France finally has a long -term spatial strategy

While the Bourget Fair is in full swing, Emmanuel Macron is preparing to unveil a French spatial strategy that traces the country’s trajectory until 2040. A return in force in an area that France had somewhat neglected in recent years, even though satellites have played a central role today: to understand climate change, but also to support military operations – as the war in Ukraine shows.

Faced with these upheavals, Prime Minister François Bayrou launched, last March, a mission entrusted to the General Secretariat of Defense and National Security (SGDSN), supposed to cover both civil and military aspects. Objective: to ensure that France “remains a leading power world” in the spatial field.

Habité flight, rise in power of China, war in Ukraine, technological dependence … To decipher the issues of this strategic turning point, the pilgrim questioned Raphaël Tavanti, co-author-with Arthur Sauzay- Space power: the alarm clock of Francepublished by the Montaigne Institute.

What should we expect from Emmanuel Macron’s announcements on the occasion of the Bourget show this Friday, June 20?

It is an unprecedented exercise for almost 15 years for France, which hitherto evolved without transversal strategy in terms of space. There was no guidance document from real inter -ministerial work. So far, the French strategy revolved between several documents and was very much embodied in certain occasional political statements, which has weakened the ability of the sector to orient itself according to clear lines. This absence questions all the more since the major spatial powers have it, like the United States or China, but also our loved ones, such as Germany and Italy.

Why does France decide to draw a national strategy now?

There are several emergencies for French space, in commercial matters in particular, but also of defense. The war in Ukraine upset the landscape. It revealed the capital importance of spatial data in armed conflicts. And above all, it has highlighted the danger that there is not to have autonomous capacities, especially in terms of intelligence and communication. And precisely, France like Europe, maintain a certain number of dependencies in the space field.

Concretely, how is space inviting on the battlefield?

In a very concrete, and on several levels. First, communications: the constellations in low orbit, like Starlink, allow ultra -fast connectivity, essential for new high intensity commitments. Admission

Even of some Ukrainian generals, the war could have been lost without this constellation. Then, the observation: satellites are today capable of producing military intelligence in large quantities, and in real time. And finally, navigation: satellite positioning allows precise guidance of men and weapons. If a high intensity conflict was to break out in Europe, France must be ready to cope with it, and have all the space tools that could allow its conduct.

What are the areas on which could be in trouble tomorrow in the event of an armed conflict?

Our greatest delay concerns the constellations in low orbit, a long under-investment area. Today, France and Europe are dependent on private companies, such as Starlink, which raises real questions in terms of sovereignty. This is not a major problem in peacetime, but it could be in case of conflict. In 2023, for example, the United States and Elon Musk blocked access to Starlink during a Ukrainian offensive which they considered risky.

France also does not have advanced alert satellites capable, by infrared, to detect the launch of missiles. These devices allow either to alert the civilian population or to activate defenses. Not France. However, this type of capacity becomes essential, with the proliferation of ballistic vectors as we see with the situation in Iran.

Does France still have the means to remain a great spatial power?

Yes, clearly. It is still a great power. It has a launch base (Kourou), efficient listening satellites, observation optical capacities, an effective ground network, and military telecommunications satellites like Syracuse. And above all, it is part of a construction that has proven its value: spatial Europe.

Is Europe really a spatial power?

Space Europe is, no doubt, one of the most manifest European successes. It produced great scientific successes. It has strong companies, such as Ariane, Thales, and Airbus. And it has long dominated commercially. But this dynamic is now in clear decline.

How to explain this decline?

It is a movement due to several factors. Europe was a leader in geostationary satellites. However, their use suddenly reduced from the 2010s. It also did not know how to anticipate the upheavals of the space economy, in particular with the arrival of new private actors, such as SpaceX. In addition, industrial tensions and political differences between Member States complicate the ability of Europe to respond to these challenges.

With the advent of Elon Musk companies, such as SpaceX or Starlink. Have private companies today become the most important players in aeronautics?

Despite a preconceived idea, the private sector has always played a central role in the space sector. What is really new is the industrial culture revolution initiated by the United States. The center of gravity has moved from public agencies to the private sector, which now assumes more risks.

In the past, development only passed through agencies like NASA, which piloted and funded projects directly. This is no longer just the case …

We talk a lot about military issues, but what can space bring in the civilian field?

Europe has many advantages. With Galileo, it has developed a more precise navigation system than GPS, integrated into all mobile phones, and which will remain at the forefront in the years to come. Above all, the European Union can boast of great success: the Copernicus program. This earth observation satellite is today the main source of scientific data to study climate change. Tools like Copernicus, or the Pléiades satellites, also made it possible to organize help in Mayotte, thanks to a fine and rapid observation of the most affected areas.

Finally, when you think of space, you often think of inhabited flights or lunar missions. What about today in Europe?

This is a question that will become central in the years to come. Europe has duly trained astronauts – Thomas Pesquet is one of the best known faces. But the international space station, which allowed these missions, will be offset by 2030. And to date, no replacement project is envisaged on the European side. Finally, his participation in the American lunar program could be called into question.

Europe does not have a clean space station. So she must ask herself a real question: does she want to continue to send Europeans to space? With Arthur Sauzay, we believe that it is a power marker, and that Europe must be able to carry its own inhabited flights. Others consider that this is not a priority – this debate is also legitimate. But European heads of state will have to decide.