Search

Planetary defense (PD) is a well-established program that refers to activities and actions to predict and mitigate a potential impact by an asteroid or comet on the Earth. States are discussing possible deflection scenarios based on their scientific knowledge and technology capacities at the UN-endorsed Space Mission Planning Advisory Group (SMPAG) and at the General Assembly. Even though PD is being formally recognized as an inherently global challenge requiring international cooperation at the level of UN COPUOS, the current state of the global PD governance depends on particular space-faring states and their willingness to fund and execute planetary defense missions. Political representatives consider PD mostly as scientific efforts, respectively efforts conducted mostly by the community of scientists. However, this would change the day an asteroid on a collision course is detected and without solid PD governance in place, behavior of decision-makers could be contingent leading to the possibly unpredictable supranational policy above national security agendas but with inherent implications to the national security of sovereign states. This situation has historical reasons. This paper, firstly, studies the evolution of PD governance from the 80s up to today, to identify the reasons for the current state-oriented (or inter-governmental in the case of ESA) PD governance. Then, secondly, I propose a multilateral PD security regime as an answer to the current state of PD governance. As the threat of being hit by an asteroid is a low probability, high impact natural phenomenon involving the whole Earth, it requires a multigenerational, financially sustainable, and scientifically beneficial planetary-wide program that covers all without exception and does not cause national security concerns of any sovereign state. As asteroids do not discriminate, the planet Earth should consider establishing a multilateral planetary defense security regime to provide security assurances to all, develop trust in the related technology development that all can oversee, and provide an environment to which all entities contribute with their scientific and industrial capacities. • Study of the last 30 years of planetary defense governance development. • Should serve as a guide for policy discussions given the detailed historical insight. • Identifies policy bottlenecks for future policy discussions. • Proposes core multilateral principles for planetary defense governance. • That is a multigenerational, financially sustainable, and scientifically beneficial policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analyses perspectives on global governance of planetary defence against asteroids under the circumstances of its current conceivable technological solution, namely the relation between technological requirements for such a project and four ideal global governance models. The author first analyses the principles of orbital mechanics and technological solutions of asteroid deflection; he argues that we do not have much chance of dealing with the asteroid threat without the authority of democratic cosmopolitan character responsible for technological development and in-space asteroid deflection infrastructure operation. The topic is studied prevalently on the theoretical level; however, the analysis is also supported by current dynamics and dilemmas of international cooperation of national space agencies and other actors. The article concludes that the discussion of the fundamental threat of asteroid collision with Earth has the potential to stimulate the emergence of an internationally respected cosmopolitan authority focused on particular global threats - it may have a constitutive eff ect on the emergence of international organizations or other political entities or regimes. Th is can have an impact on the current international system of nation states in the so-called semicosmopolitan model as the authority has higher chances to emerge in territories not under control of states - in the outer space. We talk about an environment in which any solutions related to security threats are solvable only in the setting of perfect cooperation. The article argues that to avoid anarchy, the current development of commercial space infrastructure will need a solid regime with global overseeing authority without erratic national governments. Finally, the strategic interests of nation states to participate and avoid exclusion from the elite club will slowly push them to support the semi-cosmopolitan model as it is the only way how to avoid hegemonic government of one powerful nation state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]