The Space Agency is about 70 years old. That should tell us something. Space is in danger of becoming wild, wild west. From their testimony from State Department experts are giving up on lawabiding rules of based space and settle for something less like Suggestion Space Base or even hintbased space. Perhaps thats the best we can do. I think we should try harder or better. Cant we agree on Space Traffic Management on the size of safety zones around satellites or capsules to ban debris or to have compatible docking lodges. I look forward to discussion with witnesses. Thank you mr. Chairman. I want to thank you, Chairman Castro and ranking member. Additionally i want to thank our witnesses for joining us today to discuss this important issue. As this subcommittee has highlighted again and again, space is a vital component of our National Security now more than ever. Our global economy is totally dependent on access to space. Space is a common good that we benefit from regardless of country origin. Unlike the other domains, space is more likely to suffer tragedies in outcomes as result of bad actors. It leaves it susceptible to debris created by collisions, poorly conducted antisatellite weapons and testing and poor planning. The foundation international laws and norms that we operating under were developed in the cloud and two great powers can access space. The outer Space Treaty doesnt account for the congestioned operations of space we see today. This treaty was written with broad language and phraseses that are open to wider interpretations to the agreement. I do not believe that china are operating in good faith then comes to their proposals as evidence by the treaty on prevention of placement of weapons outer place. Sometimes referred to no first place treaty. Its proposed to ban weapons out of Space Or Lack any verification and was silent on Space Debris caused by asat Testing And Rendezvous proximity operations. Russia and china are already weaponizing space eproposing a treaty upon ratification. I was glad to see the u. K. To reduce space risks of norms, rules and principles of responsible behavior. What i dont want is another international treaty that tie our hands while others ignore its limitations. Like the late intermediate range of nuclear treaty. I appreciate the continued Service And Experience that you provide to the nation. I look forward to our discussion today. Thank you mr. Chairman. I yield back. Thank you. Now i turn to Chairman Castro for his open remarks. Thank you chairman. Its an honor to be here today with my colleagues from both committees to discuss one of the longterm challenges we face not just as a nation but as a species. Space. Specifically the rules of government humanities exploration, commerce and other activity within space. Both by private Sector And Nation states. I give special thanks to Chairman And Congressman jim cooper, Hes Chairman of the strategic of the complete subcommittee of strategic forces. In short, space can bring out the best in us. Leading the Cutting Edge technologies, creating new jobs, making significant scientific discoveries and perhaps above all, united our divided inflation behind a common purpose once more. I commend the biden administration for pledging to continue ongoing plans to return american to the moon and making clear part of this mission will be to land the first Woman And Person of color on the lunar surface. Ensuring that this Moon Landing will be seen by americans and the world as an accomplishment on behalf of all americans. Yet, despite the goal of peaceful coexistence, space is not immune to the realities of international relations in a time of rising authoritarian power or global trend of increased Inequality And Lack of corporate accountability. This hearing will serve to assess the current and future state of human activity in space and to inform new american strategy for preserving rule of law, peace and international cooperation in the most hostile Environment Humanity inhabits. This is new territory for all of us. Theres never been this many state and private actors all operating in space at once with multiple different priorities and growing risks of clashes both intentional and not. In many ways, the challenge in space is unlike any humanity has faced before. It took centuries to shape the law of the sea drawing upon thousands of years of human sea. We dont have hundred years to set the rules for space. Nor do we have traditions to draw upon. The realities that space already critical to the military capabilities of the United States our allies, partners and our adversaries. The question is how beand other states will respond. Whether well be able to develop a set of rules to manage disputes and develop a set of rules that will also work for all of us. The United States is engaged in the critical issues for decades at the united nations and in other international organizations. By accelerating pace, raises the urgency of reengaging with our partners and establishing norms and rules. Earlier this week, the United States senate, United States made a public declaration what threats we face and how well engage with the international community to establish norms of behavior. This is a critical task. We rely on space for almost everything we do as society to include navigation, accurate time keeping, global communications and weather. The number of satellites in space from both government and private actors will increase nearly ten fold in the next decade. Countries including china are developing the capabilities to disable or destroy satellites in space through missiles, cyberattacks or electronic warfare. As the United States plans are returned to the moon, that raises the importance of minimizing the risk of astronauts in space. Congress must pay careful attention to all these issues and determine where the United States will stand on these crucial questions for space governance. This hearing will be one of the committees first significant opportunities to address these issues and adhere directly from the administration what were doing to build international rulebased order that can meet the challenges. Humanity second space ferry century. I yield back. Thank you so much Chairman Castro. Now we turn to ranking member for her remarks. Thank you chairman cooper. As we set there are two primary areas i wish to explore with our Panel Government witnesses from the department of defense and state. First my distinguished colleagues already made reference to the impact of the 1967 treaty. It is common principle captured in second, paragraph of the treaty, recognizing the common interest of all human kind in the progress of the Exploration And Use of outer space for useful purposes. I wish to highlight. This principle of international law holds that just as we are to treat our seas on earth, outer space should use benefit of all and shall be for all human kind. It was established to set out comprehensive legal for the world ocean, china acted without regard to its terms even going [indiscernible] rejected the maritime and behaviors from 2016. Nearly five years later, there theres been no action taken and china continues to act [indiscernible] the office of director national intelligence issued a report of worldwide threat of u. S. National security. Which includes sections on the threat of russia and Chinas Space programs. The report reflects the collective insights of the u. S. Intelligence community and focuses on the most direct serious threats the United States during the next year. The report identifies China And Russia as antisatellite weapons program. The threat these programs pose to u. S. And russian forces that rely on satellite based communication. I share in the concerns on threat posed by China And Russias Space Technology to the principle of common heritage of all human kind. Both Nations Track Records Earth Surface give more sufficient reason to expect that their behavior will extend into orbit. Second is commercial exploration of space. [indiscernible] as you can say while the u. S. Government builds partnerships with China And Russia. Theres no distinction between that which the state own and that which is privately owned. We have seen this script before. Commercial fish and vessels used as maritime militias. It offers us opportunities to future generations. On the other, they represent dangerous resulting in nation states unwilling to be bound by rules based order and Space Technology for nation security. We must not cast aside these realities and world leaders negotiated the terms of outer Space Treaty in the days of the original star trek series. Maintains it was obtainable. Today, as our global leaders pursuant to national norms, rules and principles of responsible behavior outer space is now fiction. The u. S. And other nations states may abide by international norms, rules and principles of responsible behavior but our competition acts rulebased order. This is our current Operating Environment. We must pursue Space Policy that addresses these challenges and Space Exploration. I welcome our Student Panel of experts. Thank you so much. First, let me say that everyone should be muted. Except for the witnesses that i call on. Let me repeat, everyone should be muted. Theres way too much Background Noise here. Please mute yourself. Our first witness from his five Minute Statement will be mr. John hill. Thank you chairman cooper. Its an honor to testify before you today along with my distinguished colleagues. You have my full written statement with your permission, i ask it be included in the record. I will briefly summarize it. Without objection, so ordered. The u. S. Government efforts to foster a rulesbased international order outer space are focused on establishing voluntary nonlegally binding measures derived from current technical and operational best practices. As one of the worlds most experienced space operators, the department of defense actively support and partners with the department of state in developing u. S. Proposals within international venues to shape the strategic environment toward an agreed upon model for safe, responsible and professional behavior. There are many benefits to have common guidelines. Among these are safer, more sustainable, more stable and more predictable space Operating Environment for all space operators. Importantly for dod, such an Operating Environment can also facilitate indications and warnings of hostile intentions and hostile acts. Dod policies and practices serve as the basis for international measures. Dod models responsible behavior through our routine Space Operations. Dod works to ensure that our Space Operations are consistent with international measures, the United States supports and with relevant domestic and international law including the law of conflict and inherent right of selfdefense. For example, not only are dod operations fully consistent with the 2007 Space Debris mitigation guidelines of the united Nations Committee of peaceful use of outer space. Dod practices serve as a source of the more rigorous standards adopted in the November 2019 United States Government orbittable debris standard practices. Likewise for 10 years, the department of defense provided one of the lead u. S. Delegates to negotiations on the committee on the peaceful uses of outer space that reduced the 2019 guidelines for the longterm sustainability of outer space activities. This participation ensured consistency with Dod Practices and greatly facilitated implementation of these guidelines. Most recently, dod has supported the drafting of the United States national Submission And Response to the 2020 united nations general Assembly Resolution on reducing space threats through norms, rules and principles of responsible behaviors. From the dod perspective, united States Leadership and the development of a rulesbased order for space activities, reaps benefit for u. S. Civil, commercial, scientific an National Security space operators. Space activities worldwide become more prolific, voluntary, nonbinding international norm, standards and guidelines and responsible behavior can benefit u. S. National security and foster a conducive environment for growing global space activities. Thank you for your time and attention. I look forward to your questions. Thank you very much. Mr. Hill. I ask members please mute your microphones. Theres still some Background Noise. Now well hear from General Whiting. Chairman cooper, Chairman Castro and distinguished members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today in my capacity as commander, space Operations Command on the u. S. Space force perspectives towards creating a framework for rulesbased Space Order in space. Im honored to join mr. Hill and mr. Turner and moore whos leadership and insights greatly contribute toward ensuring the safety, security, stability and longterm sustainability of u. S. Space activities. I have the distinct privilege to lead and represent guardians and airmen of space Operations Command providing combat ready, cybersecure Space And Combat support forces to the joint force. It is from the perspective of our role to generate, present and sustain these forces that i testify here before you today. We accomplished this mission through our headquarters generate present and sustain tasks along with spock west, a headquarters we strength in california who plan, integrate and assess global Space Operations. Our Mission Execution benefits from Experience Operating in Space While demonstrate, safe, professional and responsible behavior. In fact, given our imperative to help keep the domain safe, our command in partnership with what was our Combatant Command at the time u. S. Strategic Command And Today as u. S. Space command, has for years with the support of congress, been providing orbittable assessments around the globe. While also making available spacetrack. Org to foster Openness And Transparency in tracking tens of thousands of objects on orbit. As more actors come to space, the domain is changing with increased risk of collisions as well as miscalculations or misunderstandings. It is incumbent on the department to continue Space Leadership to lead responsible behavior in space. Today, we support the shift of nonmilitary Space Traffic Management to the department of commerce, thus allowing the department of defense to focus on directed military functions in our protect and defend mission. Nevertheless, the u. S. Space force will collaborate with the department of commerce by analysessing specific behaviors to ensure, safe, professional and sustainable operations on orbit by enhancing trust with allies and establishing new bonds. However, we have long understood that our nation is strongest economically, militarily and diplomatically when we have freedom of operation. It is the position of the u. S. Space force that the voluntary, nonlegally binding Transparency And Confidence building measures, guidelines and norms on responsible behavior to include and understanding what constitutes safe and professional conduct would be immensely helpful toward our mission to protect the u. S. And allies in from and to space. In conference with secretary of State Leadership to establish norms the u. S. Space force provides department of defense a capability to both model that behavior and promote internationally accepted standards. I thank you for your support. I look forward to working with congress as we continue to transform our National Security space posture. Im privileged to be here with my distinguished colleagues and look forward to your questions. Thank you so much. Now well here from mr. Moore. Thank you very much chairman cooper. Distinguished members of the subcommittees. Im very honored to join you and my colleagues from the pentagon Space Command to discuss american leadership in outer space. You have my full written testimony, which i would ask you submit for the record and ill keep my remarks to less than five minutes. Without objection, so ordered. Thank you. Thank you very much for the impressive senior bipartisan interest in this vastly important issue. As we all know, in many of you noted, human activity in outer space is changing rapidly and both interest and importance to the american people. In 1990, only about 20 countries were active in Space Today its more than 70. The United States leads the world in new Commercial Space ventures. For the first time in a decade, this is a tremendous and inspiring success, thanks to the private sector, americans are traveling to the special Face Station on american made Space Launch vehicles. It depends on international engagement and therefore, depends on diplomacy. The bureau of oceans and international environmental scientific affairs with the bureau Arms Controls compliance, conducts efforts tone sure that the behavior across all space sectors is consistent with u. S. Policy and practice as well as with the 1967 outer Space Treaty and associated conventions and agreements. The Bidenharris Administration has charged us to explore and use outer space to the benefit of humanity and ensure the Safety Stability and security of our outer space activities. This includes leveling the globally playing field for the american space industry. We work directly with partners and for u. N. Body and other multilateral euphoria for the principles. For over 60 years, we have worked through those organizations to build support for the united States Space policies as well as for our vision to expand human presence in space and promote responsible use of space. As Chairman Castro noted in february, the biden administration endorsed Nasas Artemis Program and ambitious effort to land first woman and first person of color on the moon. And establish longterm human presence there as well as develop and demonstrate new technologies, capabilities and business approaches needed Perfume Exploration activities and go on to mars. Decades ago, the Apollo Mission galvanized world attention. The cost was born by the american taxpayer. Now with international partners and private industry, we share both the burden and the rewards. The artemis accords created by the department of state and nasa are this Generations Recommitment to the principles of the outer Space Treaty and envisioning safe and transparent environment which facilitate exploration in space. There will be major geopolitical challenges as other countries advance their own Space Exploration objectives. Some countries will work with us. Others will not. Our bureau keeps a close eye on russian and chinese space activities. Together with the interagency, we engage directly with them on Space Flight Safety and responsible behavior while countering actions with those principles. U. S. Cooperation with russia is based on a governmental agreement on cooperation in the Exploration And Use of outer space for peaceful purposes which was recently extended through december 31, 2030. This arrangement provided a Leem Framework for cooperation, on the international Space Station and limited Space Science in robotics Space Exploration. With china, we maintained variety of means to understand their Space Science and exploration programs and encourage beneficial open exchange of scientific data from civil space missions. American diplomatic leadership is establishing norms of behavior based on United States people and practice. Advancing peaceful norms and responsible behaviors in outer space is critical to protecting american National Security, commercial and research interests. The department of state in coordination with the interagency and national Space Council as well as with congress will continue to utilize multilateral venues such as artemis accords responsible behavior in outer space and Space Exploration. Thank you again for inviting us to testify. I welcome your questions. Thank you very much mr. Moore. Now mr. Turner. Chairman castro and chairman cooper. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today on the rulesbased Space Order. Im grateful for the opportunity to testify along john hill, lieutenant general Stephen Whiting and Jonathan Moore. Like others, i have submitted a longer statement for the record. It is incredibly appropriate that we are meeting on may 5th, 60th anniversary of freedom seven. This flight was the first step that gradually led to american astronauts orbiting the earth, landing on the moon and traveling in continuous orbit around our planet. This flight took place in a time when there were only two countries placing satellite and human in orbit. The development and implementation of Arms Control agreements is one of the main concerns of the State Departments bureau of Arms Control Verification And Compliance known as acc. In that capacity, we are leading effort for the development and implementation of voluntary, nonlegally binding measures to enhance the Safety And Security of outer space. In general, consistent with longstanding bipartisan policy as reflected in the 2020 national Space Policy, the United States will consider proposals and concepts for Arms Control measures if they are equitable, effectively verifiable and enhance the National Security of the United States and its allies. Unfortunately, for many years, the international community has been focused on a number of flawed, legally binding Arms Control proposals including most recently the 2014 chinese Graft Treaty on weapons outer Space And Threat or use of force against outer space objects known as ppwt. The Draft Ppwt fails to test laid out in the u. S. National Space Policy. By promoting a framework for responsible behavior and outer space including the pursuit and effective implementation of best practices, standards and norms of behavior. President biden 2021 interim strategic National Security guidance also affirms that the United States will lead in promoting shared norms and forging new agreements outer space. The United States believes that the development and implementation of norms and behavior can reduce risk of interNational Security and stability through increasing predictability. Contributing to the prevention of conflict. That is why in 2020, the United States worked with our close allies to advance a new united nations general Assembly Resolution. We believe this resolution can serve as the first step of a process to describe the threats to space systems to develop ideas and to consider the establishment of channels direct communications to managed perceptions. As such, it provides a pragmatic, alternative to flawed russian and chinese armed control approaches in the resolution was adopted by the uncle general u. N. General assembly with 164 for and 12 against. Russia, iran, syria, north korea, cuba and venezuela. May 3, 2021, pursuant to the resolutions for proposed next steps to pick s departments in our government views of u. S. Security general. For many years the international community has been focused on flawed legally binding space Arms Control proposals at a time when the outer Space Environment has grown no complexity and contested. It is time for a new approach primarily focused for now upon voluntary, nonlegally binding norms, rule and principles of responsible behavior in space. Developing and implementing these measures can help create a safer more stable and predictable Space Environment for all space actors. Thank you very much. I look forward to the committees questions. Thank you very much. I would like to thank all the witnesses. Now well turn to member questions. I will begin with myself. I only have two questions. I would encourage all members to keep this brief as possible. We have a large number of members on the webex call. First question, you ended your statement with voluntary nonlegally binding. It Steam Weve given up on idea of rope or punishment. Is that the best we can do . Is that a way to get people to be in a more cooperative frame of mind . Do we need more than that . Thank you for that question. I think we are trying to make the best out of what is possible at this given moment in time. We do not exclude the possibility. Thank you. Thank you, my next will be for General Whiting. We talked about transferring Space Traffic Management out of the Air Force for some time. It seem to have taken years. Im hopeful that the Space Force will be done on a more timely basis. I dont want space nations turn to other nations for their clear guidance on a possible collisions might take place. How quickly can we get the department of commerce to pick up this ball and run with it . Mr. Chairman, thank you for that question. We are eager to work with the department of commerce. We found them to be an organization that is eager to take this work on. Were working diligently to do that we do care deeply about the Safety And Security of the domain. My understanding is now that they received resources to work toward this goal. We are working with them over the next couple of years to transfer that work. They have been partnered with us at our Operating Location such as vanderburgh Air Force base. I cant speak to what their timeline is. Were eager to get this transferred in the next couple of years. Thank you very much. Thank you mr. Chairman. Mr. Hill. Excuse me, mr. Whiting. Has space been weaponized by countries like China And Russia. What you do make of satellites that reportedly shadow other satellites . We have seen weaponization of space from China And Russia. If we point back to 2007, the Inflection Point in the 21st century, from the fall of the Berlin Wall and the disillusion will of the soviet union around 1990, until 2007, many of those threats that had come up in space in the cold war have gone fallow. In 2007 we saw chinese conduct very irresponsible test. We still have thousands pieces of debris on orbit. Thats about 10 of the total amount of objects that we track on orbit from that test 14 years ago. We continue to see the chinese building satellited like the chinese seattle with a robotic arm. We know they have multiple Ground Laser systems which could blind or damage our Seattle E systems. Russia has lasers that could jam or blind our satellites. Its probably theyll fill more later this decade. We know the russians have probably Prototype Satellite weapons including cosmos 2519 which birthed out inspector satellite. Weve seen a subsequent second object come out of that cosmos 2519. We believe that second object is a projectile. We saw cosmos 2542 which was a similar prototype weapon. Which was synchronized in the orbit with the united States Government satellite. When united States Government moved our satellite the russian cosmos 2542 resynchronized its orbit. They must have known what they were doing. Obviously we dont not support Weapons Test near air satellites. Finally, russia has a groundbased missile designed to destroy satellites in lower earth orbit. Even with the weaponization of space, we do not want a war to extend in space. We want to do everything possible to deter that. Thank you. I appreciate that General Whiting. Mr. Turner, i will finish with you. In late 2019, weve already touched on this. Russia launched a satellite that deployed a subsatellite that proceed to synchronize its orbit with the u. S. Government satellite. Its not the first time the russians have done this. Had the russians been told that this behavior is unacceptable. If so what was their response . Sorry it took me a second to turn the Sound Button on. Yes, we have met with the russians with these issues. Most of the discussions we have are less than satisfactory. Sometimes the russians do not want to acknowledge that certain activities are taking place. We have done our best to bring experts, our military and diplomatic experts to some meetings to discuss these issues. Finally, have there been any other international discussions with the russians and chinese or others defining standards of behavior for erendezvous in proximity operations . Not to my knowledge. As we were saying, all of us in our statements, we are just at the beginning of this process to define what some of these norms of behavior are which we hope define such things as how much space to loop between bodies out in space and how one might approach them. There will be communications and notifications and number of things like that. We are just at the beginning of this process now. No direct communications with the chinese on this . Even though theres been some preliminary discussions with the russianings . Russian us russians . Our dod colleagues would have a better pick on that question. General whiting, very quickly. My timing is almost gone. Mr. Congressman, im not aware of any discussions with the chinese. I would defer to mr. Hill. Congressman, we do not in the Defense Department have direct engagements with china regarding space. Theres some clear statutory limit addition limitations interaction with china. I apologize. This is jonathan, i have a bit more answer for the ranking member if i may offer it mr. Chairman. Okay. Go ahead. We do engage with china on outer space through both bilateral and multilateral channels. Our goal is to ensure Space Flight Safety. Weve been working to try to encourage china to improve communicates between satellite operators to avoid collisions in orbit. An example of this weve been coordinating with china to ensure their Navigation Satellite System does not cause interference with our gps satellites. Were trying to encourage and interoperability for civil users. We do expect them to follow it norms and standards. We have been clear with them about that as has been referred to in different context. The results has not been consistent or satisfactory. Thank you. Now, Chairman Castro . Thank you chairman. I have a question about the artemis accords for the panel. Artemis accords negotiated by the last administration and enendorsed by the biden administration represent norms and behavior in space and bringing allies and partners to work with us on the return to the moon. Its also the first time since the apollo programs or new Administration Pain taken the goals of the previous administration. Are the accords intended to exceed preexisting agreements and treaties in practicality, what is the binding effect of these accords for their signatories . What role will the artemis accords play for establishing norms for behavior in space . Finally, so far nine countries have signed the artemis accords including canada, the, u. K. , australia and japan. What steps the administration is taking to expand the accords . Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for that question. What we first started working with our colleagues in nasa on the concept of the artemis accords. There was discussion about making them legally binding. As that discussion continued with our space partners it became clear that legally binding arrangements would require ratification and it could take a long time to negotiate. The artemis accords instead as previously drawn up endorsed by the Bidenharris Administration, are not legally binding. They are mutual statements of values and vision for cooperation in space. With regard to who signed on to the artemis accords, youre right, nine country have signed on to them so far. We are engaged in active discussions with number other countries that are interested in signing on throughout the world. This is a project that affects continent. Many countries whether they are longterm allies or new friends and partners are very interested in joining us in a transparent effort to set values and standards in space. All right. Anyone else . I yield back. Thank you chairman. Thank you very much. I have a more general question. Im curious to know how it State Department and the department of Defense Coordinate on Space Related Activities particularly when it relates to our partners, allies and adversaries. I was looking for more insight. I dont mind starting this ball rolling. The State Department has the lead role in basically in foreign policy outreach. In the case of the a. B. C. Bureau, were active in number of multilateral organizations. We have to do that competitively with others for instance in the u. N. Framework or conference on disarmament or any number of other euphoria. We have regular consultations with our nato allies with our asian allies. This is what our job is basically about. Is to go around and talk to people and build support for the way we want to do things. United states is very fortunate to have a very broad network of allies which allows us to leverage our efforts and multiply them in a way that is generally not available to countries such as Russia And China. That is where the United States has an distinct advantage. Thats where summiting consulting with our allies and building support for everything we do is one of the most effective ways that the United States can achieve the kinds of goals that weve been talking about today. Of course, every step we take is even though we may have the lead on the foreign policy issues, only other thing is that all of these activities, especially involving Arms Control and some of these issues, security issues are what we do is a result of very intensive Interagency Process that brings all the different players intelligence community, joint staffs, o. S. D. , etcetera. Nasa, depending on what is being discussed and what is at stake. Its quite an intensive process. Department of Defense End . Yes. Ill be glad to give you some concrete examples of how dod were supporting State Department in these cases because talking here about diplomacy of the nation and State Department lead. For example, mr. Turner mentioned the talks, the civil space talks that his office has with china. We will provide a dod technical expert to support him. Of course, the department of defense operates the global positioning system. We will provide that technical expert to support talks related to Spectrum And Deconfliction in that respect. Other example will be last summer, the United States and russia met in vienna in the context of Space Security Exchange there. This was related to some other talks that were going on. State department organized it. Department of defense was there from the operational side. I participated from the policy side. We were able to present Defense Perspectives and diplomatic perspectives relative to the Position Russia was taking and some of the russian behavior that i find problematic. The united Kingdom Resolution that are carrying forward was something that was good for the National Security, from our perspective here as well as good for the broader perspective so they represent a Cross Reference of the government. Im running out of time, but just curious, Russia And China announcing a Research Station on the moon, and any concerns about it . We will keep a close eye on that, thats probably the most i can comment at this point. Thank you. The gentleladys time has almost expired. I yield back. Thank you. Question for the next four members will be thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to thank our witness for testifying today. Several think tanks have already noted that cyber, electromagnetic spectrum and direct energy represent growing threats to space assets. To what extent regarding standards or responses for specific behaviors . Mr. Turner, master with you . In the report may i start with you . In the report we sent to the united nations, some of the issues we have listed a number of the different kinds of threats to space, and to date, there are no standards at all, the systems are being developed, there are no international rules to govern them. We had a whole section describing the kinds of threats that are out there, ground to space, space to space, round to ground, space to ground. We talked about radiofrequency transference, attacks on terrestrial Space Infrastructure , robotics, etc. We are at the stage of the process where we are identifying the kind of threats that are out there and eventually this will lead to principles of behavior for how nations should behave but there are no formal agreements covering a number of these issues. You are on mute, i think. Bruce Turner Steam and abc focuses more on the Security Side and we focus more on the civilian side of trying to get certain standards and enforce u. S. Interest. So i apologize, i do not have more for you on that. Let me ask you this. With respect to cyber, i would be curious to hear what would you support designating space is a critical Infrastructure Sector . Dhs is currently doing professionally mandated review uncritical Infrastructure Sectors. I can step in here briefly, first, i would like to clean up something i said previously. I referenced the civil talks, its mr. Moores office, not mr. Turners office. With respect to the critical Infrastructure Question, my understanding is that space has been included as a critical infrastructure in the Home And Security context. I wasnt aware of that designation but will take that one and double check on it. I think it certainly should be critical infrastructure. You have to at ackley monitor adequately monitor to enforce responsible behavior. How would you assess our Space Situation and attribution capabilities . Are there other thoughts on designating space critical infrastructure . Congressman, if i may offer, that is worth taking a more deeper look at. Im not certain there is a designated critical Infrastructure Sector. Obviously cybersecurity security is of paramount interest to the biden administration and many of us at the State Department are working on that. In terms of space as a critical Infrastructure Sector, we would have to review that and get back to you. Fair enough. I see my time is about to expire. Anything from the other witnesses uncritical infrastructure . Nothing on the critical infrastructure peace, but if you like i will talk about Space Domain Awareness capabilities. We have the best in the world, and thats why we make available so much of that information to promote a stable and secure space domain. We need to improve that Domain Awareness capability so we can help to know when any future norms are being violated and certainly from our perspective, watch for threats and give good indications and warning of potential bad actors in space. The gentlemens time has expired. Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much for coordinating this very important joint hearing. Additionally, i would like to thank the four witnesses, each one of you have come across as very impressive and your service to our country is very much appreciated. In terms of questions, general, what progress has been made in operationalizing our international space partnerships through the combined space Operations Center . Thank you for that question. We made some substantial progress, we now have allied personnel across many of our formations to include the space Operations Center at annenberg. There is operation olympic defender, which some of those countries have signed up to, which means we operate day in space with them. We work with national military Space Operation centers on a daily basis. That unique pairing of countries that we are blessed to have is an advantage for the United States and we are excited about that progress. I share your view about being blessed. What are the leading countries that are cooperating . Canada, the united kingdom, australia and others. Again, best wishes on that. Expanding commercial Space Infrastructure is uniquely american solution to increasing our capability of resilience. I am impressed with the ingenuity of the private sector to augment Government Efforts to keep space accessible and stable. What is the appropriate level of Government Oversight necessary to ensure congressional entities are well integrated into a comprehensive Space Framework . How should the administration incorporate them into a future Dispute Defense Space strategy . Thank you, congressman wilson. On the Commercial Space, with respect to your question, kind of touched on regulation in one respect. There was a major overhaul of remotesensing regulation that took class took place in the pasture which dod work closely to bring us out of the 2006 era of old regulations into the 2020 era where we have much more prolific commercial capabilities and we need to let that competitive sector compete around the world. The Defense Department benefits from having that strong commercial sector. So big change in the philosophy there. We also leveraged u. S. Commercial Space Launches off of commercial Launch Service providers, for example theres the growing commercial Space Situational awareness capabilities that we interlink with our own capabilities and so depending on the sector, there are some areas where commercial doesnt find a great market so we have to work up an investment. Other places like satellite communications, a tremendous opportunity to leverage commercially. Its exciting to see the mutual benefit. The june 2020 Defense Space Strategy include several lines of effort, one of which is to better inform international and public audiences to the growing adversarial threat in space. What can congress do to ensure that our constituents understand the benefit of an accessible and stable space . Sorry, sometimes i forget to unmute. Todays hearing is one such step, i think. Presumably others beside all of us can hear whats going on. I think americans need to be made aware of how much they actually depend on space not only for their security but also for their prosperity. We do a certain amount of outreach as well. Of course i think one of the things that insurers our best efforts insist have been space have been supported by bipartisan consensus in congress. The old saying that domestic policy ends on americas shores, it also needs to end where we start to leave the atmosphere and enter outer space. I will leave it at that for right now. Thank you very much. Chairman cooper is leading the bipartisanship. I yelled back. Mr. Garamendi, are you still with us . If not, mr. Issa, are you still with us . Im with you. Thank you. I think i want to continue pretty much with the same line of questioning that weve been doing but i will change it up a little bit. General, i think maybe you can handle this as a joint representative. In the domains that we have operated on during your career, sea, land, air, we have international rules and conventions and they are broadly agreed to and signed in on by all the parties we mention here today. Would you say that is fair to say . Yes, sir, i would. And as we sit here today, today, tomorrow, certainly last week and in the next three weeks, we will have iranian gunboats that will enter our space and engage our ships. We may or may not have another tanking of our maritime folks, and china is building islands in complete violation of right of ways for countries throughout that region, is beginning to encroach or to allow people to have what has been hundreds of years of free travel. Would you say that as we look to space, is there any special reason not to believe that all the factors that affect air, land, and see around our hemisphere, that any of those will be significant lee different . Can we not expect at least similar activities as we have similar bad actors, or the same bad actors who are already in space, such as China And Russia . Thank you for the question. Certainly i think those analogies are useful, but if we push them too far, there is sovereign maritime space, there is sovereign airspace. There is no sovereign Space Space in space. So there are some differences that we will work through, but we certainly believe in Space Force that the establishment of voluntary, not legally binding norms of responsible behavior will help us to identify when others are acting outside, when they are acting irresponsibly, much like if youre on the interstate and everyones following the rules, you can quicklys see those cars that are not safe and not following the rules. As a followup, and i do agree that there certainly sovereign space, but using the 2007 in which china demonstrated its ability to destroy a satellite in deep space, albeit its own, but for the purpose of showing us that there but for their good graces, that could have been one of our satellites, or a number of them. That activity certainly was outside of a reasonable interpretation of their sovereign right to ensure it certainly was irresponsible, with 3000 pieces of debris that we continue to track 14 years after the fact, i cannot imagine what led them to do that, and to continue to pollute the domain and put us all at risk. So the history of our planet being at relative peace for the last half of the last century was primarily through a combination of international agreements and a degree of enforcement that the United States and its allies, nato and others, enforced with a periodic enforcement by the united nations. So in the remaining time, if you could answer one of those great questions for all time, isnt it fair to say that we must come forward and establish those international rules, drawl in as many convention signers, including potential bad actors, as possible, but also form those alliances that would mimic in space if necessary the same sort of alliances that happen in fact relatively peaceful for the last 70 plus years . Dont we sort of have to do all of them . Also bill those alliances with the expectation that just as in the past, the future, there will be those who will not respect the very agreements they have signed . We have certainly seen nato recognize space as they were fighting domain in the last couple of years. Were seeing more Interest And Concern on space and i think that proves to our benefit because we can now coalesce around these norms of responsible behavior and as those begin to establish than our State Department colleagues can work further agreements down the road. Its only good to bring more allies and partners into these discussions. I yelled back. I yield back. You may have left the impression that so far theres not much that is sovereign in space. I would say that each individual nations capsules or astronauts are in fact sovereign entities, even though they are traveling through space. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I was referring to the physical space not to manmade objects. Thank you for that clarification. I stepped away for a moment. Clearly we have a situation in which on the military side of it, space is a domain for war, and unfortunately, not just the United States, china, and russia, others are rapidly militarizing space with the anticipation that there could be trouble in the future. It happens to create an extraordinary risk when all of our countries are dependent on space for early knowledge of what the other may be doing. Im going to leave that aside, mr. Issa went into some detail. I want to deal with the commercial side of it. We are seeing a very rapid evolution of commercial activity in space, for many different reasons. Almost so that our military no longer depend solely on itself for highly detailed knowledge of whats going on in the world. Norms on the commercial side of the activity, when you putting aside the military side for i suspect the norm is equally as strong as the end of the process when we will all be dead. Lets go with dod, what is your interest in the commercial, and then to the other two witnesses and the State Department. Congressman, very much interested in that. An example of dod and the commercial communities working with respect to norms and sponsorship the research Projects Agency did, i forget the name of the acronym, but it described a body bringing together commercial people with government and to talk about Rhonda View and proximity operations. In figuring out what are the proper ways to do this, when you need permission. It is a User Community Interest group, and if you think back a long time in history, the international Telecommunications Community started out in that same way, a community of interest coming together. I think the khmer commercial community will probably be taking more of a lead in that. As a prime example when we partner with the commercial industry, how does the how does encourage stakeholders to take on take on the interest of the commons . Thank you very much. If i may jump in as well, just as has been mentioned earlier in the hearing today, or the difficulties we face is that of course with Russia And China, there really arent commercial activities, they are staterun, statesupported activities. And it comes to the United States where we have such amazing commercial partners like spacex and blue origin, without having to rely on russia, they operate at very high standards, and we support those standards. They help set the standards for the rest of the world and again, through our domestic working with those standards, other countries and their potential space operators are very interested in joining part of that process. One of the problems with the process is that there are over 90 countries in it and it does all of its work our consensus. Unless everyone agrees, nothing gets done. And it comes to Commercial Space operators, the u. S. Census standard and we are working bilaterally to make that the standard for the world. Thank you. Anybody else want to jump in on this . This is Bruce Turner again. Building on what Jonathan Moore just said, there are opportunities there of course when our commercial sector leads, we start to set these standards and they become the passing sanders for everyone. Then country such as Russia And China are maybe forced to deal with those standards as well and then would apply them to their own efforts. That again is one of the advantages of developing these systems of norms. It seems to me that on the military side, we are not going to get very far. On the commercial side, building on what mr. Issa said about allies on the military side, to develop a commercial set of standards that allow the others to join would be very fruitful. Mr. Cooper, i yield back. The gentlemans time has expired. The next four questioners will be mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I want to continue on the consistent theme throughout this hearing which is on effective enforcement. Without effective enforcement, rules and norms obviously do nothing to impede Malign Activity by our adversaries. Let me be clear, im not suggesting a rulesbased order in space is not a goal we are ensuring, but i want to ensure its not an empty gesture. What happens when they violate norms in space . We see the issue in cyberspace. We have those who will hacking without fear of retribution. What are the real consequences of setting down rules that are then going to be it nor . How do we actually respond and deal with this more effectively . Those are some very good questions. Its always a complicated situation. Whether youre about politically binding commitments in other areas. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. The advantage of a treaty is it is a legal obligation. You could argue that a violation is more straightforward, if youve ever worked with the law your you know that one of the things you get into is difficult and complicated interpretations of what a treaty actually says. That can also be a very long process. One of the advantages of, just because it is a legally binding norm does not mean it is not a norm and it doesnt mean you cannot call somebody out for violating that norm, or that you cannot take potential action if an actor is not complying with the norm. In some cases you may even have more flexibility to react in those kind of situations precisely because it is not a legally binding agreement. Lastly i would just add that all of these kinds of norms, even when certain actors violate those norms, they often pay a price for doing so. Todays social media environment, whatever you want to call it, so much depends on the narrative, who is doing the right thing and who is not doing the right thing, and that can still be useful to put diplomatic and public pressure on malign actors. Im one of the few members of congress who is not a lawyer, but it seems to me this has to be made a lot more clear and we are hoping that one of our adversaries being shamed on social media does not seem like an effective strategy. General, question for you on this same theme. A rulesbased order in any domain requires a certain level of transparency and trust. I understand theres a current effort to review potential declassification of satellite and activities to be more transparent to publicly communicate about our operation more easily. Hellyer it how are you in a grade with this effort to ensure that we have transparency to allow for verification of our own behavior, while still protecting activity that we are not prepared to share . Thank you for that question. Certainly i would say that we are the most transparent country when it comes to our activities in space, through the website i mentioned earlier, space tracked outdoor, that we make available to the world and that we care about preserving the domain for longterm operation separately we have had an effort on going for the last several years to continually even make more information available, just like in other domains we will not show exactly where our ships and airplanes are if i can interrupt, do you think we have that Balance Right , or we still on the side of too much of it being classified for the transparency we need to promote enforcement . We are crossly working to get that balance exactly right. We made important strides and will continue to do those reviews to make as possible to as many people as possible to ensure that domain is safe. Thank you, I8 Yield back. I yield back. Calling mr. Waltz. Mr. Carbajal . Here i am. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I apologize for the technical difficulties i was having. Obviously Debris Mitigation needs to be addressed. Space forces tracking about 30,000 pieces of debris with others too small to track. The guidelines of the united Nations Committee was endorsed by the united nations General Assembly in 2007. Rand recently reported the voluntary guidelines lack measures for accountability and that compliance with degree Debris Mitigation guidelines, the biggest contributor to collision risk. Based on the current levels of Space Debris and voluntary international policy, will there be a point where there will be an unacceptable risk of Space Debris thank you for the question. I want to communicate that we are concerned about the growing congestion in space, but i think certainly over the next several years, we have plans in process in place to make sure we can continue to safely operate, but we do support intergovernmental measures that will reduce debris and i will defer to my colleague to speak more about what the department is doing. In 2019, the united States Government updated our orbital Debris Mitigation standard practices that go well beyond what the united nations practices are and in fact, they drew from a lot of department of defense and existing regulations , providing much clearer statements of the hazard risks, more options for how to get debris out of orbit, particularly from higher orbits, and over time, but there absolutely is the general said there is concern, where things get crowded in some of the polar orbits in particular, but degree emit accurate Debris Mitigation is important. In some places, active Debris Removal is encouraging, but there is a lot of work to be done in this respect. Thank you very much. General whiting, in your testimony you write that more often than not, there is an agreement on what constitutes responsible behavior. The desire to callout irresponsible behavior what has been the biggest barrier to moving forward with an internationally accepted framework . Each of the countries we have discussions with, and these are allied countries, they all have their legal frameworks and policy traditions. We work through those in forums like the wargames exercise we conduct every year. Through that we find there is a coalescing around some generally accepted ways of operating that are responsible, safe, and professional. We think through dialogue we can work through those issues. Commercial companies are heavily investing in Satellite And Lawn services. Companies are developing dual use. As a government engaging with political actors and can you comment on how dual technology is being considered . I would defer to my colleague from oes on the commercial aspect of that, but from a security standpoint, this is one of the issues with developing behavior and one of the issues talking about we are acutely aware of the fact that a number of things can either have benefits or can potentially be used against satellites. So its one of those issues that needs to be talked about and again while we are in favor in favor of the sorts of things. Bruce touched exactly on some of the aspects of dual use. We are very much trying to support the development of the commercial sector, and again, this is a place for companies in the United States are setting leading the way in setting the standard, helping to return us to iss so we are not dependent on other countries for that. As part of the broader efforts to build partnerships and to share values and vision on space , we are again very grateful for the strong endorsement of this administration for those goals. That is part of the discussion with the commercial sector. Thank you much. Im out of time and i yield back. Mr. Brooks was next and he has logged off. Thank you for holding this important hearing. I am very thankful for the expertise from all the panelists today. I do my Reserve Duty at the Air Force base and im thrilled that the United States has chosen to locate space systems command, one of three under the Space Force at the Los Angeles Air Force base and with every passing day, space becomes more important. I also want to clarify the critical Infrastructure Question that was asked earlier. Theres approximately 16 critical Infrastructure Sectors, the chemical sector, communications, energy. Space is not one of them. However, if there is a Space Communication Satellite that would be captured within the communication sector, to alleviate confusion, im working on legislation that would designate space as a critical Infrastructure Sector. That goes in line with other administrations. First of all, a note that your title includes doesnt include space anywhere in it. The department of defense that created an entire Space Force dedicated just to space, do you think it is a good idea, or should we elevate space to standalone . Thank you very much for your service in uniform and in the house of representatives. Thank you for an excellent question. Please to tell you that across the list of endeavors, we have nine action offices, one is the office of space affairs. It is staffed by number of diplomats and professional experts with advanced degrees, including an astrophysicist, that core needs diplomatic efforts on space in lockstep with in, Space Command, with nasa, and congratulation to Administrator Nelson on his recent confirmation. We have a very distinguished team the Word Space may not appear in our title, but it has a fairly long name as it stands. I can assure you that space is front and center and for all these reasons, we are grateful for the opportunity to testify today in response not just your Questions Today as we have done in the past, and with many offices in congress, to help explain and gain Information And Guidance for you. My next question goes to General Whiting, thank you for your service as well. We have currently other countries such as China And Russia, and china has done antisatellite Weapons Test. So we can have two possibilities. Either we allow all countries to do antisatellite Weapons Testing, or we allowed no countries too. Do you have any preference for that from a Defense Perspective . Should the usb allowed to do antisatellite test, or should other countries be allowed to do that . From my perspective, the real danger with those tests, are the longlived debris, like the chinese debris that we continue to have to operate around today. We do absolutely want to establish a norm that no actions in space, no Countries Action in space should create longlived debris. I would defer to mr. Hill on questions of legality guarding those tests. To pick up from what General Whiting just said, in terms of tests, you are correct, there is no Prohibition Today on antisatellite tests. There is quite a bit of scorn to be earned, as china earned in 2007 with their tests, the question though, if you were to try and prohibit weapons is, what is the definition of a weapon, and what of the systems which are so inherently dual use lasers to be used for communication, it lasers to be used as weapons, and it goes on from there. So its the practicality, the Verifiability And Enforceability of that. So what we really have to focus on in the long run is reducing the benefits that people might seek to derive from deploying capabilities as weapons. That goes to resilience and to Mission Assurance, which is a longer topic. Thank you. I yield back. I did not know that mr. Moore was so multilingual, so congratulations. Mr. Walz is back. Thank you, everyone. Mr. Hill, as an ost alum, its great to see you in this capacity. It has been a long time. When i asked you about thinking through how we establish deterrence in space, as many of you have said and many of my colleagues have said, our entire modern economy could be greatly adversely impacted should some of these assets be taken down. We are seeing the chinese in particular increase their alliance, as by due come of their Gps System comes online, their military increasingly projects and is becoming increasingly dependent. How do we establish deterrence in space . I know the Vice Chairman is working on a declassification effort, but i want them to know what we can do and what we cant do and what we are willing to do , as a deterrent measure. What efforts are there along those lines . Anyone can feel free to answer. It is good to see you again. Deterrence in space, we spent quite a bit of focus on this. As i started to mention in my previous response, for a nation that is highly dependent on space, both inner civil life, our daily commercial live, private lives as well as in our military life, it is fundamentally important to have reliability, Mission Assurance of capabilities at a level commensurate to the level we rely on those capabilities. That was the case when we didnt have adversary threats in space. You had to design for the natural Environment And Jamming and you did that. But as these more modern, conventional threats have emerge, we have as they had to transition, and this goes back to commercial points earlier. Leveraging information coming out of the sector at significant cost reductions that we see in both Launch And Space capabilities themselves allows us to do entirely different architectural approaches. You openly transition architectures, as in any other domain you have the ability to combat casualties. With respect to the Cost And Position side of things, thats where you may be looking across the main types of up activities. What are we communicating that we are willing and capable to do . Thats how misjudgments, miscalculations happen. To your State Department colleagues, what are we communicating now in terms of our capability and our will . One of the reasons we had a meeting in july with the russians was to communicate clearly to them the kinds of concerns that we have about things they are doing. For the same reason the biden administration is interested in beginning dialogue with the russians that will cover nuclear and other issues as well, the whole point is to explain clearly to them what our concerns are, what we do not want them to do and to try to iron out some of these rules of the road so they know exactly what kinds of risks they are taking as they engage in certain types of behavior. One of the things im concerned about is our nuclear Command And Control systems. Were talking about standards in terms of how close you can get, what types of activities you can do, now that other countries are open geosynchronous, i think we need to be very clear on our end and also make it clear on therein so we dont have those kind of catastrophic miscommunications. I time has expired, and i yield. Thank you. We have completed i think the first round of questioning, and i was going to cut it off. Weve been in the session for about an hour and 45 minutes. Are there any members who have a final question they would like to ask . If not, then i want to thank the witnesses for their excellent testimony. I thank the members are showing up and posing subsequent questions. I want to thank the staff for assembling all this. Its hard to have a remote hearing, but this went very well. It is certainly an important and possibly historic hearing that we had today to get these efforts underway. So thank you for being part of this historic effort. The hearing is now adjourned with the chairmans permission. Absolutely, thank you, everyone. Thursday, the Commerce Secretary testifies before house Appropriations Subcommittee on president bidens fiscal year 2022 budget request. Watch live at 2 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan, online at cspan. Org, or listen with the free cspan radio app. Press Secretary Jen Psaki was joined by Agriculture Secretary Tom vilsack. He addressed Food Insecurity provisions in the american Families Plan and providing aid to farmers. Hi, everyone