile material cut-off treaty). China is linking the issue of negotiations on FMCT with the PAROS [3]. China wants the conference on disarmament (CD) to negotiate both FMCT and PAROS concurrently. However, the USA opposes this idea [4]. This has prevented the CD from undertaking any serious negotiations on space issues. Overall, the Chinese position is having a bearing on the various international negotiations in space domain.

The nuclear policies of non-NPT signatory states have put them under interna­tional sanctions regime. Imposition of sanctions has denied them export of space technology too. States like India suffered technological isolation because of their nuclear policies and the nuclear testing undertaken by them during 1974 and 1998. The state had to suffer of technology apartheid, and space technology was a prominent element of such embargo. Space technology was not traded with India for many years. A particular case in point is the transfer of cryogenic technology by Russia to India. During 1992, Russia was pressurised by the then US administration in this regard because it was felt that India would use this technology for its missile programme in violation to MTCR requirements. Indian space programme has suffered significantly because of this and is yet to indigenise the cryogenic

technology. Space agenda of India has been always held hostage for nuclear matters. Only after the successful negotiation of the Indo-US nuclear deal (2005) by the year 2010/2011, the USA had removed various embargos put against India’s space agency.