To be honest, some of the proposals are long overdue and need international agreement. There are more and more satellites up there and issues like frequency interference, space debris, and other problems associated with the explosion in space technology need to be addressed by the international community.
But as with everything this administration does, they go way beyond reasonable and enter the absurdly optimistic realm of trusting Russia and China to play by the rules without much in the way of verification.
Washington Times:
The administration has signaled that it is preparing to accept the European Union's draft Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities with minimal changes to the document. An administration interagency review concluded last month that the code of conduct - aimed at reducing the amount of space debris that could collide into satellites - would not damage U.S. national interests in space or limit research and development into classified programs.The United States and France are expected Tuesday to sign a bilateral agreement to share data on space debris.
Peter Marquez, who served as National Security Council director of space policy for President George W. Bush and for President Obama until Sept. 29, raised concerns about the U.S. strategy. He said it could lead other states to set limits on U.S. defenses in space.
"Implementation of the space strategy is going to be key. International norms could unintentionally limit U.S. deployment and development of satellites that track orbital debris and other satellites in space," he said.
"It leaves open the door also for the United States to be forced to disclose the nature of its intelligence collection activities and capabilities from orbit."
Rick Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center, said the strategy fails because it does not adequately account for the Chinese threat to U.S. satellites.
China is already far along in development of anti-satellite weapons, having tested a system already. It is thought the US and Russia have ground based laser systems that could blind a military satellite, although such a move would be tantamount to declaring war. The point isn't so much that it is a one sided agreement; the problem is that assumes the good intentions of all the signatories.
As with the START treaty, we give away too much and receive too little in return.
Hat Tip: Ed Lasky
Share