• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Benjamin Silverstein"
  ],
  "type": "commentary",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Carnegie Space Project"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "TIA",
  "programs": [
    "Technology and International Affairs"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Iran"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Technology"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Commentary

How Governments Should Address the Increasing Risks of Satellite Collision

Riskier launch operations may hasten the danger of orbital debris.

Link Copied
By Benjamin Silverstein
Published on Apr 11, 2022
Program mobile hero image

Program

Technology and International Affairs

The Technology and International Affairs Program develops insights to address the governance challenges and large-scale risks of new technologies. Our experts identify actionable best practices and incentives for industry and government leaders on artificial intelligence, cyber threats, cloud security, countering influence operations, reducing the risk of biotechnologies, and ensuring global digital inclusion.

Learn More

Growing interest in networks of thousands of satellites in low Earth orbit (LEO)—often called megaconstellations—has elevated concerns about the sustainability of human activities in outer space. State and private actors alike are interested in deploying megaconstellations in pursuit of advantages in commerce and interstate competition, despite the attendant risks of orbital overcrowding and collisions between spacecraft. In response, states should collaboratively enhance multinational space traffic coordination to reduce the chances of collision and curb the spread of debris in orbit.

Plummeting costs of manufacturing and launching satellites into orbit have prompted companies and governments to reconsider previously cost-prohibitive satellite network designs that provide global coverage. Moreover, faster mass production practices and more accessible launch services enable operators to replace broken satellites more rapidly. The financial risks of mission failure have declined, leading to riskier operations that may hasten the proliferation of orbital debris from failed or failing satellites.

Thus far, governments have been slow to adapt regulatory oversight practices to address risks specific to megaconstellations, let alone override deployments. Yet major government stakeholders are beginning to voice concerns about the risks stemming from tens of thousands of new satellites in LEO. Within the U.S. government, NASA recently expressed concerns about SpaceX’s plans for its Starlink megaconstellation. In a letter to the Federal Communications Commission, which has regulatory responsibility for commercial satellite launches, NASA outlined how more megaconstellations could significantly hamper access to Earth’s orbits and constrain space activities.

NASA’s letter is a notable indicator of shifting perceptions of the risks of megaconstellations. NASA and SpaceX signed a ten-year commitment in 2021 to coordinate collision avoidance maneuvering. Under this agreement, SpaceX took the onus for moving satellites in its Starlink megaconstellation out of NASA’s way to preclude instances in which both operators attempt to avoid a collision between their satellites and accidentally maneuver into one another. Just over a year into the agreement, it appears that NASA considers this type of ad hoc arrangement insufficient for supporting space safety.

Several nongovernmental observers share NASA’s concerns that current space governance mechanisms cannot manage risks related to megaconstellations. It is unlikely that the sources of risks in LEO will abate in the imminent future. More megaconstellation deployments, operated by actors from multiple countries with various motivations, necessitate better space traffic coordination. An orbital traffic management system capable of handling new megaconstellations will require states to hold both their domestic industry and each other accountable for collecting, sharing, and analyzing data on satellites in LEO.

Currently, most of the world relies on the U.S. Department of Defense to collect and analyze data on objects in LEO. The 18th Space Control Squadron alerts the owners of spacecraft when analyses indicate potential conjunctions. These warnings are often rendered meaningless by significant margins of error, blurring expectations about risk-reducing behaviors. Even when analyses precisely uncover an imminent conjunction, there is no threshold collision probability that absolutely warrants an avoidance maneuver, nor globally accepted rules for how, where, and when to move.

To address the looming spike in imprecise conjunction warnings stimulated by a boom in megaconstellations, states should share relevant data about satellites in addition to orbital elements. States can build on existing measures such as the Long-Term Sustainability Guidelines, agreed to by members of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, to foster cooperation on a centralized mechanism for data collection and conjunction analyses. Building on this foundation, states can establish and enforce rules about collision avoidance maneuvers. This would engender trust and transparency among state and commercial satellite operators alike.

The international community has arranged rules for terrestrial, maritime, and aeronautical collision avoidance. It is high time to establish similar rules for Earth’s orbits.

About the Author

Benjamin Silverstein

Former Research Analyst, Space Project

Benjamin Silverstein was a research analyst for the Space Project at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Benjamin Silverstein
Former Research Analyst, Space Project
TechnologyIran

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Europe Should Not Let Nuclear Nonproliferation Die

    Amid uncertainty caused by the Iran war, the global drive for nonproliferation has stalled. With Europe diplomatically marginalized and countries reassessing their nuclear options, efforts to curb the spread of nuclear weapons risk becoming irrelevant.

      • Jane Darby Menton

      Jane Darby Menton

  • Abstract image of China and AI
    Article
    China’s Pivot on Global AI

    Beijing’s AI diplomacy is pivoting from infrastructure and associated technical standards toward a more comprehensive effort aimed at recrafting global norms and institutions of AI governance.

      Arindrajit Basu

  • Visualization of technology and democracy intersection
    Article
    Realizing the Potential Gains of AI-Enabled Deliberative Democracy

    Democratic institutions currently lack the capacity needed to govern AI-augmented deliberation in ways that serve democratic imperatives.

      • Micah Weinberg headshot

      Micah Weinberg

  • Climate desalination plant Saudi Arabia
    Paper
    Ecological Statecraft in the Midst of War: Water, Regeneration, and the Future of Gulf Security

    The U.S.-Iran war has crossed a dangerous threshold: water infrastructure in the Gulf is now a target. Ecological statecraft is no longer peripheral to security, it's part of its foundations.

      • Ali Bin Shahid

      Olivia Lazard, Ali Bin Shahid

  • Commentary
    The Unresolved Challenges in U.S.–India Semiconductor Cooperation

    The U.S.–India semiconductor cooperation story is well-stocked with top-level strategic intent. What remains unresolved, however, are some underlying challenges that will determine whether the cooperation actually functions. Three such friction points stand out.

      Shruti Mittal

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.