周波：太空不应成为中美竞争的新疆场

【文/周波，翻译/中国论坛 董思】

火星在一个月之内突然接待了三位来自地球的访客，这很有趣。首先，阿联酋名为“阿玛尔”（意为“希望”）的探测器于2月9日抵达。一天后，中国的“天问一号”进入火星轨道。2月18日，美国宇航局最新的“毅力”号火星探测器登陆这颗红色星球的表面。为什么各国不能聚合资源和知识来共同完成如此艰巨而昂贵的任务呢？

在太空，所有问题基本上可以归结为两类：和平利用太空和太空非军事化。无论前者听起来多么令人向往，后者才是真正的挑战。美国国防部长奥斯汀将太空描述为“大国竞争的擂台”。

但在冷战期间，美国和苏联在阿波罗-联盟号试验项目上成功地进行了合作，这是第一个在太空中建立国际合作伙伴关系的项目。1975年7月17日，一架两天前发射的美国“阿波罗”号宇宙飞船与苏联“联盟”号宇宙飞船实现对接。

遗憾的是，这样的合作不会发生在中美这两个当今最大的经济体之间。《沃尔夫修正案》限制美国国家航空航天局（NASA）这样的美国政府机构与中国商业机构或政府部门进行合作。然而，富裕的中国有能力在自主创新和持续发展的国内航天工业领域大举投资。

在某些领域，中国甚至已经超过了美国。中国的500米口径球面射电望远镜是世界上最大的望远镜，比美国在波多黎各运营的阿雷西博球面反射盘还要大。2020年12月1日，也就是中国月球探测器登陆月球的同一天，阿雷西博反射盘突然坍塌了。

与华盛顿禁止中国宇航员进入美国建造的国际空间站不同的是，北京在与其他国家的太空合作方面似乎更加开放。北京已经表示，愿与国际机构和科学家分享月球样品，因为太空属于每个人。中国还在一份与联合国签署的备忘录中宣布，中国空间站将于2022年建成，之后将用于国际科学实验和国际宇航员飞行。

国际空间站原定于2024年到期。即使延长寿命至2030年（美国参议院已通过，但在众议院遭到搁置），中国空间站仍可能会是唯一一个在轨运行的空间站。美国人届时会提出搭中国的“便车”吗?

避免太空军事化—无论目标多么崇高，都是说易行难。1967年的《外层空间条约》禁止在轨道上部署任何大规模杀伤性武器，禁止在月球和其他天体上建立军事基地或设施，禁止试验任何类型的武器或进行军事演习。

自20世纪80年代以来，联合国就避免太空军备竞赛进行了多次辩论。然而，到目前为止，各国尚未就此达成一个新的条约。2018年，美国就防止在外层空间进行军备竞赛及不首先在外空部署武器等四项联合国决议都投了反对票。

一个突出的问题是：如何定义什么是“太空武器”或“太空武器化”。大多数空间技术本质上都可以两用，即同一种技术既可用于军事目的也可用于民事目的。哪怕是一颗卫星靠近另一颗卫星，也能构成威胁。激光、电子干扰、定向能武器和攻击性网络工具都可能成为威胁卫星的武器。

如果所有国家都认同在太空军备竞赛中没有赢家，那么解释上的差异就不应成为不可逾越的障碍。美国、中国、俄罗斯和印度都成功进行了反卫星试验。美国比其他任何国家都更加脆弱，因为它在太空中的民用和军用资产更多，而这些资产有可能受到对手的攻击。

北京同样也很脆弱。在过去三年里，中国发射火箭的次数超过任何其他国家。太空正在变得越来越拥挤。在今年1月的一次发射中，SpaceX公司的“猎鹰9号”将143颗小型卫星送入轨道。在今后十年中，还将有数千颗新卫星被送入轨道。太空安全与每个国家都利害攸关。

冷战的教训可能有用。当时，“相互确保摧毁”（MAD）防止了一场全面核战争。当华盛顿和莫斯科确信它们各自不能在军备竞赛中拥有相对优势，认为即使通过恐怖来实现战略平衡也比战争更可取的时候，这个概念应运而生了。同样，为了避免太空军事化或武器化，解决之道或许是让主要的航天大国彼此“相互确保脆弱性”（MAV），最终达成不在太空部署任何武器的条约。

如果冷战期间的敌人可以合作，为什么今天的竞争对手就不能呢？令人欣慰的是，拜登政府续签了《新削减战略武器条约》（New Start）核军备控制协议。该协议（除其他事项外）禁止任何一个国家通过干涉对方的“国家技术手段”来监督遵守情况，这被理解为包括卫星侦察系统。

中美在一些民用航天项目上的合作，将引导更多的国家参与到太空开发的努力中来，这是可能实现的。在中国2019年的探月任务中，美国宇航局（NASA）获得国会批准与中国国家航天局进行特定互动，使用美国宇航局的“月球勘测轨道飞行器（LRO）”观察中国的月球探测器在月球背面着陆情况。

竞争是人性的一部分，但人类最愚蠢的行为，莫过于试图在太空轨道上放置武器来打击地球，以消灭对手。宇航员柯林斯（Michael Collins）曾建议世界领导人从16万公里以外的高空看看他们的星球来改变他们的观念。他们会看到什么？“无比重要的边界将遁于无形，喧嚣的争论瞬间沉寂。”

美丽的地球，我们的家园。图片来源：视觉中国

(英文原文发表于《南华早报》，中国论坛董思译、韩桦校，翻页阅读原文)

To avoid the folly of a US-China space race, the two competitors shou****ld learn some Soviet-era cooperation

It is interesting to see how, in one month, Mars suddenly had three visitors from Earth. First, the United Arab Emirates’ probe named Amal, or Hope, arrived on February 9; a day later, China’s Tianwen-I entered Mars’ orbit. Perseverance, Nasa’s newest rover, landed on the red planet’s surface on February 18. Why can’t nations pool their resources and knowledge on such gargantuan tasks that are extremely difficult and expensive?

In outer space, all issues basically boil down to two categories: peaceful use and demilitarisation of space. No matter how desirable the former sounds, the latter is the real challenge. US Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin described space as “an arena of great power competition”.

But, during the Cold War, the United States and Soviet Union managed to cooperate on the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project, the first international partnership in space. On July 17, 1975, an American Apollo spacecraft, launched two days earlier, docked with a Soviet Soyuz spacecraft.

Sadly, this won’t happen between China and the US, the two largest economies today. The Wolf Amendment limits US government agencies such as Nasa from working with Chinese commercial or governmental agencies. However, a prosperous China can afford to invest lavishly in a domestic space industry that is self-propelled and sustainable.

In some areas, China has already overtaken the United States. China’s 500-metre Aperture Spherical Telescope, larger than the US-run Arecibo spherical reflector dish in Puerto Rico, is the biggest in the world. On December 1, 2020, the same day a Chinese lunar probe landed on the moon, the Arecibo dish collapsed.

Unlike Washington, which does not allow Chinese astronauts into the US-built International Space Station, Beijing appears more open-minded about space cooperation with other nations.

Beijing has said it is ready to share its moon samples with international institutions and scientists as space belongs to everyone. It has also declared in a UN memorandum that China’s space station, set to be completed in 2022, will be used for international scientific experiments and flights for international astronauts.

The International Space Station is scheduled to expire in 2024. But even after a life extension to 2030, which passed in the US Senate but has stalled in the House of Representatives, China’s space station might be the only one in orbit. Will the Americans ask Beijing for a ride then?

Avoiding militarisation of outer space, however lofty the aim, is easier said than done. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty prohibits placing any weapons of mass destruction in orbit, establishing military bases or installations, testing any type of weapons or conducting military exercises on the moon and other celestial bodies.

Since the 1980s, the UN has had several debates on avoiding a space arms race. So far, though, countries have failed to negotiate another treaty for the purpose. In 2018, the US voted “no” on four UN resolutions which included prevention of an arms race in outer space and no first placement of weapons in outer space.

One outstanding problem is how to define what constitutes a space weapon or the weaponisation of space. Most space technologies are dual-use in nature – the same technology can be used for military or civilian purposes. Even a satellite that can move close enough to another satellite can pose a threat. Lasers, electronic jamming, directed energy weapons and offensive cyber tools can all become weapons that threaten satellites.

A difference in interpretations should not be an insurmountable barrier if all countries agree there will be no winners in a space arms race. The US, China, Russia and India have successfully conducted anti-satellite tests. The US is more vulnerable than any other countries because it has more civilian and military assets in space that are subject to potential attacks from adversaries.

Beijing is vulnerable, too. In the past three years, China had more rocket launches than any other country. Space is becoming increasingly crowded. In a single launch in January, a SpaceX Falcon 9 sent 143 small satellites into orbit, and thousands of new satellites will be sent to orbit in the coming decade. Every nation has a stake in space security.

The lessons of the Cold War might prove useful. During that time, mutually assured destruction helped prevent an all-out nuclear war. This concept only came into being when Washington and Moscow decided they could not have an edge over the other in the arms race and a strategic equilibrium, even balanced by terror, was more desirable than war.

Similarly, in avoiding militarisation or weaponisation in space, perhaps the way out is recognition of mutually assured vulnerability by major spacefaring nations that eventually leads to a treaty agreeing not to deploy any weapons in outer space.

If enemies could cooperate during the Cold War, why not competitors today? It is a relief that the Biden administration has renewed the New Start nuclear arms control agreement. The agreement prohibited, among other things, either country from interfering with the other side’s “national technical means” for monitoring compliance. This is understood to include satellite reconnaissance systems.

China-US cooperation in selected civil space projects will steer more countries to join the effort to develop space. It is possible, too. During China’s 2019 moon exploration mission, Nasa got Congressional approval for a specific interaction with China’s National Space Administration to monitor China’s landing of a lunar probe on the dark side of the moon using Nasa’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter.

Competition is part of human nature, but no human folly is more monumental than attempting to place weapons in orbit to strike Earth to eliminate adversaries. Astronaut Michael Collins once suggested that the political leaders of the world should see their planet from 160,000 km away to change their outlook. What could they see? “The all-important border would be invisible, that noisy argument suddenly silenced.”

本文系观察者网独家稿件，文章内容纯属作者个人观点，不代表平台观点，未经授权，不得转载，否则将追究法律责任。关注观察者网微信guanchacn，每日阅读趣味文章。