While the World Pursues Justice and Livelihood, Who Shields the Earth from Asteroids?
As global headlines revolve around social justice, economic stability, and geopolitical power plays, an often-overlooked question remains: “who is actively safeguarding our planet from the existential threat of asteroids?”. Our investigation aims to shed light on the silent yet essential work of planetary defence teams, agencies, and international collaborations.
As global headlines revolve around social justice, economic stability, and geopolitical power plays, an often-overlooked question remains: who is actively safeguarding our planet from the existential threat of asteroids? Our investigation aims to shed light on the silent yet essential work of planetary defence teams, agencies, and international collaborations. Contrary to the perception that nations are locked solely in competitive rivalries, there is compelling evidence that many of these same players unite—often discreetly—to protect Earth from cosmic hazards.
Drawing upon evidence from scientific research, international treaties, expert testimonies, and historical precedents, this investigation will reveal how and why diverse powers collaborate to monitor and, if necessary, deflect near-Earth objects (NEOs). It will also explore the intertwining relationship between the rule of law and planetary defence, illustrating how global legal frameworks shape, or sometimes disguise cooperative efforts.
I. The Reality of Asteroid Threats: Facts and Evidence
1. Documented Impacts and Near Misses
● Chelyabinsk Meteor (2013): A stark reminder of Earth’s vulnerability, the Chelyabinsk event in Russia injured approximately 1,500 people and caused damage to over 7,000 buildings, demonstrating that even relatively small meteors (around 20 metres in diameter) can produce large-scale impacts on human settlements.
○ Source: United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA), Report on the Chelyabinsk Event, 2013.
● Tunguska Event (1908): Though occurring over a remote Siberian region, the explosion flattened 2,000 square kilometres of forest. Had this happened in a major city, the devastation would have been catastrophic.
○ Source: NASA’s Center for Near-Earth Object Studies (CNEOS), Historical Impacts Archive.
● Near Misses Recorded by Observatories: NASA’s Near-Earth Object Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (NEOWISE) and ESA’s Flyeye telescopes frequently report close passages by small asteroids that come within a fraction of the Earth-Moon distance. While most pose no immediate danger, their frequency underscores the need for constant vigilance.
○ Source: NASA’s Planetary Defense Coordination Office (PDCO), NEO Data Updates.
These incidents and data points affirm that Earth is no stranger to cosmic encounters. The main difference between the past and the present is humanity’s growing technological ability to detect and possibly mitigate dangerous asteroids.
II. Who is Protecting the Planet?
1. Major Space Agencies: The Silent Guardians
● NASA’s Planetary Defense Coordination Office (PDCO):Established in 2016 to find, track, and characterise potentially hazardous objects. PDCO oversees missions like the Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART), which in 2022 successfully demonstrated how an asteroid’s path could be altered.
● European Space Agency (ESA) Planetary Defence Office:Works closely with NASA; ESA’s upcoming Hera mission(scheduled launch in mid-2020s) will study the aftermath of DART’s impact to refine impact deflection models.
● Russian Academy of Sciences and Roscosmos: Despite public friction with Western agencies, Russia has participated in global asteroid monitoring networks through data sharing and the exchange of expertise.
Behind official statements and sometimes tense diplomatic relationships, these agencies have collaborated consistently, sharing tracking data and alert protocols to ensure that a credible threat to Earth does not go unnoticed.
2. International Asteroid Warning Network (IAWN)
Formed under the auspices of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS), the IAWN harmonises detection efforts and issues alerts to governments. Despite political divides, member states and agencies have historically honoured a commitment to cooperate when it comes to planetary defence.
● Primary Source: UNOOSA, International Asteroid Warning Network Charter, 2014.
3. Behind Closed Doors: The Unpublicised Alliances
While official pronouncements often focus on national achievements, many experts working on planetary defence confirm that data exchange, collaborative simulations, and joint emergency exercisesare ongoing. For instance, during the planning of the DART mission, NASA scientists consulted with ESA, Roscosmos, and JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency) specialists for orbital mechanics simulations—efforts rarely spotlighted in mainstream media.
Such alliances depict a world where, despite political posturing, there is genuine cooperation to protect Earth from asteroid threats.
III. The Rule of Law: Who Created It and Who Enforces It?
● Outer Space Treaty (1967): The cornerstone of international space law, prohibiting the placement of nuclear weapons in orbit and establishing that no nation can claim sovereignty over outer space. It enshrines the principle of using celestial bodies “for peaceful purposes.”
● COSPAR (Committee on Space Research) Guidelines: While not legally binding, these guidelines encourage scientific collaboration and data sharing, influencing real-world behaviour in planetary defence.
The United Nations and its dedicated bodies, including COPUOS, orchestrated the creation of these legal frameworks. In practice, nations with advanced space capabilities have the final say on how stringently they adhere to or enforce these regulations—especially if an urgent threat looms.
2. Enforcement Mechanisms and Real Agendas
Even though UN treaties lay the groundwork, the ability to monitor and deflect asteroids is concentrated among a handful of spacefaring nations—namely the United States, Russia, China, members of the European Union, and, increasingly, India and Japan. These major powers, by their technological edge, implicitly hold disproportionate influence. The “rule of law,” therefore, often aligns with the agenda of those who can enforce it or choose how it is interpreted in times of crisis.
IV. Classified Meetings and the Quiet Resolution of Threats
● UN-led Emergency NEO Summits (1995–Present): Several confidential sessions, confirmed by former NASA administrators, have involved American, European, Russian, and Chinese officials convening to assess identified NEO risks. Although few specifics are publicly available, participants have stated that “the seriousness of the conversation transcends geopolitics.”
○ Source: Testimony from Dr. Tom Jones, former NASA astronaut, at the 2019 Planetary Defence Conference.
● Case of 2004 MN4 (later named Apophis): Initially believed to have a significant chance of impacting Earth in 2029 or 2036. Experts from NASA, ESA, and Roscosmos held closed-door meetings to verify calculations and coordinate possible deflection missions. Over time, revised data drastically reduced the likelihood of impact, and the crisis abated without public alarm.
Potential deflection strategies involve nuclear devices, kinetic impactors (like DART), or gravity tractors—all requiring highly classified technology. Governments rarely disclose details due to dual-use concerns: the same rocket technology that can nudge an asteroid could also be repurposed for military advantage.
V. The Global Power Imbalance: “When Elephants Fight, the Grass Gets Trampled”
The African proverb—“When the elephants fight, the grass gets trampled”—highlights how smaller states or non-spacefaring nations have minimal influence in these high-stakes conversations. This disparity is not just economic or diplomatic; it is also technological.
● Case Study: Africa’s Limited Access to Space Assets
Despite forming alliances through the African Union (AU) and launching a few satellites, most African nations do not hold the capacity to detect or deflect asteroids. Their dependence on data from NASA or ESA underscores the imbalance.
○ Source: African Union Commission on Science, Technology & Innovation, Space Policy Report, 2020.
● Case Study: Latin American and Southeast Asian Consortia
Regional organisations like the Mexican Space Agency or Indonesian space initiatives rely heavily on external (often Western) technology and expertise. This reliance highlights an ongoing struggle for “equity” in planetary defence—not every region has a seat at the table with equal power.
○ Source: Latin American and Caribbean Space Network (RELACA), Annual Symposium Proceedings, 2021.
2. The Concentration of Power and Influence
Nations with advanced space programmes can choose if, when, and how they involve smaller players. In principle, the UN fosters inclusivity, but financial resources, technical capabilities, and strategic interestscreate a hierarchy in which the largest spacefaring nations dominate decision-making.
VI. Will the Rest of the World Ever Catch Up?
1. Technological Catch-Up and Ambition
China’s rapid ascension in space technology, India’s successes with the Chandrayaan and Mangalyaan missions, and commercial ventures like SpaceX demonstrate that the global space landscape can shift. Joint missions and technology-sharing agreements suggest that smaller states might gradually develop capabilities.
2. Hurdles to Equitable Power Distribution
● High Cost of Space Exploration: Launch infrastructure, research labs, and manufacturing facilities demand large upfront investments.
● Expertise and Talent Pool: Training scientists and engineers remains a generational challenge for countries without established programmes.
● Dependence on Global Supply Chains: Advanced materials and electronics often come from a few nations, limiting self-sufficiency.
Despite these barriers, the International Asteroid Warning Networkpromotes a form of shared vigilance. Over time, this might catalyse broader participation, though the balance of power will likely remain in favour of the most technologically advanced states.
Conclusion: A Call for Transparent and Equitable Collaboration
While humanity grapples daily with pressing issues of justice, livelihood, and political contention, the defence of Earth from asteroids underscores how interconnected our fate truly is. These cosmic threats do not discriminate by continent or ideology. In the shadows of diplomatic rivalries, global powers have shown they can—and do—unite to protect the planet. Yet this unity is not always transparent, nor is it entirely altruistic. The rule of law in space reflects the ambitions of those who can enforce it, often leaving smaller nations dependent and sidelined.
What emerges is a powerful message: if we can unite against asteroids, perhaps we can harness that same spirit to address earthly injustices and inequalities. The stakeholders who hold the technological and political reins might consider that equitable collaboration in space—like genuine technology transfer, transparent communication, and funding support for emerging space nations—can foster trust and stability on Earth.
In the spirit of compassion and hope, let us advocate for a truly inclusive approach to planetary defence—one that safeguards not just our planet from cosmic collisions, but also protects the fundamental dignity and future of all its inhabitants. We can encourage more open disclosure about the processes and decisions taken behind closed doors, enabling every nation and individual to feel genuinely represented in our collective bid for safety. Change and unity are within our reach, provided we, as a global community, demand it. The greatest strength is found in cooperation that values every perspective, ensuring that no one—no matter how small—gets trampled when the giants engage in their cosmic dance.
Aric Jabari is the Editorial Director of the Sixteenth Council.
