The Transformation of Space from a Social Sciences Perspective: International Law, Security and Space Diplomacy

Space has created a new arena of competition and cooperation among states; in this context, it has highlighted the need for the peaceful use of space, its security, and the clear and binding definition of international obligations. Space activities, operating within a multi-actor structure, have transformed space from merely a scientific and technological field into a geopolitical arena at the center of global power projection. This development underscores the importance of strengthening legal frameworks governing space activities.

One of the key indicators of interest in space activities today is the number of space agencies worldwide and the policy documents developed by states and international organizations. The primary function of these agencies is to develop their countries' space ecosystems and to create policy frameworks that include space-related goals, strategies, and future perspectives. According to current data, 77 countries have their own space agency. (Space Crew 2024). In addition to national initiatives, international organizations such as NATO and the European Union have also developed space-related policies in recent years, highlighting the critical role of space in protecting collective security and enhancing prosperity (Baykal & Bayır, 2025).

The present century is characterized by an increasing interest in space among states, international organizations, and private companies. The growing strategic importance of space has accelerated developments in space technologies, leading to transformations in political, economic, legal, and social dynamics at global and regional levels (Baykal & Bayır, 2025).

Space within the Framework of International Law

International regulations concerning safety in space are governed by five major international treaties. While the first four treaties were accepted by both the United States and the Soviet Union, the superpowers of the time, the last one, the 1979 Moon Treaty, was not accepted by either state. Therefore, it has remained a non-binding, advisory text.  (Brittingham, 2010, p. 38; Leon, 2018, p. 516). In addition to these four treaties concerning the use of space, one of the first and most important treaties was the 1963 Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. This treaty was also the first treaty to limit weapons in space. The Outer Space Treaty (OST) , signed in 1967, followed the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. (Hobe & De Man, 2017; Ben-Itzhak, 2022). Accepted by more than 100 countries, including the United States and the Soviet Union, the OST is essentially considered the primary legal framework for the coordination and management of activities in outer space. (Wessel, 2012, pp. 289, 292; Tennen, 2016, pp. 281–282; Taylor, 2019, p. 655)

The OST prohibits the establishment of any weapons systems in space, or the placement of nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit (Wolff, 2009, p. 73). The OST also prohibits the establishment of any weapons systems or the conduct of weapons tests on the Moon or other celestial bodies. States party to the treaty are obligated to compensate another state for any damage caused during space exploration activities. In the event of potential risks, it is recommended that the parties consult with each other (OST Article 9). Furthermore, according to the treaty, the activities of one state should not hinder the activities of other states. Additionally, existing space exploration activities should not harm space (OST Articles 7 and 9).

The 1972 Liability Convention, another fundamental agreement concerning space, reaffirmed that states launching spacecraft would be held responsible for damages caused to third parties. The 1975 Registration Convention, on the other hand, made the cause-and-effect relationship between the state launching a space object, the launch operation, and its consequences more visible and traceable.

The Moon Treaty, which was not accepted by the United States and the Soviet Union, prohibited the use or threat of use of force in space, or any other hostile act. The treaty also prohibited the establishment of military bases or facilities on the Moon, as well as weapons testing or military maneuvers (Articles 3, 4 of the Moon Treaty). However, it permitted the use of military personnel for scientific research or other purposes (Wolff, 2009, p. 75).

Other treaties related to space security include the treaty made by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) which determines the allocation and usage ranges of radio frequencies. With this treaty, the ITU has accepted the right of member states to send satellites or satellite systems into Earth orbit for military purposes (Article 48, paragraph (1)). The ITU Treaty also stipulates that member states must not violate the principle of Harmful Interference (Article 38, paragraph (22) and Article 45, paragraph (1); zielinski, 2022, pp. 327-350). Harmful interference means that radio signals disrupt or prevent other systems from functioning. This can particularly lead to the interruption or malfunction of services such as communication and navigation (e.g., GPS)  (Polkowska, 2021). To prevent such situations from arising, threats have been identified and measures to be taken to prevent them have been specified.

Space law provides a normative framework regulating the peaceful, safe, and sustainable use of  space, while also highlighting the growing strategic importance of this area at the legal level.

Space Diplomacy in the 21st Century

The rapid development of space technologies and their indispensable role in societal functioning (Bayır et al., 2021 ) has made the functionalization of space in relation to individual well-being, sustainability, efficiency, and societal welfare a central issue on the agenda of governments; especially within the frameworks of Society 5.0 and Industry 4.0. Today, the use of space applications in critical sectors such as agriculture, food supply, and security, along with their diverse roles in various fields such as military, tourism, and communication, encourage governments to develop comprehensive strategies in this area. (Bohlmann & Petrovici, 2019). This field is characterized by developments that have driven the prioritization of space by states and non-state actors. While space activities are understood to have a collective nature, an analysis of the competition and cooperation among the actors is necessary.

This process accelerated in the 21st century, creating a complex network of relationships among states, corporations, international organizations, and individuals—in short, among all the new actors in international relations. While private initiatives such as satellite broadcasting and communications existed in the 20th century, the primary players remained developed states. As societal needs evolved and technology advanced, the space ecosystem underwent significant changes. A key term that captures these dynamics in the 21st century is "new space." Although it lacks a universally accepted definition, the term is widely recognized and helps explain the current state of space policy, highlighting the difference between "old" and "new" space. (Golkar 2021, 2).

Technological advancements, particularly in miniaturization, have significantly reduced the mass of electronics by up to 50%, thereby lowering the resources required for launches and enabling new participants to enter the space arena. Furthermore, the new space landscape is characterized by the emergence of diverse actors, including countries that previously had no space activities and private companies of various sizes. These new ventures have the potential to disrupt existing supply chains through innovative business models. Sectors such as space activities, space mining, tourism, and energy are increasingly seen as viable commercial ventures, attracting investment from private entrepreneurs and public-private partnerships. (Golkar 2021, 4–5).

Space systems form the basis of technologies used in daily life. Many technological products that societies use to carry out their daily lives utilize space-based systems. Telephones, communication and navigation technologies (including regional positioning and timing technologies), the internet and all systems that can be used in connection with the internet, including payment and card systems, and satellite-based television broadcasting are examples of this. Space has many other major strategic uses, such as monitoring oceans and other geographic environments that affect the daily lives of societies. Space technologies have also provided the ability to monitor air pollution and climate change. Space technologies also make it possible to protect food supply chain security by comparing data obtained from satellite imagery (Bayır, Akmaz & Aktaş, 2021).

Analytical tools and satellite-based information allow us to predict food production. Clearly, one of the most important and strategically useful areas of space-based systems is military systems. The fact that space enables various technologies used in critical systems such as food security, climate, communication, and military fields has brought it to a significant place on the agenda of states (Bayır, Akmaz & Aktaş, 2021).

New Space activities affect space infrastructure, encompassing both upstream and downstream sectors. The upstream sector includes more costly technologies; activities such as satellite design and launch, research and development, and the development of space infrastructure. The downstream sector, on the other hand, covers work related to space-based information production, observation activities, broadcasting, and communication systems. (Bayır, Akmaz & Aktaş, 2021)

Data evaluation is a field of application in space that has an impact on various sectors. The utilization of data obtained from satellite-based systems in many areas such as agriculture, oceanography, and geographic applications produces high value-added results. With accurately analyzed data, highly accurate predictions can be made, and many undesirable situations such as disasters and crises can be prevented in advance. (Bayır, Akmaz & Aktaş, 2021)

2019 is widely regarded as a turning point for NATO’s space policies for several reasons. First, it marked a significant shift and escalation in the Alliance’s strategic focus on space. Second, NATO formally recognized space as a new operational domain alongside air, land, sea, and cyberspace, acknowledging the increasing vitality of space-based assets to collective security and prosperity. Thirdly, in the same year, the Alliance demonstrated its formal institutional commitment to recognizing space as a strategic priority by adopting the High-Level Space Policy. (Baykal & Bayır, 2025)

NATO’s High-Level Space Policy is critically important because it underlines the multifaceted role of space within the Alliance’s security framework. This policy emphasizes the significant contribution of space not only to deterrence and defense capabilities, but also to a wide range of civilian and strategic areas such as weather monitoring, environmental and agricultural management, transportation, science, communications and banking. (Baykal & Bayır, 2025)

NATO’s increasing strategic focus on space and the development of related policy documents have been largely driven by the ambitious space programs of China and Russia. Analyzing the space policies of these two countries is essential to fully grasping the strategic importance of space for the Alliance. Both China and Russia aim to be leading actors in space. Through their expanding activities and missions, they pose a significant challenge to NATO’s security framework in the 21st-century space domain. (Baykal & Bayır, 2025)

Today, the US and Russia maintain their leadership in space exploration, followed by countries such as China, Japan, India, and the member states of the European Union. Furthermore, private sector participation in space activities is rapidly increasing. These organizations possess the capacity to operate launch sites, manufacture launch vehicles and spacecraft, and provide related services. (Baykal & Bayır, 2025, pp. 158–175)

All these developments show that in the 21st century, space diplomacy is not only an extension of interstate relations, but has also transformed into a multi-actor and multi-dimensional field of governance.

Conclusion

Space has transformed into a multi-actor structure with evolving and developing dynamics, expanding its scope of activity and encompassing more complex projects. These developments highlight the need to adapt existing legal frameworks to these new developments and to make the necessary adjustments. Within this multi-actor structure, fostering cooperation will contribute to the effective functioning of policy-making processes and regulatory mechanisms, with the aim of building peaceful governance. This approach necessitates not only new practices but also a flexible and inclusive governance model that is innovative, encouraging, and facilitating.

References

Baykal, S., & Bayır, Ö. E. (2025). NATO and the changing space security environment: Strategic challenges from China and Russia. Journal of Liberty and International Affairs, 11(3), 158–175. https://doi.org/10.47305/jlia.2025.1961

Bayır, Ö. E., Akmaz, K., & Aktaş, Ö. (2021). New Space: The European Union’s evolving space policy and changing European space ecosystem. Studia Europejskie – Studies in European Affairs, 25(4), 113–132.

Baykal, S., & Bayır, Ö. E. (2024). Space diplomacy: The case of Türkiye as a regional actor. Studia Europejskie – Studies in European Affairs, 28(4), 263–278.

Bohlmann, U. M., & Petrovici, G. (2019). Developing planetary sustainability: Legal challenges of Space 4.0. Global Sustainability.

Ben-Itzhak, S. (2022). Companies are commercializing outer space. Do government programs still matter? The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/11/companies-are-commercializing-outer-space-do-government-programs-still-matter/

Brittingham, B. (2010). Does the world really need new space law? Oregon Review of International Law, 12(1), 31–54.

Çelikpala, M. (Ed.). (2026). Emerging disruptive technologies in counter-terrorism. NATO Centre of Excellence – Defence Against Terrorism.

Golkar, A. (2021). Definition of New Space—Expert survey results and key technology trends. IEEE Journal on Miniaturization for Air and Space Systems, 2(1), 2–9.

Hobe, S., & De Man, P. (2017). National appropriation of outer space and state jurisdiction to regulate the exploitation, exploration and utilization of space resources. German Journal of Air and Space Law, 66(3), 460–475.

Hobe, S., & De Man, P. (2017). National appropriation of outer space and state jurisdiction to regulate the exploitation, exploration and utilization of space resources. German Journal of Air and Space Law, 66(3), 460–475. (not: duplicate entry removed in final use recommended)

Lyall, F., & Larsen, P. B. (2009). Space law: A treatise. Ashgate.

Polkowska, M. (2021). Space security diplomacy in international organizations: Some legal aspects. Humanities and Social Sciences, 28(1), 89–105.

NATO. (2019). NATO’s overarching space policy. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_190862.htm

United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs. (n.d.). Outer Space Treaty. https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/introouterspacetreaty.html

Wessel, B. (2012). The rule of law in outer space: The effects of treaties and nonbinding agreements on international space law. Hastings International and Comparative Law Review, 35(2), 289–322.

Wolff, J. M. (2009). Uzayın askerileştirilmesini içine alan “Barışçıl kullanım” kavramı, uzayın silahlandırılmasına da yol açar mı? (Y. Poyraz, Çev.). Erzincan Binali Yıldırım Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(3–4), 69–83. (Orijinal eser 2003).