uthor and journalist Tim Marshall has an uncanny ability to remind readers of things they instinctively know but perhaps have forgotten in the crush of day-to-day life. It is a unique niche and one that he fills exceptionally well and in a rather enjoyable way. His book “Prisoners of Geography” highlighted ten key maps that he saw as illustrating global politics. Its sequel, “The Power of Geography” explores an additional ten maps that he suggests will define the future of geopolitics here on earth. More prosaically he reminds readers that geography (and cartography) still matters. It is far from destiny, but natural barriers, borders, and terrain are certainly drivers for potential conflict and strife. How often does the average person look at a map beyond Google Maps or when tracking their Uber? Arguably very rarely. But Marshall in his previous books reminds readers that these things still matter, even in an age of social media and global connectivity.
This novel insightfulness is carried through to his latest book “The Future of Geography,” which in looking to the stars shows that humanity’s future will be far more grounded than speculative fiction film and television would suggest. Marshall touches on something everyone knows, even if they can’t fully articulate it or recognize it daily; Space matters, even if it is taken for granted.
The importance of space to the way in which we live, and work is far too often underappreciated. At a policy event at which I was speaking, I remarked (much to their amusement) that if any of the attendees had secured a date through Tinder or a similar location-based dating app, they should really thank the Department of Defense, which operates the GPS constellation. That little blue dot on a user’s phone is only possible because of the network of position, navigation, and timing (PNT) satellites the government operates. Everything from weather forecasting to gas pumps rely on space, yet it is largely taken for granted and falls into this cognitive gap. Space is just up there for most people and so long as everything works, they pay it no further mind.
He opens his book with brief overviews of humanity’s relationship with astronomy and the rise of the space age, both of which are cursory, but sufficient to get the reader’s cognitive juices flowing. It is hard not to be enthralled by space and its infinite mystery. That is, unfortunately, where most of the public’s consideration of the cosmos stops—an awe-inspiring photo from the James Webb Space Telescope or its predecessor, the Hubble Telescope.
In that cognitive gap between the far cosmos and real world, misconceptions, and misunderstandings of space fester. Here speculative fiction often fills the hole leading to warped perceptions of reality. “Space, the final frontier” and all that. Space is not, and arguably never has been, an entirely benign environment, divorced from the realities of the world. It is inextricably linked—for better and for worse—with terrestrial affairs.
Addressing this gap is the real contribution of “The Future of Geography.” Even as he looks to the not-too-distant future, Marshall normalizes space activity. There are, of course, sections that wax lyrically about helium-three and moon mining, but it is written with less gee-whiz amazement than matter-of-fact practicalities. Marshall, in a way, brings space back down to earth, and that is what is needed most. Too much of space policy is driven by a belief that space is somehow fundamentally different from any other domain of operation or activity. While the physics are certainly different, and the challenges of operating in that domain greater than anywhere save the deep oceans, at its core the governance of space is no different than the governance of its terrestrial counterpart. In the words of one senior defense space policy official, it is about normalizing the space domain.
Once the belief that space is somehow different and governed by different rules is jettisoned, smart and effective policy can be crafted. It is less about space politics and more the application of geopolitics to space, or as Marshall writes, “astropolitics.” Bowen’s “Original Sin” quite rightly captured this false mentality, that space was somehow peaceful and benign, subject to better angels than any other domain. While Bowen’s postmodern self-flagellation begged the question too much, his core thesis contained that element of truth: that space is just another operational domain.
More pressingly, space issues are not something in the distant future. They are happening in real-time and we’re watching the show. SpaceX routinely lands the first stage of its Falcon 9 rocket, recently completing its 100th consecutive successful landing. NASA is pressing ahead with plans to return to the Moon using commercial partners. China launched a probe to the far side of the moon and landed a rover using that satellite as a relay station for communications. NASA also recently redirected an asteroid as part of its DART mission. Commercial companies are building business cases for private space stations. Marshall writes, “Many of us still think of space as ‘out there’ and ‘in the future.’ But it’s here and now—the border into the great beyond is well within our reach.”
One of the most notable issues Marshall addresses is the shortcomings of the legal governance of space. The Outer Space Treaty is nearly 60 years old and could not have foreseen the rise of commercial space, growing competition on orbit, or the sheer proliferation of space assets. As Marshall astutely observes, “Technology has outpaced law. Without laws, geopolitics—and now astropolitics—is a jungle.”
While there are bilateral efforts—most notably the American-led Artemis Accords—and multilateral fora such as within the United Nations to address space governance issues, the pace of these processes is being far surpassed by developments on orbit. Marshall rightly highlights the big issues such as space debris mitigation and conflict avoidance, but also entertainingly (if morbid) legal frameworks for prosecuting murders on orbit:
“What about murder on the Orbital Express en route to SpaceTel—a million-start, 200-room hotel orbiting the Moon? Or even in the hotel? It’s much less straightforward in SpaceTel is owned by a private Indian company whose head office is in the Seychelles, with its parts made in Japan, carried up from rockets launched in Kazakhstan, the USA and China. Good luck with that, Space Inspector Poirot.”
I for one very much wish Agathe Christie were alive to pen that story. How would Poirot’s “little grey cells” manage this who-dun-it?
More immediately and closer to home, what are the legal obligations or responsibilities of governments to commercial companies in a conflict? What happens if Russia decides to target SpaceX’s Starlink satellites currently supporting Ukraine’s defense? How would the Department of Defense handle companies that pursue policies counter to American national interest? How should dual-use technologies—such as debris mitigation satellites that clearly can be used as weapons—be governed? What about moon or asteroid resource exploitation?
These decisions, like those on earth, will be driven by the primary actors. Marshall rightly chooses to focus on the three largest space powers: the United States, China, and Russia. The United States clearly is the prime actor in space, but its lead is rapidly shrinking due to China’s ambitions in space. Russia, by contrast, is a markedly weaker space power, a position that is being further eroded by Moscow’s war against Ukraine and the resulting political isolation. Russia may never recapture its Cold War space position, but it still can act as a spoiler with counter-space capabilities.
He wisely dedicated a subsequent chapter on the rest of the world, including the European Union, India, and others who do have interests in and capacity to access space. Bowen’s “Original Sin” offers a much deeper dive into the interests of countries like Japan in space, but Marshall’s inclusion of an overview is welcomed. For as much as the three prime actors will define the future of space, these other countries will have a role to play in space and its governance, as evidenced by the Artemis Accords and other multilateral engagements.
It is interesting that he does not have a dedicated chapter on commercial space actors. Companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin are woven throughout the narrative, yet Marshall seems to underplay the influence these companies are having on space and will have in the future. Indeed, commercial companies have fundamentally eroded the primacy of the state when it comes to accessing space. It is not just American companies, either. China is developing a robust commercial space ecosystem with companies that aim to compete with their American counterparts. The space race may find itself in a race to the bottom as Chinese and American companies aim for greater market share, reducing prices along the way.
a global affairs media network
Grounding Humanity’s Orbital Future
Image created via Midjourney.
June 10, 2023
In his latest book, "The Future of Geography," Tim Marshall explores what humanity's relationship with space is today, and what it will be in the future, with some comparisons to terrestrial geography. The book's real lesson, writes Joshua Huminski, is that our future remains decidedly terrestrial.
A
uthor and journalist Tim Marshall has an uncanny ability to remind readers of things they instinctively know but perhaps have forgotten in the crush of day-to-day life. It is a unique niche and one that he fills exceptionally well and in a rather enjoyable way. His book “Prisoners of Geography” highlighted ten key maps that he saw as illustrating global politics. Its sequel, “The Power of Geography” explores an additional ten maps that he suggests will define the future of geopolitics here on earth. More prosaically he reminds readers that geography (and cartography) still matters. It is far from destiny, but natural barriers, borders, and terrain are certainly drivers for potential conflict and strife. How often does the average person look at a map beyond Google Maps or when tracking their Uber? Arguably very rarely. But Marshall in his previous books reminds readers that these things still matter, even in an age of social media and global connectivity.
This novel insightfulness is carried through to his latest book “The Future of Geography,” which in looking to the stars shows that humanity’s future will be far more grounded than speculative fiction film and television would suggest. Marshall touches on something everyone knows, even if they can’t fully articulate it or recognize it daily; Space matters, even if it is taken for granted.
The importance of space to the way in which we live, and work is far too often underappreciated. At a policy event at which I was speaking, I remarked (much to their amusement) that if any of the attendees had secured a date through Tinder or a similar location-based dating app, they should really thank the Department of Defense, which operates the GPS constellation. That little blue dot on a user’s phone is only possible because of the network of position, navigation, and timing (PNT) satellites the government operates. Everything from weather forecasting to gas pumps rely on space, yet it is largely taken for granted and falls into this cognitive gap. Space is just up there for most people and so long as everything works, they pay it no further mind.
He opens his book with brief overviews of humanity’s relationship with astronomy and the rise of the space age, both of which are cursory, but sufficient to get the reader’s cognitive juices flowing. It is hard not to be enthralled by space and its infinite mystery. That is, unfortunately, where most of the public’s consideration of the cosmos stops—an awe-inspiring photo from the James Webb Space Telescope or its predecessor, the Hubble Telescope.
In that cognitive gap between the far cosmos and real world, misconceptions, and misunderstandings of space fester. Here speculative fiction often fills the hole leading to warped perceptions of reality. “Space, the final frontier” and all that. Space is not, and arguably never has been, an entirely benign environment, divorced from the realities of the world. It is inextricably linked—for better and for worse—with terrestrial affairs.
Addressing this gap is the real contribution of “The Future of Geography.” Even as he looks to the not-too-distant future, Marshall normalizes space activity. There are, of course, sections that wax lyrically about helium-three and moon mining, but it is written with less gee-whiz amazement than matter-of-fact practicalities. Marshall, in a way, brings space back down to earth, and that is what is needed most. Too much of space policy is driven by a belief that space is somehow fundamentally different from any other domain of operation or activity. While the physics are certainly different, and the challenges of operating in that domain greater than anywhere save the deep oceans, at its core the governance of space is no different than the governance of its terrestrial counterpart. In the words of one senior defense space policy official, it is about normalizing the space domain.
Once the belief that space is somehow different and governed by different rules is jettisoned, smart and effective policy can be crafted. It is less about space politics and more the application of geopolitics to space, or as Marshall writes, “astropolitics.” Bowen’s “Original Sin” quite rightly captured this false mentality, that space was somehow peaceful and benign, subject to better angels than any other domain. While Bowen’s postmodern self-flagellation begged the question too much, his core thesis contained that element of truth: that space is just another operational domain.
More pressingly, space issues are not something in the distant future. They are happening in real-time and we’re watching the show. SpaceX routinely lands the first stage of its Falcon 9 rocket, recently completing its 100th consecutive successful landing. NASA is pressing ahead with plans to return to the Moon using commercial partners. China launched a probe to the far side of the moon and landed a rover using that satellite as a relay station for communications. NASA also recently redirected an asteroid as part of its DART mission. Commercial companies are building business cases for private space stations. Marshall writes, “Many of us still think of space as ‘out there’ and ‘in the future.’ But it’s here and now—the border into the great beyond is well within our reach.”
One of the most notable issues Marshall addresses is the shortcomings of the legal governance of space. The Outer Space Treaty is nearly 60 years old and could not have foreseen the rise of commercial space, growing competition on orbit, or the sheer proliferation of space assets. As Marshall astutely observes, “Technology has outpaced law. Without laws, geopolitics—and now astropolitics—is a jungle.”
While there are bilateral efforts—most notably the American-led Artemis Accords—and multilateral fora such as within the United Nations to address space governance issues, the pace of these processes is being far surpassed by developments on orbit. Marshall rightly highlights the big issues such as space debris mitigation and conflict avoidance, but also entertainingly (if morbid) legal frameworks for prosecuting murders on orbit:
“What about murder on the Orbital Express en route to SpaceTel—a million-start, 200-room hotel orbiting the Moon? Or even in the hotel? It’s much less straightforward in SpaceTel is owned by a private Indian company whose head office is in the Seychelles, with its parts made in Japan, carried up from rockets launched in Kazakhstan, the USA and China. Good luck with that, Space Inspector Poirot.”
I for one very much wish Agathe Christie were alive to pen that story. How would Poirot’s “little grey cells” manage this who-dun-it?
More immediately and closer to home, what are the legal obligations or responsibilities of governments to commercial companies in a conflict? What happens if Russia decides to target SpaceX’s Starlink satellites currently supporting Ukraine’s defense? How would the Department of Defense handle companies that pursue policies counter to American national interest? How should dual-use technologies—such as debris mitigation satellites that clearly can be used as weapons—be governed? What about moon or asteroid resource exploitation?
These decisions, like those on earth, will be driven by the primary actors. Marshall rightly chooses to focus on the three largest space powers: the United States, China, and Russia. The United States clearly is the prime actor in space, but its lead is rapidly shrinking due to China’s ambitions in space. Russia, by contrast, is a markedly weaker space power, a position that is being further eroded by Moscow’s war against Ukraine and the resulting political isolation. Russia may never recapture its Cold War space position, but it still can act as a spoiler with counter-space capabilities.
He wisely dedicated a subsequent chapter on the rest of the world, including the European Union, India, and others who do have interests in and capacity to access space. Bowen’s “Original Sin” offers a much deeper dive into the interests of countries like Japan in space, but Marshall’s inclusion of an overview is welcomed. For as much as the three prime actors will define the future of space, these other countries will have a role to play in space and its governance, as evidenced by the Artemis Accords and other multilateral engagements.
It is interesting that he does not have a dedicated chapter on commercial space actors. Companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin are woven throughout the narrative, yet Marshall seems to underplay the influence these companies are having on space and will have in the future. Indeed, commercial companies have fundamentally eroded the primacy of the state when it comes to accessing space. It is not just American companies, either. China is developing a robust commercial space ecosystem with companies that aim to compete with their American counterparts. The space race may find itself in a race to the bottom as Chinese and American companies aim for greater market share, reducing prices along the way.
