Introduction
Current armed conflicts have resulted in significant challenges for international humanitarian law (IHL), leading to considerable legal uncertainties and the impediment of the development of robust protective measures.Footnote 1 These challenges are aggravated by interference with, or loss of, critical civilian and military space-based assets, causing harm to civilians and the infrastructure on which they depend. At the same time, outer space and space-based assets increasingly influence everyday life. This development is visible in the military field as well, as many military assets are supported by space technology, including satellite-based communication, navigation, early warning, and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) systems.Footnote 2
This trend is also reflected in multilateral processes, including the United Nations (UN) Open-Ended Working Group (OEWG) on Reducing Space Threats, and the Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS), as well as in recent UN General Assembly resolutions. Through these processes, States have articulated diverging positions on responsible military behaviour in outer space and the protection of space-based services that are essential to civilians.Footnote 3
Additionally, outer space plays a significant part in the development of new multi-domain approaches, highlighting its importance in hostilities. However, not only militaries but also civilians worldwide are increasingly dependent on space services. This article will discuss the current development of the use of outer space in armed conflicts and the possible consequences of disregarding the deleterious effects that such hostilities can have on civilian use of outer space services. From the interruption of satellite-supported water treatment systems to power outages in hospitals or the loss of satellite-based navigation during aviation operations, civilian life and critical infrastructure rely heavily on space-enabled services, making them particularly vulnerable when these assets are disrupted during armed conflict.
Following this introduction, the article is structured in four substantive sections. The first section addresses the growing significance of outer space in armed conflicts; it begins by outlining current military uses, before considering likely future developments and assessing the consequences for civilians and civilian infrastructure. The second section shifts focus to the legal dimension, examining the discussions surrounding the application of IHL to outer space. This includes a review of academic commentary, relevant manuals, and the positions taken by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and international bodies such as the OEWG on PAROS, and a discussion on the core IHL principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution. The third section proposes legal and practical approaches to guide the responsible use of outer space in the military context. Finally, the fourth section concludes with reflections on the legal and practical implications of space-based military operations in the context of the protection of civilians and civilian infrastructure.
The increasing use of outer space in armed conflicts
Although the military use of outer space has been developing for several decades, there has been a significant acceleration in the past decade, driven both by the further development of space technologies and by their growing use in hostilities. Even though the use of outer space has always been driven by military developments and State power,Footnote 4 only in recent years has it evolved into a domain with direct operational relevance for hostilities. Through this evolution, military and dual-use assets are now frequently placed in outer space,Footnote 5 and space-based assets play a major part in hostilities on Earth. This evolution has created structural interdependencies between civilian and military uses of outer space. In contrast to the terminology employed in space policy, IHL does not recognize “dual-use objects” as a separate category; instead, it requires a functional assessment of whether an object qualifies as a military objective at the time of attack.Footnote 6 These interdependencies directly affect the interpretation of the IHL conduct of hostilities principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution in contemporary conflicts. The following subsections will take a closer look at how space technology is used in current armed conflicts and what can be learned from past uses for addressing possible future uses of those technologies and their increasing effects on civilians and civilian objects.
Contemporary uses of outer space in hostilities
When analyzing the present utilization of outer space services in armed conflicts, recent hostilities such as those taking place in Russia/Ukraine and Israel/Gaza are frequently cited, particularly due to their reported extensive reliance on satellite-based communications and positioning systems, and the prominent role of (commercial) satellite imagery in documenting military operations and civilian harm.Footnote 7 The following will take a closer look at the different types of uses of space technology and their effects on Earth. These examples demonstrate how space-based capabilities have become integral to the conduct of hostilities, thereby increasing the likelihood of humanitarian consequences on Earth arising from military operations affecting space systems.
Non-kinetic capabilities and operations
Most uses of outer space services in hostilities are of a non-kinetic character; nonetheless, it is evident that such activities can significantly influence the conduct and outcome of armed conflict by enhancing a party’s situational awareness, coordination and operational effectiveness.Footnote 8 For instance, the Houthi movement in Yemen has been reported to utilize satellite imagery and space-based communications to identify targets and coordinate attacks against its adversaries in the region.Footnote 9 A similar dynamic is observable in the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine, where space-based ISR capabilities, particularly commercial Earth observation services, have facilitated the real-time monitoring of troop movements, the identification of artillery positions and the refinement of targeting decisions.Footnote 10 The role of private space actors has further expanded these capabilities: in the context of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, SpaceX’s provision of Starlink terminals has played a pivotal role in ensuring the continued operation of high-bandwidth communications.Footnote 11 This initiative has been particularly crucial in the face of reported Russian cyber operations and electronic warfare attempts to disrupt national connectivity.Footnote 12 These services have supported military command and control, enabled secure communication between dispersed units and maintained essential civilian communication networks.Footnote 13 When considered as a whole, these developments illustrate how access to space-based services has become an important factor in the contemporary shaping of military operations. At the same time, the dual-use nature of these systems makes it difficult to apply the principle of distinction, since the same satellite services may support both civilian populations and military forces simultaneously.
In 2008, during the conflict between Russia and Georgia, cyber operations were reportedly used to disrupt governmental communication channels and essential civilian services, including information flows and financial transactions.Footnote 14 Although the impact on military operations appears to have been limited, this incident demonstrated how cyber capabilities can create uncertainty, impose operational friction and expose the fragility of the digital and space-enabled systems that are relied upon by State authorities and civilians.Footnote 15 This use of non-kinetic means disrupted not just the function of the Georgian military, but also the country’s civilian infrastructure. Thus, even without direct military confrontation, vital civilian infrastructure can still be affected.Footnote 16
The effects of non-kinetic operations are felt on Earth, even when the affected infrastructure is located in outer space. Such operations are enabled by technologies used for cyber warfare, including, for example, jamming and data manipulation.Footnote 17 Of course, cyber warfare is also used on Earth, but it is important to note that it is now frequently used to disrupt or disable space-based assets that provide services to populations on Earth, both civilians and combatants; therefore, it can harm civilian infrastructure in a conflict, such as communication, internet and energy networks. A notable example is the cyber attack on the Viasat KA SAT network in February 2022, at the outset of the Russia–Ukraine conflict. This attack disrupted satellite broadband services across parts of Europe, affecting both civilian users and critical infrastructure.Footnote 18 Crucially, it is not cyber operations that have led to an increased reliance on space-based assets; rather, the growing dependence on space-enabled services for military operations has created the strategic incentive and vulnerability that make such assets attractive targets for cyber interference. Thus, no matter the size of the conflict or the geographical focus, with the growing use of such technologies for both strategic and tactical operations, the reliance on space capabilities in global conflicts is increasing. Non-kinetic uses tend to be more politically and diplomatically tolerated than kinetic actions because they are generally perceived as less likely to lead to escalation or cause long-term harm, such as through the creation of space debris. Nevertheless, even non-kinetic interference can have significant humanitarian consequences, highlighting the need for precautionary measures when military operations risk affecting the space-based services that civilians rely on.
Kinetic capabilities and space-related military actions
In addition to the non-kinetic applications outlined above, there is an emerging body of evidence suggesting a rise in the utilization of kinetic applications. These are military activities that result in physical damage or destruction. Since the start of the use of outer space in general, the placement of military satellites and other military assets in outer space has taken place. Provided that this does not have an effect on celestial bodies or their orbits, it is not prohibited under the Outer Space Treaty (OST).Footnote 19 These military assets can include reconnaissance satellites, communication systems and early warning devices, all of which are considered crucial for national security and defence.Footnote 20 The deployment of these assets gives rise to concerns regarding space debris, conflicts and the militarization of outer space when the number of such assets continues to rise. Due to their physical vulnerability, any kinetic action involving satellites risks generating long-lasting debris that can have indiscriminate effects on other space objects, including those used for essential civilian services.
As emphasized in international discourse, it is imperative that responsible behaviour is upheld in order to guarantee that space remains a safe and sustainable environment for all actors.Footnote 21 A frequently cited recent example is the exo-atmospheric interception of a ballistic missile by the Israel Defense Forces in 2025.Footnote 22 Although the intercepted missile was not an orbiting space object, the operation demonstrates the growing integration of space-related sensors, tracking systems and intercept technologies into modern military operations. Therefore, even though the interception did not constitute a kinetic attack against an orbiting object, it reflects the growing relevance of space-enabled capabilities in kinetic engagements. As technology continues to advance, it is probable that a greater number of analogous examples will emerge, resulting also in the enhancement of space-based defence systems.Footnote 23 The future of military strategies could be significantly impacted by these developments, underscoring the significance of technological innovation and international regulations in the responsible management of kinetic space operations. These developments also raise questions about how the IHL principles governing the conduct of hostilities apply to kinetic operations that could have a ripple effect on civilian infrastructure which relies on space-based services.
One of the most notorious kinetic uses is the employment of anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons, whose destructive testing has become widely criticized due to the generation of long-lived orbital debris, the resulting risks to other space objects, and the destabilizing effects that such activities have on international security and emerging norms of responsible behaviour in outer space.Footnote 24 A notable example of this phenomenon is China’s 2007 destruction of the Fengyun 1C weather satellite, which alone is reported to have generated more than 2,000 trackable debris fragments 10 cm or greater in size, and remains one of the most severe debris-producing events in history so far.Footnote 25 Several States, including the United States,Footnote 26 China,Footnote 27 RussiaFootnote 28 and India,Footnote 29 are reported to have developed technologies that are able to target and destroy satellites – however, it is important to note that no kinetic ASAT system has ever been used in an armed conflict. The consequences of the destruction of a satellite could range from the disruption of communication and navigation services to the degradation of early warning systems for missile launches. In this context, the ongoing development and testing of ASAT capabilities by major spacefaring States has consequently become a significant factor in discussions about a potential arms race in outer space.Footnote 30 In light of the long-term persistence of debris, kinetic actions in space give rise to acute precautionary concerns under IHL, as their effects may extend far beyond the immediate military objective and impact civilian infrastructure for extended periods of time.
Effects on terrestrial systems
Following the above examination of kinetic and non-kinetic operations, it is crucial to consider the secondary aspect: the consequences they engender. In addition to the developments occurring in the outer space environment, there is an affiliated development concerning the effects of those developments on Earth. It is evident that military infrastructure is increasingly reliant on space-based assets, with the Global Positioning System (GPS) being a prime example.Footnote 31 GPS satellites are of paramount importance for military operations as they provide critical data for navigation, communication and surveillance. Recent advancements in warfare strategies, particularly the emergence of multi-domain operations that also extend to the space domain,Footnote 32 have underscored the imperative for enhanced connectivity via satellite systems. This growing reliance reflects how dependent modern military operations are on uninterrupted access to space-enabled services. As a result of this interconnectedness, any disruption to such services may have immediate operational consequences on Earth, which must be considered when assessing the proportionality of attacks affecting space systems.
The extensive reliance on outer space systems in military operations can also have direct consequences on civilians. As significant elements of civilian infrastructure are reliant on GPS signalsFootnote 33 and satellite internet and communication systems, they are susceptible to disruptions in outer space. The impact of such phenomena can be observed in a variety of contexts, including financial markets and the domain of aviation.Footnote 34 Furthermore, the disruption of satellite communications has the potential to adversely impact emergency, transportation and daily digital activities, resulting in widespread inconvenience and safety risks:Footnote 35 during periods of conflict or cyber attacks targeting space-based assets, civilians may experience internet connectivity disruptions, navigation errors or compromised financial transactions. This highlights the interdependence of military and civilian systems, emphasizing the importance of safeguarding space-based infrastructure in order to minimize the impact on vital civilian services. The examples given here demonstrate that the incidental effects of military operations involving space systems may be severe and widespread, reinforcing the need for careful proportionality assessments.
Presently, utilization of outer space services in hostilities is predominantly non-kinetic in nature; such operations are already playing an important part in hostilities and may evolve to assume an even more significant role in the future. As space technologies evolve, however, it is important to note that such advancements may initiate a new arms race, thereby encouraging States to develop more destructive space-based weapons for kinetic and non-kinetic use. In this regard, the weaponization of low Earth orbit (LEO) could influence the future utilization of outer space. The unhindered use of LEO is vital for many space-based services,Footnote 36 and the accumulation of space debris as a consequence of destructive activities poses considerable risks to both current satellites and future missions, potentially hindering scientific progress and peaceful exploration efforts.Footnote 37 The long-term risks associated with debris-generating activities underscore the necessity of incorporating precautionary measures into military planning involving space systems.
Technological developments shaping contemporary armed conflict
Predicting the future use of outer space in armed conflicts seems almost impossible. Using outer space to the extent that it is used today seemed unthinkable even a few decades ago; today, almost every technology – even sanitation – depends on outer space.Footnote 38 Russia has reportedly developed a satellite that can “give birth” to another satellite in outer space.Footnote 39 China has demonstrated technologies in outer space that can refuel satellites in orbit.Footnote 40 Possible “repair stations” in outer space are opening new possibilities for the use of and need for “graveyard orbits”.Footnote 41 The speed at which technology has developed since the launch of the first artificial satellite Sputnik 1 enables a cautious look into the future; many lessons can therefore be learned from past developments. These technological trends also indicate that future armed conflicts may increasingly involve space-based capabilities, which renders the integration of IHL considerations into space operations ever more urgent.
Historical technological foundations of space capabilities
The transition from early dreams of space to modern achievements is a fascinating story of innovation and perseverance. A seminal moment in the history of space travel research was marked by the publication of Robert H. Goddard’s groundbreaking 1919 work A Method of Reaching Extreme Altitudes, which laid the theoretical foundation for space travel and paved the way for future research in the field.Footnote 42 The application of “de Laval nozzle to liquid fuel rockets”,Footnote 43 as pioneered by Goddard, demonstrated the feasibility of developing powerful propulsion systems capable of achieving the high velocities necessary for interplanetary travel. The subsequent transformation of the concept of extraterrestrial exploration into a tangible engineering challenge has had a profound impact on the field, inspiring generations of scientists and engineers to actualize these visions.
The twentieth century witnessed significant advancements in the field of space travel. The launch of the first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1, in 1957, signalled the commencement of the first space age.Footnote 44 This historic event demonstrated that the launch of artificial satellites into orbit was not only feasible but also practical, thereby paving the way for the development of a wide range of applications, including navigation, communication, weather monitoring and scientific research. In a period spanning just over a decade, with the culminating event occurring in 1969, humankind accomplished another milestone, perhaps one of the most significant in history: the achievement of a lunar landing.Footnote 45 The Apollo 11 mission demonstrated that, given sufficient ingenuity and determination, reaching other celestial bodies was no longer merely a theoretical prospect but a tangible goal.
In addition to rockets and associated missions, the concept of space habitats emerged early on as a visionary idea. In 1929, the Slovenian officer Hermann Potočnik Noordung published his vision for a complete space station in his book The Problem of Space Travel.Footnote 46 The notion of a rotating space station to simulate gravity and support human life in orbit was remarkably advanced for its time. In the contemporary era, space-based facilities such as the International Space Station embody the principles established by Potočnik Noordung, functioning as both laboratories and habitats for astronauts engaged in scientific research in microgravity.Footnote 47 These developments demonstrate how initial ideas that were once considered science fiction have steadily become integral parts of our space exploration and use endeavours, thus illustrating the incredible progress made over the past century. These historical developments also established the foundations for the contemporary dual-use environment, as numerous technologies originally developed for exploration or strategic purposes have since become integral to essential civilian services.
Commercial actors and the transformation of space operations
A large proportion of the projects discussed above have been driven by military endeavours, while others have been driven by scientific thought. The majority of these undertakings have been characterized by an objective of showcasing the strength of a State. This ongoing development of projects is marked by significant investment of States in space technology for the purpose of maintaining or enhancing their strategic positions.Footnote 48 Nevertheless, there has been a notable increase in the involvement of private actors in space exploration. These private actors have already played a significant role in hostilities, as evidenced by the involvement of companies such as ICEYE and Maxar, which are reported to have delivered satellite imagery of the Ukrainian front line to Ukrainian forces in the Russian–Ukraine conflict, as previously indicated. It is thus notable that some private actors are able to facilitate development to a greater extent than States, due to the financial resources and strategic investments available to them.Footnote 49 The advent of private actors has engendered a novel dynamic, thereby effecting a shift in the balance of power and capabilities in outer space.Footnote 50
While there has been a notable increase in the participation of private actors in space-related activities,Footnote 51 these entities are also assuming an increasingly prominent role in armed conflicts. The capacity to produce high-resolution images and real-time data has become of inestimable value to military operations, intelligence-gathering and strategic planning.Footnote 52 In contrast to State actors, private actors frequently exhibit greater operational flexibility and less bureaucratic oversight, enabling expedited deployment and innovation.Footnote 53 The financial resources and strategic investments of these entities have been instrumental in facilitating the rapid development of new technologies, thereby enabling the enhancement of capabilities in a more efficient and expeditious manner, as compared to the protracted processes typically associated with government-sponsored projects.Footnote 54 This influx of private capital and expertise has lowered barriers to entry in space activities, leading to a more crowded and “competitive environment”.Footnote 55
The increasing involvement of private actors in outer space carries profound implications for armed conflicts and international security. The increased capacity of actors to deploy and operate space-based assets may expand the scope of military applications, both defensive and offensive. Private actors have the capacity to develop and deploy advanced satellite systems, ASAT weaponry and other space-based instruments with the potential to influence the trajectory of conflicts.Footnote 56 Their involvement gives rise to a number of issues, including those of regulation, accountability and the possibility of escalation, as the boundary between civilian and military space activities becomes increasingly blurred.Footnote 57 Furthermore, the ease of access and rapid development facilitated by private investments signifies that space-based capabilities are no longer solely within the reach of powerful States, but are increasingly accessible to a broader range of actors. This democratization of space technology has the possibility to result in a more unpredictable security environment where conflicts may become more prevalent and intense, extending into the domain of outer space. In essence, private entities have profoundly transformed the dynamics of outer space, rendering it a more multifaceted, competitive and potentially hazardous domain within the context of armed conflicts. This shift also complicates the application of IHL, as private actors may operate systems that simultaneously support civilian and military functions, thereby raising questions regarding accountability and the protection of civilian infrastructure.
Prospective military uses of outer space
An examination of the advancements made in technology reveals that the utilization of outer space is set to witness a marked expansion, thereby becoming even more intertwined with our daily lives and military operations. As noted, the utilization of satellites has become imperative in contemporary society, with their function encompassing pivotal roles in various domains, including communication, navigation, meteorological forecasting and scientific research.Footnote 58 As technology advances, these functions are expected to become increasingly sophisticated and widespread, continuing to exert growing influence on a wide range of domains, from global commerce to personal devices. This growing reliance on space infrastructure gives rise to concerns regarding security and the possibility of conflicts spreading beyond Earth;Footnote 59 as space-based systems become increasingly vital, they also become popular targets in hostilities,Footnote 60 and this could result in a future where military actions are not confined to terrestrial battlegrounds but also involve space-based weapons and strategies. Such a development would inevitably intensify the legal and humanitarian stakes involved, as any interference with satellites risks cascading effects on civilian services far removed from the immediate military objective.
With respect to military applications, a number of trends indicate the potential for outer space to become a theatre of war for the attainment of strategic dominance in the future. The development of space-based missiles and orbital strikes represents a particularly concerning possibility. The employment of such armaments could result in the disruption or destruction of enemy satellites, which are indispensable for communication, navigation and intelligence. The notion of orbital strikes, whereby missiles are launched from outer space or are employed to target satellites, has the capability to profoundly transform the character of warfare, rendering conflicts more destructive and challenging to regulate.Footnote 61 Such developments may initiate a new arms race in outer space, with States allocating substantial resources to ASAT systems and space-based weaponry with the aim of safeguarding their interests or augmenting their global influence. The implementation of these advancements is also contingent on the geopolitical landscape on Earth – States will assess the risks and benefits of deploying such weapons based on their security needs and international relations, as with any weapon. Should these capabilities be realized, they would give rise to complex questions under IHL, particularly with regard to proportionality and the foreseeability of incidental harm to civilian infrastructure that is dependent on uninterrupted satellite services.
In considering the future of space exploration, it is evident that technological innovation and geopolitical challenges on Earth will play a pivotal role in shaping the course of events.Footnote 62 As States continue to develop their space capabilities, the potential for space-based weapons such as orbital strikes could become more realistic, raising serious concerns about stability and the risk of escalation. However, the actual implementation of such weapons will also depend on the global political climate, treaties, and the willingness of States to abide by international agreements aimed at preventing an arms race in outer space. The issue is further complicated by the increasing presence of humans in outer space, whether in scientific, commercial or exploratory capacities, which in turn expands the range of potential threats to life in that environment. The future of outer space utilization will be characterized by a multifaceted interaction between technological capabilities and the geopolitical dynamics that influence security strategies on a global scale. In light of these considerations, it is imperative that IHL be integrated into military planning, as the humanitarian consequences of space-based hostilities are likely to extend far beyond the immediate area of operations.
Effects of space operations on civilian infrastructure
Concerns pertaining to the long-term sustainability of outer space, particularly the risk that excessive space debris could render certain orbits unusable,Footnote 63 have been addressed above, but contemporary conflicts also demonstrate that activities affecting outer space have tangible consequences on Earth. As previously outlined, essential civilian services are heavily reliant on space-based systems, rendering them particularly vulnerable in dual-use and critical infrastructure contexts. These vulnerabilities imply that military operations affecting space systems have the potential to engender immediate and severe humanitarian consequences, even when civilians are not the intended target. These consequences will be discussed in greater detail below, after taking a closer look at dual-use infrastructure.
Vulnerabilities of dual-use infrastructure
It is no secret that many infrastructures in outer space are of dual-use character.Footnote 64 A significant proportion of satellite systems and space-based assets are designed for civilian application, yet they can also be utilized for military or strategic advantage.Footnote 65 The dissemination of such dual-use technologies has had a considerable impact on civilian infrastructure, both in terms of enhancing capabilities and introducing vulnerabilities. For instance, Global Navigation Satellite Systems such as GPS,Footnote 66 GLONASS,Footnote 67 GalileoFootnote 68 and BeiDouFootnote 69 are predominantly utilized for civilian navigation, transportation and logistics. These systems depend on a network of satellites orbiting Earth, providing precise positioning and timing information that is vital for various sectors, including aviation, shipping, agriculture and emergency services.Footnote 70 In a similar manner, Earth observation satellites that were initially developed for military reconnaissanceFootnote 71 have become vital for civilian applications, including disaster management, environmental monitoring, urban planning and resource management. These satellites provide real-time data on weather patterns, deforestation, crop health and pollution levels, informing policy decisions and economic activities.Footnote 72 It is crucial to note that these systems serve both civilian and military functions; consequently, any interference with them risks blurring the line between civilian objects and military objectives, thus complicating the application of the principle of distinction.
Moreover, with the onset of the Russia–Ukraine conflict, there has been an increase in the publication of documents offering evidence of the interaction between military and civilian objects in both outer space and on Earth.Footnote 73 Although dual-use infrastructure offers significant advantages, it concomitantly engenders vulnerabilities. Due to the accessibility of these systems and their extensive utilization, adversaries have the capability to target them with the objective of disrupting civilian services. To illustrate, interference with GPS signals through jamming or spoofing has the potential to compromise navigation and timing accuracy,Footnote 74 thereby exerting a detrimental effect on various areas, including transportation safety, financial transactions and communication networks. Such vulnerabilities have been demonstrated in various incidents where GPS signals were reported to have been intentionally interfered with or manipulated.Footnote 75 These examples emphasize that even limited interference with dual-use systems can produce disproportionate effects on civilians, which must be carefully weighed in proportionality assessments.
The present state of space technology and infrastructure development indicates an increasing reliance on satellite systems for both civilian and military applications. As these systems become more sophisticated and pervasive, their significance to daily life and national security is set to increase exponentially. As civilian infrastructure becomes increasingly dependent on space-based systems, any disruption – whether accidental or intentional – has the potential to engender cascading effects on transportation, communication, finance and emergency response.Footnote 76 The increasing sophistication of dual-use technologies necessitates international cooperation and robust security measures to protect these vital systems from emerging threats. These illustrations underscore the probable ramifications of vulnerabilities in space infrastructure, which possess the capacity to exert a profound and pervasive influence on the day-to-day functioning of society and the provision of essential services. This interconnectedness underscores the need for prudence in planning and executing military operations that may have space-based implications.
Risks to critical dual-use infrastructure
Following the general overview of the impact of hostilities on civilian infrastructure that is increasingly characterized as dual-use, the question of critical dual-use infrastructure remains unanswered. It should be noted that the term “critical” is used in this context to denote essential services;Footnote 77 it is therefore evident that critical dual-use infrastructure refers to space-based systems that are deemed to be essential for the maintenance of infrastructure and public health and safety networks, as well as economic stability. These systems comprise high-precision navigation satellites,Footnote 78 Earth observation platforms utilized for disaster response,Footnote 79 and communication networks that support emergency services.Footnote 80 The potential consequences of their disruption or destruction are so significant that governments worldwide are compelled to prioritize their protection.
Given their critical importance, these systems are attractive targets for adversaries. ASAT weapons, cyber attacks and electronic jamming pose significant threats; furthermore, the increasing sophistication of cyber threats suggests the capability for malicious actors to hack into satellite control systems, manipulate data or temporarily disable services. The potential for deliberate interference with critical space-based assets gives rise to concerns regarding national security, economic stability and compliance with IHL. The latter emphasizes the protection of civilian infrastructure and the minimization of harm during conflicts.Footnote 81 Many States advocate for treaties and agreements to limit the deployment of destructive ASAT weapons and to promote responsible behaviour in space, aligning with principles of international law to prevent harm to civilians and civilian objects.Footnote 82
The vulnerability of critical dual-use infrastructure highlights the need for international cooperation and the establishment of norms to prevent space conflicts. In order to protect these assets, it is necessary to implement redundancy measures, develop resilient systems and establish rapid response capabilities in order to mitigate possible disruptions. It is imperative that these measures comply with IHL to prevent escalation and ensure the protection of civilian populations. As reliance on space-based critical infrastructure grows, so too does the importance of safeguarding it against emerging threats, ensuring the stability of essential services that underpin modern civilization while respecting legal obligations to minimize harm to civilians during conflicts.
Effects on civilian infrastructure and essential services
In the modern era, it is increasingly difficult to identify infrastructure that is exclusively utilized for civilian purposes. This challenge is especially salient in the context of armed conflict, wherein numerous services that are vital to civilians, including communication, navigation and environmental monitoring, are facilitated by space-based systems that concurrently serve military purposes. Consequently, the following paragraphs focus on those civilian services delivered via outer space that are most likely to be affected during hostilities, and on the implications that disruptions to such dual-use systems may have for civilian populations.
The significance of satellite-based communication systems in civilian life is indisputable, particularly in regions where terrestrial networks are either limited or vulnerable to damage. In the context of armed conflict, these systems frequently become indispensable when ground infrastructure is destroyed, overloaded or deliberately targeted. In situations of crisis, civilians have been shown to rely on satellite links for a number of purposes. Firstly, these links are used for emergency communications; secondly, they provide access to information; and thirdly, they facilitate the coordination of humanitarian assistance. Any disruption to these services, whether through jamming, cyber operations or physical attacks on space assets, can therefore directly impede the ability of affected populations to seek help, receive warnings or maintain contact with relief providers. Furthermore, satellites that facilitate meteorological forecasting and environmental monitoring also play a crucial role in ensuring the safety of civilian populations.Footnote 83 In situations involving armed conflict, the accuracy of meteorological data and environmental assessments remains paramount for the effective planning of evacuations, the management of humanitarian logistics and the mitigation of secondary hazards such as floods, wildfires or chemical releases.Footnote 84 The utilization of satellite imagery has become a customary practice in the assessment of damage, the identification of affected areas and the coordination of rescue operations in situations where ground access is restricted.Footnote 85 These functions assume even greater significance in situations of heightened conflict, particularly in circumstances where civilian mobility is significantly constrained and on-site assessments become unfeasible.
These civilian applications illustrate the extent to which essential services depend on space-based systems, and they highlight the risks that arise when such systems are disrupted during armed conflict. The utilization of outer space in hostilities has already demonstrated its capacity to exacerbate the effects of ground operations: interference with satellite communications, navigation signals or Earth observation capabilities has the potential to hinder civilian transportation, health-care delivery and emergency response. These vulnerabilities imply that military operations affecting space systems have the potential to engender immediate and severe humanitarian consequences.Footnote 86 In the contemporary era of warfare, with its increasing incorporation of space-based technologies, the safeguarding of these assets has become imperative in order to protect civilian populations and maintain essential infrastructure. This underscores the necessity of interpreting IHL principles in a manner that fully accounts for civilian dependence on space-based systems, ensuring that military operations do not cause excessive harm to essential services.
Discussions surrounding the application of IHL in outer space
In recent years, there has been an increased level of discourse around the application of IHL in the context of armed conflicts involving outer space operations;Footnote 87 however, an under-estimation of the significance of the utilization of outer space remains. The recent directive issued by US president Donald J. Trump pertaining to the establishment of an “Iron Dome for America”,Footnote 88 including the deployment of a new generation of military space-based assets, has heightened the attention directed towards the utilization of outer space in the context of armed conflicts. Nevertheless, there seems to be a lack of consideration paid to the potential impact on civilian infrastructure in outer space and on Earth, and the means by which such infrastructure might be protected. The following examples illustrate the main themes that currently shape discussions on this issue.
Academic discussions
The international legal framework governing activities in outer space, particularly IHL, remains a complex and evolving area of scholarly debate. Conventionally, the field of space law has been guided mainly by the OST, which emphasizes the peaceful use of outer space and prohibits the placement of nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in outer space.Footnote 89 However, the treaty does not explicitly address the application of IHL principles in outer space, thus prompting academic discussions on how those principles might extend to activities beyond Earth. It is the contention of scholars that, in view of the increasing militarization of outer space and the development of satellite-based systems for strategic advantage, there is an urgent need to clarify how principles such as distinction, proportionality and precautions in attack apply to space-based assets and potential hostilities.Footnote 90 These discourses underscore the significance of interpretative frameworks that harmonize space law with IHL, emphasizing the need for explicit interpretation in order to forestall escalation and ensure the protection of civilian and civilian-associated objects in outer space.Footnote 91
A substantial proportion of the academic discourse focuses on the applicability of IHL to space systems employed in armed conflict, whether they are affected by military operations intentionally or incidentally,Footnote 92 outlining that principles such as the prohibition of unnecessary suffering and the protection of civilian populations are universal.Footnote 93 Moreover, scholars have examined outer space as a warfare domain akin to land, sea or air,Footnote 94 thus raising questions about the ability of current legal regimes to prevent and manage such conflicts. The importance of establishing norms of responsible behaviour, transparency measures and confidence-building activities among spacefaring nations in order to reduce the risk of misunderstandings and accidental hostilities is emphasized.Footnote 95 Throughout the discourse, it is imperative to acknowledge the intricate and overarching network of norms that govern space activities. This network encompasses space law, particularly the OST, general international law (as exemplified by the UN Charter) and IHL, including the Geneva Conventions, their Additional Protocols and customary law.Footnote 96 In the present article, the focus lies on IHL alongside space law, without addressing in depth the complexities that may arise when these legal regimes apply concurrently.Footnote 97
The academic discussion also considers the role of emerging technologies, such as cyber operations and directed energy weapons, that could have humanitarian implications and challenge existing legal boundaries.Footnote 98 The academic discourse emphasizes the necessity of developing a comprehensive, multilateral legal framework that integrates IHL principles into outer space governance, ensuring that space remains a domain of peaceful use and that any conflicts therein are conducted within clear, internationally accepted legal limits.Footnote 99
Manuals on the military use of outer space
Besides the general academic discussion, manuals have already been drafted concerning this issue.Footnote 100 The legal and regulatory framework governing space activities, particularly in the context of armed conflict, is currently characterized by a combination of international treaties, customary law and specialist manuals developed by various organizations and national authorities. The OST is widely regarded as the cornerstone of space law, insofar as its Article IV establishes that outer space should be used for peaceful purposes and prohibits the placement of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction in outer space. Despite the fact that it does not explicitly address armed conflict scenarios, the OST creates the foundational principles that inform subsequent legal sources. These principles are further elaborated in a series of additional agreements, including the Rescue Agreement of 1968,Footnote 101 the Liability Convention of 1972,Footnote 102 the Registration Convention of 1976Footnote 103 and the Moon Agreement of 1984.Footnote 104 Collectively, these instruments establish the legal framework for all space activities, but they lack specific provisions for military conflicts or the weaponization of outer space. This has prompted the development of specialized manuals such as the Woomera Manual on the International Law of Military Space Operations (Woomera Manual) and the McGill Manual on International Law Applicable to Military Uses of Outer Space (McGill Manual),Footnote 105 with other manuals, such as the Oslo Manual on Selected Topics of the Law of Armed Conflict (Oslo Manual) and Tallinn Manual on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Warfare (Tallinn Manual), adding to the framework.Footnote 106 These manuals provide in-depth analysis and recommended practices for conducting outer space operations in a responsible manner during conflicts, with a particular emphasis on the importance of protecting space-based assets and preventing unchecked militarization.
Furthermore, the manuals address the critical issues of conflict prevention and management in outer space, acknowledging that outer space is considered a new warfare domain. The importance of transparency, communication and international cooperation to minimize the risk of misunderstandings escalating into conflict is emphasized. In the event of armed conflict, the manuals examine how existing IHL rules, originally designed for terrestrial warfare, apply to space-based assets and activities. Satellites and other space infrastructure are vital for civilian life, military operations, scientific research and environmental monitoring, making their protection of paramount importance; the manuals stress that space-based assets must be shielded from intentional attacks, aligning with principles such as distinction and proportionality to avoid unnecessary harm to both space infrastructure and the broader environment. The manuals also explore possible scenarios involving offensive operations, ASAT weapons and cyber attacks, thereby highlighting the need for clearly defined legal boundaries and specific responsible behaviour norms.Footnote 107 The manuals consequently advocate for conflict prevention measures and responsible conduct,Footnote 108 with the objective of preventing the militarization and weaponization of space, thereby ensuring that outer space remains a domain of peaceful exploration and use.Footnote 109
Moreover, these manuals explore the responsibilities of private actors, who are becoming increasingly involved in space exploration and use, space resource exploitation and space commercialization.Footnote 110 As commercial entities assume greater prominence in the space sector, the need for international regulation and accountability is becoming increasingly apparent. The manuals stipulate the necessity of establishing clear legal frameworks with a view to ensuring that private actors comply with IHL standards, prevent environmental contamination and avoid contributing to orbital debris accumulation.Footnote 111 It is asserted that sustainable practices are of paramount importance to safeguard future scientific and humanitarian missions and to maintain international peace and security.Footnote 112 The overarching objective of these initiatives is to cultivate responsible conduct among all stakeholders, thereby fostering stability and cooperation in the domain of outer space.
Military doctrines and national manuals on outer space further influence the legal landscape. A number of States, including the United States and Russia,Footnote 113 have promulgated space operation doctrines that encompass guidelines pertaining to the utilization of space-based assets during periods of hostilities. The development of the manuals is therefore indicative of efforts to establish comprehensive legal frameworks that integrate humanitarian principles into space law. It is evident that these manuals play a pivotal role in the harmonization of space law with IHL, and this process is central to ensuring that the exploration and use of outer space is conducted in a manner consistent with the principles of peace, sustainability and respect for international norms. As the threat landscape evolves, with concerns over ASAT weapons, cyber attacks and orbital debris, the above-mentioned manuals and guidelines need to be updated continuously. While initiatives such as the Woomera Manual and the MILAMOS project provide comprehensive guidance, they do not yet examine the practical and legal challenges that arise when applying IHL to outer space in depth. Nevertheless, the collective efforts of treaties, military doctrines and international guidelines contribute to shaping an emerging understanding aimed at ensuring that peaceful uses can continue even in situations where military operations extend into the space domain.Footnote 114
Discussions by the ICRC and other international organizations
International organizations and their committees, such as the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, play a pivotal role in encouraging responsible conduct by formulating non-binding guidelines and best practices. UN initiatives such as the Guidelines for the Long-term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities promote transparency, responsible conduct and the development of norms to prevent conflicts and debris proliferation.Footnote 115 Additionally, the UN has established a number of processes that address the prevention of armed conflict in or through outer space in a more direct manner. The GGE on PAROS and the subsequent OEWG on PAROS have become central fora in which States articulate their positions on issues such as the definition of space weapons, the legality of kinetic and non-kinetic counter-space capabilities, and the scope of responsible military behaviour.Footnote 116 As evidenced by the proceedings of these bodies, there is a persistent divergence of opinion; for instance, China and Russia continue to advocate for a legally binding treaty prohibiting the placement of weapons in outer space,Footnote 117 whereas several Western States, including members of the European Union, favour non-binding norms and behavioural commitments rather than capability-based prohibitions.Footnote 118 The present OEWG on PAROS, incorporating its substantive April and July 2025 sessions in Geneva, is a reflection of these ongoing divergences. Despite the occurrence of a certain degree of progress during informal consultations, the sessions were ended without the establishment of an agenda or programme of work. This outcome serves to highlight the ongoing presence of both procedural and political challenges that continue to exert their influence on efforts to cultivate a shared understanding with the objective of mitigating risks in the domain of outer space.Footnote 119
At the same time, the ICRC has become increasingly involved in deliberations concerning the applicability of IHL to activities in outer space. This engagement is a response to the rapid advancements in technology and the proliferation of space-based military and civilian assets. While IHL has historically focused on armed conflicts on Earth, the ICRC acknowledges that space activities, such as satellite deployment, military space operations and potential conflicts involving space-based assets, pose new challenges for IHL.Footnote 120 The ICRC is currently advocating for a clearer legal framework that ensures the protection of civilians and civilian infrastructure in outer space,Footnote 121 and it emphasizes that existing principles of IHL should be extended and adapted to address the unique environment of outer space;Footnote 122 this includes discussions on the relevance of principles such as distinction, proportionality and precautions in attack within the context of space warfare.Footnote 123 In this domain, the destruction of satellites or space stations could have grave consequences for civilian populations on Earth, including the disruption of communication, navigation and the delivery of humanitarian aid. The ICRC has also emphasized the importance of transparency, accountability and rules of engagement in space conflicts, calling for international consensus to prevent the weaponization of outer space and to mitigate the risks of conflict escalation beyond Earth.Footnote 124
The ICRC is an active participant in international fora and dialogues such as those organized by the UN Office for Outer Space Affairs and the Conference on Disarmament, with a view to promoting the integration of IHL principles into space law and policy.Footnote 125 It advocates for the development of legally binding treaties or protocols that explicitly address the conduct of hostilities in outer space, ensuring that even in the absence of specific treaties, existing legal norms are interpreted in a manner that safeguards human life and minimizes suffering.Footnote 126 The ICRC also underscores the significance of establishing safeguards for space objects designated for humanitarian purposes, such as Earth observation satellites utilized in disaster response, to avert their misuse or destruction during conflicts.Footnote 127 The ICRC’s involvement in outer space discourse is indicative of its overarching mission to uphold humanitarian principles in all contexts of armed conflict, including emerging domains such as outer space. The ICRC seeks to promote international cooperation and legal clarity with a view to preventing the escalation of space conflicts and ensuring that space remains a domain that respects human dignity and security.Footnote 128
Challenges to applying the core principle of distinction
One of the principles that is of great importance to the ICRC and academia, and which has also been reflected in State statements in multilateral fora as well as in the manuals, is also one of the “cardinal principles”Footnote 129 of IHL: the principle of distinction.Footnote 130 The principle of distinction is included in most IHL instruments and treaties, highlighting its importance.Footnote 131 IHL has been developed to provide protection for individuals and objects in the event of an armed conflict; the distinction between combatants and civilians and between civilian objects and military objectives is therefore its most essential element.Footnote 132 It is imperative that the principle be applied consistently and without exception, and consequently, any new weapon must be capable of distinguishing between these categories.Footnote 133 Nevertheless, the application of the principle of distinction is, unfortunately, not straightforward. This challenge has long been recognized, and with the rise of dual-use objects as described above, its practical application has only become more difficult.Footnote 134
The principle of distinction in outer space presents further challenges in terms of its application. The advent of novel technologies and operational practices engenders further layers of complexity, thereby complicating an already complex principle. The application of distinction is increasingly stressed, as evidenced by several developments.
Firstly, it is important to note that cyber operations, which are now among the most frequently employed techniques, are generally non-kinetic, but may still constitute attacks under IHL.Footnote 135 As critical infrastructure is placed in outer space, cyber security and outer space will continue to be closely linked, and at the same time, States have assigned cyberspace a significant role. It is evident that the utilization of these systems is driven by two primary factors: first, there is the intrinsic necessity of their operation within the military organization, and second, there is the awareness of the vulnerability inherent in these systems, which presents a strategic opportunity to weaken the adversary.Footnote 136 The integrity of a satellite, inclusive of its system and data, can be compromised, impaired or destroyed through the implementation of cyber attacks.Footnote 137 The issue with cyber operations is that they are characterized by a certain number of unpredictable consequences, given the presence of indirect values. It is evident that cyber attacks have the potential to exert a significant influence on the domain of outer space; concurrently, the principle of distinction is jeopardized, as the majority of the systems targeted are dual-use systems, and attacking those systems can put civilians in a severe and dangerous situation. In addition, the majority of technology in space is vulnerable to cyber attacks, and consequently, any attack must be sufficiently specific to avoid infringing upon the principle of distinction.
Secondly, the involvement of private security entities in outer space further complicates the process of distinguishing between civilians and combatants.Footnote 138 Thirdly, autonomous weapon systems are playing an increasingly prominent role, but it remains uncertain to what extent they can meet the requirements of distinction or whether their capabilities may even extent the limits of human judgement.Footnote 139 These are just a few examples of issues that are currently challenging the application of the principle of distinction in outer space; in spite of such challenges, the effects of outer space operations on civilians and civilian objects must be constantly considered during armed conflicts.
Challenges to applying the core principles of proportionality and precaution
The obligation to account for the effects of attacks on civilians and civilian objects extends beyond the principle of distinction and is equally integral to the principles of proportionality and precaution. While the principle of proportionality focuses on minimizing damage to civilians by setting it in balance with military advantage,Footnote 140 the principle of precaution states that
constant care must be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects. All feasible precautions must be taken to avoid, and in any event to minimize, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects.Footnote 141
These principles face similar challenges as the principle of distinction, but there are also additional problems occurring which need attention in order to safeguard civilians and civilian objects. One major aspect that needs to be addressed is space debris.Footnote 142 As outlined earlier in this article, space debris is already endangering the use of outer space, and kinetic but also non-kinetic attacks can add to this problem. Damage caused by space debris could lead not only to issues for military activities in outer space but also to disruption of service for all space users, including civilian activities.
In relation to the generation and trajectory of space debris, it is challenging to predict the full scope of the consequences of an attack; the question therefore arises as to whether the principles of proportionality and precaution are subject to limitations imposed by the unique physics of outer space. This uncertainty can be attributed to the intricate and frequently disorderly nature of orbital mechanics, which undermines the feasibility of issuing effective warnings or calculating the full effects of an attack, thereby complicating compliance with IHL.Footnote 143 Space debris thus poses significant challenges to the application of IHL in outer space, particularly regarding collateral damage and the long-term effects of military operations. The generation of debris threatens civilian space assets and the sustainability of space activities; the destruction of satellites, whether intentional or accidental, can trigger a cascading effect, where resulting debris endangers other operational spacecraft, including those used for humanitarian, scientific and commercial purposes. This issue was highlighted in 2019 when India’s ASAT test destroyed one of its satellites, creating a debris cloud that endangered the International Space Station.Footnote 144 While the 2019 Indian ASAT test was conducted in the absence of an armed conflict, it serves to illustrate how the generation of space debris can be exacerbated by certain activities, thereby increasing the risks associated with civilian space operations and jeopardizing the long-term sustainability of outer space.
The international community is heavily reliant on outer space and therefore seeks to ensure the applicability of IHL in this domain, marking an important step in space governance. However, the insufficient attention being paid to the issue of space debris – an anthropogenic challenge – poses a significant risk, potentially undermining the effective enforcement of IHL in outer space. It is therefore vital to employ a nuanced understanding of the immediate and long-term ramifications of military operations in the space domain, with a view to ensuring that proportionality and precaution are upheld.
The influence of the outer space domain on IHL
The increasing militarization and commercialization of outer space have significant implications for the application and evolution of IHL. As space becomes more and more important for global communications, navigation and surveillance, the traditional frameworks of IHL, which were primarily designed for terrestrial conflicts, face new challenges in addressing the unique characteristics of space operations. The employment of dual-use satellites serves to complicate the principle of distinction, while the long-term and often unpredictable effects of operations that generate debris strain the concepts of proportionality and precaution. It is imperative that IHL assessments take into account not only immediate effects but also cascading risks to essential civilian services and the sustainability of the orbital environment. In consideration of the interdependence between space-based and terrestrial critical infrastructure, the protection of civilians necessitates the provision of more explicit directives concerning the application of IHL principles to space operations. Furthermore, there is a requirement for military actors to devise and implement plans for such operations that prioritize the minimization of humanitarian harm. This necessity forms the basis for developing more concrete approaches to guiding the use of outer space in armed conflicts.
Guiding the use of outer space in armed conflicts
The utilization of outer space in armed conflicts has become an increasingly significant aspect of modern warfare, yet it remains a relatively under-regulated domain. Despite its critical role in a range of activities, critiques concerning the indiscriminate use of outer space, and regulation of outer space activities during armed conflicts, have been limited. It is evident that disruption caused by attacks on space-based assets, whether kinetic, non-kinetic or harmful interference, can have consequences that are comparable to those observed in attacks on terrestrial systems. As Rodenhäuser has outlined, “[f]or the civilian population, it makes little difference whether water supply or medical treatment is cut through bombing or disabled through cyber operations”;Footnote 145 the same logic applies to space-based operations. The legal challenges posed by dual-use technologies and the risks associated with space debris are well documented, and the current framework offers several avenues for addressing these concerns and adapting the law to the specificities of space warfare. It is therefore vital that IHL principles such as distinction, proportionality and precaution be interpreted and operationalized for outer space in order to ensure civilian protection. A key area that requires further development is the clarification of the application of IHL to dual-use space assets;Footnote 146 this includes the development of clearer criteria for determining when a satellite, despite its dual-use character, qualifies as a military objective under IHL, the establishment of procedures for the disablement of space systems that minimize collateral effects, and the promotion of transparency measures such as notifications prior to potentially harmful operations in order to reduce the risk of miscalculation.Footnote 147
A more systematic approach to the regulation of military space operations is predicated on the recognition of the profound interdependence between space-based and terrestrial critical infrastructure. A wide range of critical infrastructure is reliant on satellite services, including but not limited to communication networks, financial systems, transportation management and emergency response.Footnote 148 The targeting of such systems in armed conflict has the potential to have catastrophic consequences for civilians, thus making strict adherence to IHL imperative. The enhancement of space traffic management, the refinement of satellite registration practices and the augmentation of the visibility of dual-use assets have the potential to facilitate compliance with IHL by enabling more precise targeting decisions and reducing the risk of inadvertent harm.Footnote 149 Concurrently, the incorporation of IHL considerations into emerging space governance initiatives, in conjunction with the advancement of proposals for space traffic management or updated registration mechanisms, would assist in ensuring that military operations do not impede the safe and sustainable utilization of outer space.Footnote 150
It is evident that in order to achieve the objective of safeguarding civilians in the space domain, multilateral cooperation is essential. Existing treaties, including the OST, provide a foundation for the peaceful use of outer space, but their implementation in conflict settings remains insufficiently robust. It is recommended that States consider the harmonization of space law with IHL, the updating of existing instruments where necessary, and the development of new mechanisms for accountability, monitoring and dispute resolution. The international community is able to promote responsible behaviour, reduce humanitarian risks and ensure that the benefits of outer space are preserved for future generations by embedding IHL principles into the governance of military space operations.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the evolving landscape of armed conflicts underscores the urgent need to address the complex interplay between IHL, civilian safety and the strategic use of outer space. As reliance on space-based assets for communication, navigation and surveillance grows, their misuse or accidental damage during hostilities poses serious risks to civilian infrastructure and daily life. Recent conflicts have shown how attacks on critical infrastructure, such as water supplies, hospitals and power grids, can cause extensive civilian suffering. If space-based assets are targeted or inadvertently affected, the resulting disruptions may include polluted drinking water, blackouts during medical procedures or the loss of essential navigational systems for transportation and emergency response. Such consequences demonstrate how deeply modern societies depend on space-based technologies and how severely civilians can be affected when these systems are compromised.
Furthermore, the militarization of outer space, in conjunction with its integration into multi-domain strategies, has the potential to engender conflict escalation and collateral damage to space-based assets that underpin civilian life. While the establishment of clearer legal frameworks and measures to address issues such as dual-use systems and space debris would undoubtedly lead to a more responsible conduct of space operations, progress in this area is impeded by significant political divisions. Recent UN processes, including the OEWG on Reducing Space Threats, have demonstrated that member States continue to hold divergent views on the optimal form of regulation, with some favouring binding treaties, others non-binding norms, and others voluntary confidence-building measures. The question of whether to impose new legal obligations in this context is a contentious one – some argue for such measures, citing the long-standing difficulties in achieving broad multilateral space treaties and the technological challenges of the present day as reasons to proceed, while others view such instruments as politically unrealistic or technologically premature. In this context, any movement towards enhanced protection, whether through binding rules or incremental cooperative measures, must navigate these divergent positions, even as the need to reduce risks to civilians and safeguard the peaceful use of outer space becomes increasingly urgent.
The development and deployment of space technology in armed conflicts present both opportunities and challenges. While these technologies have the possibility to enhance military capabilities, there is a pressing need for a cautious and responsible approach, given their significant potential to cause widespread civilian harm. It is imperative that policy-makers, military strategists and international organizations prioritize the protection of outer space and space-based assets, and uphold the principles of IHL, in recognition of the critical dependence of civilian infrastructure on space-based assets. It is only through concerted endeavours that continued accessibility of outer space can be ensured for the benefit of all humanity, despite the complexities of modern warfare.
Open access
