The quest for space has ignited minds since the nineteenth century. It has taken many thousands of years to reach the current status of space activity and technology. The 20th century may be looked upon by future generations as the true origins of tangible utilization of space for the benefit of mankind or laying the seeds of its destruction through militarization of space; only time will tell. The responsible people of the world are pondering these sentiments now. Certain space powers have already chosen the latter path without the consent of the governed, a path chosen by men in uniforms and blessed by their governments. Some well established space powers see militarization as a natural evolution of the civilian program, some emerging space powers see it as devolution in the concept of space belonging to all mankind, not as a bastion to be dominated by one or the few.
The emerging space powers, India and China are against the concept of a space denial regime, the militarization of space. The full spectrum domination of space is an expensive proposition, especially for developing nations. As developing nations, India and China have followed different paths in their quest for space. India began its space program almost a decade after Mao Zedong declared China would become a world power through space activities. The activities of India’s program had origins in the ideals of Nehruvian socialism, the use of space to cure the ills of the common man in India through socio-economic space applications. The space upliftment social project continues to be the cornerstone of New Delhi’s civilian space program’s objectives.
The objectives of the Chinese space program have at its cornerstone, military
applications. Mao wanted China to have great power status and international prestige, this could be accrued by following the footsteps of the space programs of the US and Soviet Union. Both nations’ space programs started as military space programs to develop missiles as platforms for nuclear delivery. The missiles not only provided great power status and prestige but the ability to have independence of leverage in a hostile situation. One cannot be powerful without
sovereignty of action and means of exerting leverage upon others. Herein, the new China, coming out of the yoke of imperialism laid the genesis for achieving international power and prestige though the militarization of its space program.
Over time, China’s space program grew to employ the activities similar to India’s civilian space program, that of space applications that provide socio-economic benefits. Both nations have advanced their respective programs to such a degree that they are narrowing the space competitiveness gap with the US. It is natural for Asia’s two giants to be competitive in space endeavors. The competition has yielded advanced space technologies that benefit not only civilians but the military as well, dual-use technologies. Both nations possess dual-use
technologies such as, launch vehicles, resource, navigation and communication satellites that can have military applications as well. In India’s case such technologies were not knowingly
manufactured for a military purpose. The ISRO wears it civilian badge with pride and attempts to maintain the distinction as a civilian space agency.
However, in China’s case, its space program has, since inception been controlled by the military, in its essence it is a military space program that supports civilian space
applications/technologies. The CNSA acts as the civilian public face of Beijing’s military space program, allowing it to escape international scrutiny, make easier space diplomacy,
access/develop cutting edge space technology and increase its international prestige.
Prestige is important to India and China at the world stage; their space programs raise their international stature. This is truly evident with the success of India’s Chandrayan-1 mission and China’s Shenzhou V-VII manned missions. Both countries are working actively to promote space exploration programs in the coming years, solidifying their reputations as cutting edge space programs even further. Do the reputations of their space programs translate into being role models for developing countries? While China’s space program is nontransparent, accountable to the PLA and the CCP and military at its core; is the polar opposite to India’s transparent,
accountable to the Indian people and civilian at its core space program. Additionally, the knowledge China has gained from its space program in missile technology and by extension nuclear delivery, hasn’t been restricted within the nation’s borders. China has been a source of international destabilization for geopolitical strategic gain in the form of nuclear and missile technology proliferation, even though it is a signatory of the nonproliferation regime. India is not a signatory of the nonproliferation regime but has always abided by its principles by never illicitly proliferating technology earned through its space program. Recently, it was recognized as a responsible nuclear and space power by receiving “de facto” international status and recognition as a responsible nuclear power within the comity of nations.
India and China have built remarkable space programs within a span of a few decades with limited resources. The paper has shown that domestics and geopolitics are indeed
motivating factors for these developing space programs. For India, the domestic goals were social and economic upliftment of its people and for the Chinese it was military self defense through missile development as well as garnering prestige. Also, geopolitics was a critical determinant in China’s space program. The paper findings showed that the China wanted to remedy the military disparity between it and a perceived hostile environment from Cold War powers United Stated and Soviet Union, particularly in missile technology. Chinese principal interest lay in having ballistic missiles capable of reaching distant targets.
It was also revealing that the two programs are developing similarly as they are moving in tandem with emphasis on space exploration and manned spaceflight. It is becoming harder to distinguish the two space programs, the main difference being the military nature of China’s space program. Due to the new emphasis on space exploration and human spaceflight, Indian and Chinese space programs are not considered role models for developing nations. It is this
researcher’s recommendation that the dynamic space programs of India and China be continually reviewed as to see any permanent shift in their respective space policies. Any permanent shift will be more visible in India’s case due to the initial motivation of its space program. Ultimately, the capabilities of one nation aspiring for space dominance through weaponization of space will lead others to react in kind to protect their right of sovereign action, and then no space program will be a role model.