Artemis Accord Regulations

 Should be for peaceful purposes and in accordance with relevant international law.

 Should be transparent in the broad dissemination of information regarding their national space policies and space exploration plans in accordance with their national rules and regulations opportunities in collaboration with American firms who have already been awarded contracts.

 Plan to share scientific information resulting from their activities pursuant to these Accords with the public and the international scientific community on a good-faith basis, and consistent with Article XI of the Outer Space Treaty.

 Retain the right to communicate and release information to the public regarding their own activities.

 Commitment to openly share scientific data is not intended to apply to private sector operations unless such operations are being conducted on behalf of a Signatory to the Accords.

 Coordinate with each other in advance regarding the public release of information that relates to the other Signatories’ activities under these Accords in order to provide appropriate protection for any proprietary and/or export-controlled information.

 Preserve outer space heritage, which they consider to comprise historically significant human or robotic landing sites, artifacts, spacecraft, and other evidence of activity on celestial bodies in accordance with mutually developed standards and practices.

 Commit to seek to refrain from any intentional actions that may create harmful interference with each other’s use of outer space in their activities under these Accords.

 Commit to provide each other with necessary information regarding the location and nature of space-based activities under these Accords if a Signatory has reason to believe that the other Signatories’ activities may result in harmful interference with or pose a safety hazard to its space-based activities.

 Create a reasonable safety zone to prevent harmful interference.

Opportunities under the US Department of Commerce and India’s Department of Space, DoS also need to be explored. This may require that the CSJWG include members from the Indian Space industry to take forward the collaboration between American and Indian firms. Indian industry has begun to address the SSA and these efforts could be further enhanced and presents a good opportunity for collaboration under the proposed Planetary Defence programme.

Impact of the Artemis Accord

In this context, it is necessary to examine the benefits, if any, arising from India signing the Artemis Accord.

The Accord mainly concentrates on “civil space activities conducted by the civil space agencies of each Signatory. These activities may take place on the Moon, Mars, comets, and asteroids, including their surfaces and subsurfaces, as well as in orbit of the Moon or Mars, in the Lagrangian points for the Earth-Moon system, and in transit between these celestial bodies and locations”. Clearly earth based activities are excluded.

Currently, Chandrayaan 3 is on its way to the Moon. Its Lander and rover will explore the area near the Lunar south pole. Aditya-L1 is slated to occupy the Lagrangian-1 zone. Since these activities are after India has signed the Accord the conditions of the Accord should apply.

The Road Ahead

Apart from the CSJWG and the iCET, there are really no other opportunities which have arisen from the Indo-US Joint statement. The CSJWG is akin to a mela. The seventh meeting, held in November 2019, had 52 Indian government and 243 US government participants.

A few glaring questions arise: What would be the outcomes of such a huge gathering? Were there any side meetings which could have led to some concrete decisions? The absence of any industry participation is glaring.

The first move should be for India to bring in private space industries as observers in the

CSJWG. A working group of US and Indian firms could follow, to spell out the possible cooperation.

As of now, the nearest realizable opportunity is that of the CLPS which awaits a NASA-ISRO move to convene an interaction between US and Indian firms.

According to Ranjana Kaul of Dua Associates, there are already many opportunities for private firms with the Government opening Space up to the private sector and the reorganization of DoS but “the moot point to consider for these companies is – at what point in time or when might government allow commercial private launch service providers?”

Further, “Will these companies be permitted to export launchers or provide services from space- ports in other jurisdiction? If this does not happen and the governing statutes/regulations are not reformed in time how will these companies navigate the way ahead. Perhaps the satellite manufacturers may be able to –but the launcher manufacturers?”

Both the governments are talking about strategic technology partnership and defense industrial cooperation between the governments, businesses, and academic institutions of the two countries. But, as Ranjana points out “How easy/hard is it [for India] to break into the US and possibly the Global market and will the initiatives remove/ lessen roadblocks?”

Susmita Mohanty, Director General, Spaceport SARABHAI, feels that India has to significantly increase its Space budget to be able to play a meaningful role in the Artemis programme.

She also feels that a coalition of space faring nations who have signed the UN Moon Agreement and Artemis Accord be formed to send a message that notwithstanding India signing the Artemis Accord, India is committed to a multilateral approach as enshrined in the Outer Space Treaty and Moon Agreement.

The CSJWG and the iCET, along with the possible NASAISRO initiative for convening an industrial interaction are all very good ideas. Signing the Artemis Accord is a major step forward, though now both the governments need to walk the talk.

Prof. Arup Dasgupta

Managing Editor arup@geospatialworld.net