{"id":918,"date":"2025-08-21T07:58:02","date_gmt":"2025-08-21T05:58:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/?p=918"},"modified":"2025-06-08T09:50:45","modified_gmt":"2025-06-08T07:50:45","slug":"jul-2024-is-the-united-states-doing-enough-to-engage-with-china-on-space-policy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/?p=918","title":{"rendered":"Is the United States doing enough to engage with China on space policy?"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Mariam Kvaratskhelia<\/strong><\/p>\n

While Beijing has accused the United States of turning outer space into \u201ca weapon and a battlefield,\u201d[1] it has no less a history of doing the same. China has been interested in counterspace capabilities for years now, developing multiple anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons, such as ground-based directed energy weapons (DEWs), satellite jammers, and ASAT missiles targeting low-Earth orbit satellites. The principal goal of these endeavors remains \u201c\u2026asymmetrically disrupting U.S. space operations,\u201d[2] and matching or surpassing the US capabilities in space, according to the Intelligence Community\u2019s Annual Threat Assessment.[3]<\/p>\n

While some experts maintain that cooperation with China on space policy should be one of the priorities of the US government, I argue that the latter is doing enough in terms of engagement. Opportunities for cooperation with China are narrow for three principal reasons. First, there is no track record of substantial coordination on space issues with China, and therefore, no history of trust. Second, the US regulatory framework currently in place, namely the Wolf Amendment, already establishes an environment where engagement with China is limited. Third, it is unrealistic to expect that Sino-American cooperation on space policy will soothe general tensions existing between the two nations. The great power competition encompasses virtually every area of the national security policy; therefore, for space partnership with China to bear any tangible outcomes, it must be a part of a greater package of cooperation, not an isolated policy goal of its own.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
While some experts maintain that cooperation with China on space policy should be one of the priorities of the US government, I argue that the latter is doing enough in terms of engagement.<\/strong><\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

There is a widespread tendency today to vouch for a closer Sino-American engagement on space issues based on the example of the Cold War Soviet-American partnership. The 1975 Apollo-Soyuz Test Project (ASTP) is widely regarded as a \u201ccatalyst for East-West d\u00c3\u00a9tente.\u201d[4] Therefore, importing this line of thinking into a discussion about China implies that increased engagement on space issues with the latter will\u00a0a priori<\/i>\u00a0result in a less tense strategic environment.<\/p>\n

This comparison is flawed for three main reasons. First, there is an argument to be made that during the fall of the Soviet Union, because the country was in a weak position, it was in its own interests to cooperate with the United States. The US, too, benefited from diverting Russian talent and money to shared projects like the International Space Station (ISS), as it meant that the Soviets would not work on developing individual military capacities. Second, it must be kept in mind that despite the historical handshake of 1975, Moscow resumed testing ASAT weapons in space shortly afterwards, which more generally suggests that there is no direct correlation between joint projects and maintained trust. Third, the Apollo-Soyuz project set the stage for future space policy dynamics with Russia. This is why we have seen instances like Roscosmos-NASA collaboration even after Russia\u2019s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, despite the general hostility between the two countries.[5]<\/p>\n

The same cannot be said for China: Beijing is not in a weak position, which means that any joint project that the US pursues with China can easily bite back. Additionally, there is no history of Sino-American cooperation on space issues, which in of itself is derived from a lack of trust between the two. China has a record of intellectual property (IP) theft since the 1990s, examples that include Hughes Electronics Corp., Loral Space & Communications, and Lockheed Martin Corp. scandals.[6] More recently, in 2019, a Chinese national was caught smuggling export-controlled components of US technology used in spacecraft.[7] Aside from IP theft, the Chinese People\u2019s Liberation Army (PLA) has been working on developing ASAT and precision strike capabilities for destroying satellites in low and geosynchronous orbits,[8] pointing at the fact that \u201cBeijing conceives of outer space as a critical warfighting domain.\u201d[9] Dean Cheng brilliantly notes that China prioritizes \u201cdeterrence through space\u201d over \u201cdeterrence in space,\u201d[10] which further highlights that, aside from wanting to establish leadership beyond terrestrial limits, Beijing is willing to use space for offensive as well as defensive purposes. All this, combined with China\u2019s overall image as an authoritarian state, creates lack of trust on the part of the US, which is a reasonable ground to not pursue further engagement.<\/p>\n

The United States\u2019 lack of trust is reflected in the regulatory frameworks in place. The Wolf Amendment, introduced in 2011 by former Rep. Frank Wolf, prohibits NASA and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy from cooperating with China without prior authorization. This legislation was essentially a precautionary measure taken by the US Congress to mitigate growing risks of China\u2019s IP theft. In one interview, Wolf noted that \u201cChina has more to learn from the U.S. than we have to learn from them… So any cooperation would mean they take from us, not that we take from them.\u201d[11] Of course the Wolf Amendment does not mean that there is no prospect at all of NASA working with Chinese counterparts; it simply means that the FBI would have to assess risks of sharing information with Chinese entities prior to authorizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The space domain does not exist in a political vacuum. To borrow an example from the Cold War again, one can argue that space cooperation did not cause improvement of Soviet-American relations, but vice versa.<\/strong><\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

There is a counterargument to be made based on these restrictions. Some argue that had China been more involved in these US-led international missions, it would have been deterred from establishing its own space station and\/or building advanced space capabilities.[12,13] By creating such a polarized space policy environment, opponents say the US could even lose some of its allies and partners to China. But Chinese intentions have been clear to us from the beginning: they are aimed at challenging US leadership in space and achieving a \u201cworld-class status in all but a few space technology areas.\u201d[14] It would be irrational to believe that more engagement with China would eradicate Beijing\u2019s existing intentions, or that these intentions stem from a lack of engagement. The question, therefore, becomes: is China willing to cooperate to begin with? Its aggressive space policy and ambitions raise skeptical answers.<\/p>\n

Another question worthy of addressing involves the intended end goal of more engagement. Some forms of cooperation to deconflict space can be beneficial for short-term and micro-scale objectives, but hoping that it will ease the general animosity between China and the US is shortsighted and unreasonable. Aaron Bateman rightly notes that space activities are not \u201cfree of geopolitical machinations\u201d and are \u201cjust another vehicle for promoting a state\u2019s interest.\u201d[15] In other words, the space domain does not exist in a political vacuum. To borrow an example from the Cold War again, one can argue that space cooperation did not cause improvement of Soviet-American relations, but vice versa.<\/p>\n

Competition is its own form of engagement too. The United States is doing enough to engage with China, and bringing space partnership at the forefront of the agenda would be devoid of meaning. In this discussion, it is important that we ask the following questions:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Considering Chinese ambitions of becoming the leader in space exploration, is Beijing interested in space policy cooperation to begin with? Would it have to give up on its leadership aspirations and accept a power equilibrium with the US., or even a position of inferiority to the latter? What is either party gaining from this partnership?<\/li>\n
  2. Taking into account China\u2019s track record of intellectual property theft, in addition to its lack of history of cooperation with the US on space issues, how can the US trust Beijing with joint projects and information sharing?<\/li>\n
  3. What is the overarching end goal of space policy cooperation, considering that improving broader geopolitical relationships requires addressing a bigger and more diverse set of military and non-military domains?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Answering these questions helps draw a cost-benefit analysis, which in case of this paper\u2019s argument skews more towards costs than benefits. The US must focus on advancing its own technological capabilities to ensure zero-sum competition in the years to come, while also eradicating any power vacuums that can potentially be filled by China.<\/p>\n

    References<\/h3>\n
      \n
    1. Ed Browne,\u00a0\u201cChina Accuses U.S. Of Turning Outer Space Into ‘a Weapon and a Battlefield,’\u201d<\/a>\u00a0Newsweek<\/i>\u00a0(July 2022).<\/li>\n
    2. Oscar Glaese,\u00a0\u201cChina\u2019s Directed Energy Weapons and Counterspace Applications,\u201d<\/a>\u00a0The Diplomat (June 2022).<\/li>\n
    3. Office of the Director of National Intelligence,\u00a0\u201cAnnual Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community\u201d<\/a>\u00a0(February 2023).<\/li>\n
    4. Andrew Jenks,\u00a0\u201cU.S.-Soviet Handshakes in Space and the Cold War Imaginary,\u201d<\/a>\u00a0MIT Press Direct (May 2021).<\/li>\n
    5. The Guardian<\/i>,\u00a0\u201cRussians and American share spacecraft despite nations\u2019 enmity over Ukraine\u201d<\/a>\u00a0(September 2022).<\/li>\n
    6. Vernon Loeb,\u00a0\u201cLockheed Accused of Giving Data on Rockets to China,\u201d<\/a>\u00a0Los Angeles Times<\/i>\u00a0(April 2000).<\/li>\n
    7. Justin Rohrlich and Tim Fernholz,\u00a0\u201cChina is trying to steal military space tech. The US is running stings to stop it,\u201d<\/a>\u00a0Quartz<\/i>\u00a0(September 2019).<\/li>\n
    8. U.S. Department of Defense,\u00a0\u201c2023 Report on Military and Security Developments Involving the People\u2019s Republic of China\u201d<\/a>\u00a0(2023).<\/li>\n
    9. Christopher A. Ford, \u201cArms Control in Outer Space: History and Prospects,\u201d\u00a0Arms Control and International Security Papers<\/i>\u00a01, no. 12 (July 2020), 4.<\/li>\n
    10. Dean Cheng,\u00a0\u201cAre we ready to meet the Chinese space challenge?\u201d<\/a>\u00a0SpaceNews<\/i>\u00a0(July 2017).<\/li>\n
    11. Jacqueline Feldscher,\u00a0\u201cBiden space advisers urge cooperation with China,\u201d<\/a>\u00a0Politico<\/i>\u00a0(December 2020).<\/li>\n
    12. Makena Young,\u00a0\u201cBad Idea: The Wolf Amendment (Limiting Collaboration with China in Space)\u201d<\/a>\u00a0Defense 360 (December 2019).<\/li>\n
    13. Aaron Bateman,\u00a0\u201cThe Prospects for United States\u2013China Space Cooperation are Limited,\u201d<\/a>\u00a0Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists<\/i>\u00a0(June 2023).<\/li>\n
    14. Office of the Director of National Intelligence, \u201cAnnual Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community.\u201d<\/li>\n
    15. Aaron Bateman, \u201cThe Prospects for United States\u2013China Space Cooperation are Limited.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
      \n

      Mariam Kvaratskhelia<\/strong> is a recent graduate of Georgetown University’s Master of Science in Foreign Service (MSFS) program, specializing in transatlantic security, defense and nuclear strategy. She has more than eight years of experience in academic research, writing, and project management.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

      By Mariam Kvaratskhelia While Beijing has accused the United States of turning outer space into \u201ca weapon and a battlefield,\u201d[1] it has no less a history of doing the same. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1905,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[37,40],"tags":[386,275,88],"class_list":["post-918","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-opinions","category-space","tag-chine","tag-space","tag-us"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/CHINA-US-SPACE.png","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/918","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=918"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/918\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1950,"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/918\/revisions\/1950"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/1905"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=918"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=918"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=918"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}