The EU Space Act: a call for true strategic fairness

Before we start, a caveat: The following opinion is only relevant in a situation where the EU, together with its member states, would eventually decide to invest enough to equip itself with space capabilities commensurate with Europe’s economic importance, the role it wants to play in the world and current security threats (meaning: significantly more than what is invested today, and in a significantly more coherent manner). In short, there is no need to regulate the sector with an EU Space Act if we do not invest more and better at the same time.

In this sense, the European space industry believes that the proposal for an EU Space Act could have been more ambitious and contribute to something bigger: Europe’s sovereignty. We cannot build autonomous nor competitive capabilities in space if our supply chains depend on non-European sources for critical systems or components, or if our sector is not resilient enough, as we have seen with the war against Ukraine. This Act proposed by the Commission should have been an opportunity to address real resilience issues, not just give lip service with regard to cybersecurity. Strategic autonomy starts with industrial autonomy: with suppliers, materials and technologies that are European, trusted, safe, secure and resilient.

That being said, today, with the proposed EU Space Act, we stand before a defining moment. A moment to decide whether Europe will shape its own destiny in space, or merely adapt to rules set elsewhere. The EU Space Act is a positive and necessary step. It recognizes that space safety, security and sustainability are essential for Europe’s future, from secure communications and navigation to climate monitoring and defence.

By providing a single, coherent framework, the act will contribute to prevent fragmentation of its internal market, ensuring that we have one Europe to ensure safety in space, not 27. And, beyond our borders, it gives us a stronger collective voice in the international arena, on debris mitigation, space traffic management and cybersecurity where Europe can lead by example and advance international collaboration for a safe, secure and sustainable use of space as a common good.

But to fulfil this promise, the act must truly protect European strategic autonomy and ensure a fair and level playing field.

Because there is a very real risk that the current text, through its derogations and equivalence provisions, could make EU operators subject to stricter requirements than their non-EU competitors. That cannot be the outcome of a law meant to defend Europe’s interests! Europe must not regulate itself into disadvantage.

That is why industry calls on the co-legislators to limit derogations (such as the one granted for small-sized enterprises), to consider the equivalence regime with extreme carefulness (as there are concerns that the level playing field intended for EU operators will truly apply at global level), and to uphold a genuine EU preference principle: giving priority to European launchers, European technologies, and European services. This is not protectionism. I’d call it “strategic fairness.”

Let us not forget: when non-United States operators seek access to the American market, they do face layers of regulation and we, manufacturers, do need to abide by ITAR rules when using U.S. components. Those are real, effective and strictly enforced safeguards, and no one accuses the U.S. of being protectionist for protecting its strategic interests.

Europe deserves the same confidence in its own rules, and the same commitment to its own industrial base.

Within the internal market, the act should also avoid creating new asymmetries. Safety and risk management rules must apply equally to all, because one unprotected or unsafe satellite can jeopardize hundreds of others. Proportionality, yes, depending on a transparent risk assessment of the nature and characteristics of the mission, not of the nature of the operator, and never at the expense of security.

At the same time, smaller companies must not be put at risk when navigating the future new compliance obligations; they need support, capacity-building and practical assistance so that regulatory ambition does not become a barrier to entry.

Let’s also speak about what industry fears most: complexity and duplication.

If the Space Act adds layers of bureaucracy, overlapping audits, obscure secondary legislation and parallel authorizations, it risks slowing down the very industry it seeks to empower. I must confess that, regarding the risk of “red tape,” some of the aspects of the Impact assessment leave us a bit perplexed and certainly not reassured.

The goal must be clear: simplify, standardize, coordinate; use what already works, the ECSS and ISO standards, build on the existing cyber-security legislative arsenal and the work already undertaken in the ESA framework rather than building parallel regimes. And please, do consult industry when drafting implementing acts.

Finally, we consider that the Space Act can become a catalyst for innovation, not only a “constraint.” It can open new markets, from in-orbit services to space situational awareness, where the Europe space sector already has capabilities. To unlock this potential, we need clear roles for public and private actors; public systems and commercial initiatives must complement, not compete.

We also welcome the ideas of R&D support and a European Space Label, provided the label remains voluntary, practical and backed by incentives.

In conclusion, in a world where, on the one hand, other space powers are aiming at full independence and even at dominance but, on the other hand, where more nations have ambitions in space, the Space Act is an opportunity for Europe to raise the bar and be a standard-setter. But this will happen if, and only if, it is implemented and updated to move at the speed of innovation and with the European industry as partners, not only as subjects.

Note: This article is adapted from a speech Olivier Lemaitre gave before a Hearing organized by Member of the European Parliament Elena Donazzan on the Space Act on November 13 in Brussels, Belgium.

Olivier Lemaitre is Eurospace Secretary General. A biologist by training and with a first career in nature conservation, Lemaitre got himself lost in space 20 years ago, first as part of the Belgian federal administration. He later joined the private sector with positions in Thales Alenia Space, as Head of EU Affairs and now Eurospace, where one of his main mission is to ensure that the association provides relevant information and recommendations to the decision-makers to help them make the best use of the capabilities and expertise of the European space Industry.

SpaceNews is committed to publishing our community’s diverse perspectives. Whether you’re an academic, executive, engineer or even just a concerned citizen of the cosmos, send your arguments and viewpoints to opinion@spacenews.com to be considered for publication online or in our next magazine. The perspectives shared in these opinion articles are solely those of the authors.