(UNTITLED)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85T00287R000100530002-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: January 12, 2017
• Document Release Date: June 9, 2011
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: March 3, 1980
• Content Type: MEMO

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP85T00287R000100530002-3
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
NATIONAL FOREIGN ASSESSMENT CENTER
MEMORANDUM
THE UN SUBCOMMITTEE NEGOTIATIONS ON THE
DEFINITION OF OUTER SPACE
Summary
In our best judgment--based on fragmentary reporting--
moat nations would favor at some time in the near future an
arbitrary definition or delimination of outer space. Many
countries could agr:2e to the Soviet proposal introduced last
year that defines outer space as beginning 100-110 kilometers
above sea level. It is unlikely, given other pressing
matters under consideration in the UN Legal Subcommittee
and the general impact of the Afghanistan crisis on UN
negotiations, that the matter will receive much attention
in the upcoming March session. Nevertheless, certain
decisions reached at the World Administrative Radio Conference
(WARC) last fall might generate momentum for considering
the matter before 1984--at which time a Space WARC will be
convened bu the International TeZPonmmvninnt1.nn Union
(ITU).
General Positions on Definitions of Outer Space
At last year's session of the UN Legal Subcommittee,
the USSR tabled a proposal that;
(1) Defined outer space as territory 100-110 kilometers
above sea level;
(2) Called for states to confirm this by treaty;
This paper was written for Steve Bond Chairman, US Delegation to the
UN Legal Subcommittee by International Issues Division,
Office of Political Analysis. It was coordinated with the Office of
Scientific Intelligence. Comments are welcome and should be addressed to
Chief, Political-Economic Issues Branch, International Issues Division, OPA,
25X1
25X1
PAM80-10106
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP85T00287R000100530002-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP85T00287R000100530002-3
CONFIDENTIAL
(3) Stated that space objects of states should be able
to fly over countries at altitudes lower than 100-
110 km in order to reach orbit or to return to
earth in the territory of the launching state.
We have no insights as to any underlying technical reason
why the USSR opted for a 110-110 km definition of outer
space.
Other issues--including remote sensing and direct
broadcast satellites--pre-empted significant debate on the
Soviet proposal and prevented any consideration of other
definitions. Nevertheless, reporting at that time suggested
that most countries could accept the Soviet definition with
Only the United States, some US allies such as Great
Britain, and the equatorial nations were strongly opposed.
The United States maintained that an artificial definition
of outer space was unnecessary and, moreover, that it might
result in a freeze on technological innovation. The equa-
torial nations, particularly Colombia and Ecuador, adamently
oppose any definition of outer space that denies their
sovereign claim over the geostationary orbit. They are not
necessarily opposed in principle to a definition that covers
the area that excludes the geostationary orbit region
Most other developing countries--and a few developed
countries--are not opposed to an artificial definition or
delimination of outer space; for the most part, the technical
issue is not a high priority item. They maintain that there
is a need to clarify the legal issue of outer space and its
relationship with national claims on air space. International
law regards air space as part of the national territory and
as subject to national regulation. Some of the developed
countries, including France and Belgium, have signaled that
the Soviet proposal is acceptable
Political Climate for March 1980 Legal Subcommittee Session
By and large, discussions on space issues at the Legal
Subcommittee session in Geneva will be insulated from events
in Afghanistan. However, the crisis in Afghanistan did
contribute to a growing opposition to Moscow as the site
of the 1982 Outer Space Committee. A decision on venue will
be made this June at the Outer Space Committee. Vienna, or
some third world capital such as Nairobi, likely will be
selected as the alternate site.
- 2 -
CONFIDENTIAL
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP85T00287R000100530002-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP85T00287R000100530002-3
Despite the political climate, the March 1980 UN
meeting will debate important issues such as a remote-
sensing and direct TV broadcasting from satellite primarily
on the basis of national interests, narrowly defined by
technical and economic considerations, rather than broad
political alliances. It is possible the Soviets will opt to
assign the definition issue a low priority during the 1980
session, if they perceive a general erosion of support
caused by the invasion of Afghanistan.
The Impact of WARC Decisions on Negotiations
Before attacking the issue of a definition of outer
space, nations may have to respond to the equatorial countries'
claims over the geostationary orbit. The equatorial nations
maintain that circumterrestrial territory above the equator
rightfully belongs to them, and that they can regulate use
of that orbit. At the World Administrative Radio Conference,
the equatorial countries reasserted their claim; Brazil
recommended that the Legal issue be relegated to the UN
Legal Subcommittee for consideration. It is unlikely that
the equatorial countries will strongly push for a resolution
at the upcoming sessions, but behind-the-scenes they are
lobbying for support among the non-equatorial developing
countries
The equatorial countries will try to link the sovereignty
issue with a priori planning of the geostationary orbit--a
proposal, advanced by the developing countries at WARC,
which will be discussed in 1984 at the Space WARC. To
garner support from other LDCs, the equatorial countries
h
e
maintain that they will give special privileges to t
developing countries in the use of the orbit.
Most developing countries will back the establishment
of a special legal regime to regulate the geostationary
orbit. At this point, they are opposed to the special
claims made by the equatorial countries. Most developing
countries want a legal regime that would ensure that the
orbit is used equitably and efficiently, and that no nation
is denied access in the future.
Following the 1979 Legal Subconmittee, the Soviet Union
indicated a willingness to accept a legal regime regulated
by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU). At
WARC-79, a consensus emerged favoring a priori planning of
the geostationary orbit. The Soviets and the United States
strongly opposed any form of planning. Nevertheless, the
meeting recommended a special WARC for 1984 to consider a
priori planning of the space services.
CONFIDENTIAL
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP85T00287R000100530002-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP85T00287R000100530002-3
As a result, the Soviets may rethink their position on
a legal regime for the geostationary orbit because some
developing countries may link a priori planning with a
legal regime negotiation in the subcommittee. The Soviet
Union has already noted its opposition to the equatorial
nation claims, and will continue to promote a definition
on Outer Space to stymie the equatorial nation efforts.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP85T00287R000100530002-3 -