Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/14777622.2022.2142351
Jakub Pražák
ABSTRACT Space hybrid operations possess considerable residual offensive capabilities for waging space warfare. Adequate utilization of space hybrid operations may surpass the disadvantages of kinetic anti-satellite weapons related to the proliferation of space debris and keep a wide array of impacts with flexible outcomes. Moreover, the significance of space hybrid operations is underlined by the renewed geopolitical competition and rivalry that spills over from the traditional states as key actors of conflict to non-state space actors influenced by international disputes. Non-state actors, especially the commercial sector, are then dragged into the geopolitical conflict with a twofold role since their space assets constitute valuable targets, and given the dual-use nature of space systems, may directly or non-directly support space militarization and even weaponization. As such, state and non-state actors must closely cooperate and create mutually beneficial relations that will ensure the protection of space assets and the building of resilient space infrastructures.
{"title":"On the Threshold of Space Warfare","authors":"Jakub Pražák","doi":"10.1080/14777622.2022.2142351","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14777622.2022.2142351","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Space hybrid operations possess considerable residual offensive capabilities for waging space warfare. Adequate utilization of space hybrid operations may surpass the disadvantages of kinetic anti-satellite weapons related to the proliferation of space debris and keep a wide array of impacts with flexible outcomes. Moreover, the significance of space hybrid operations is underlined by the renewed geopolitical competition and rivalry that spills over from the traditional states as key actors of conflict to non-state space actors influenced by international disputes. Non-state actors, especially the commercial sector, are then dragged into the geopolitical conflict with a twofold role since their space assets constitute valuable targets, and given the dual-use nature of space systems, may directly or non-directly support space militarization and even weaponization. As such, state and non-state actors must closely cooperate and create mutually beneficial relations that will ensure the protection of space assets and the building of resilient space infrastructures.","PeriodicalId":35153,"journal":{"name":"Astropolitics","volume":"16 1","pages":"175 - 191"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89088429","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/14777622.2022.2141113
Taufik Rachmat Nugraha, Y. Putro, Ridha Aditya Nugraha, Rio Christiawan
ABSTRACT From early 1963 to 2022, Indonesian space activities saw numerous breakthroughs in space technologies, law, and policies, but also multiple challenges, the majority of which were caused by internal political issues. Indonesian space operations can be classified into three epochs: (1) the old order, (2) the new order, and (3) the reformation era. Prior to the reformation era, the most stable environment for Indonesian space development since state policy has strengthened national space infrastructure existed. However, following the political turbulence in 1998, Indonesia's space program has been stalled since the start of reformation administrations, indicating that space initiatives are not a priority. Nonetheless, in the 2000s, Indonesia took a significant step by acceding to four of five international space treaties, significantly altering the course of the Indonesian space program. Indonesia has aspired for space technology independence, and to that end, in 2013, it enacted Law No. 21 of 2013, which paved the way for the Indonesian Space Activities Master Plan 2016–2040 for national space development. Although Indonesia has a defined long-term plan for space program development, the government's political and financial inconsistencies remain a significant impediment. This paper explores Indonesia's national space development policy and the prospects for achieving the country's space development goals by 2040.
{"title":"Indonesian Space Activities: The Long and Winding Road","authors":"Taufik Rachmat Nugraha, Y. Putro, Ridha Aditya Nugraha, Rio Christiawan","doi":"10.1080/14777622.2022.2141113","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14777622.2022.2141113","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT From early 1963 to 2022, Indonesian space activities saw numerous breakthroughs in space technologies, law, and policies, but also multiple challenges, the majority of which were caused by internal political issues. Indonesian space operations can be classified into three epochs: (1) the old order, (2) the new order, and (3) the reformation era. Prior to the reformation era, the most stable environment for Indonesian space development since state policy has strengthened national space infrastructure existed. However, following the political turbulence in 1998, Indonesia's space program has been stalled since the start of reformation administrations, indicating that space initiatives are not a priority. Nonetheless, in the 2000s, Indonesia took a significant step by acceding to four of five international space treaties, significantly altering the course of the Indonesian space program. Indonesia has aspired for space technology independence, and to that end, in 2013, it enacted Law No. 21 of 2013, which paved the way for the Indonesian Space Activities Master Plan 2016–2040 for national space development. Although Indonesia has a defined long-term plan for space program development, the government's political and financial inconsistencies remain a significant impediment. This paper explores Indonesia's national space development policy and the prospects for achieving the country's space development goals by 2040.","PeriodicalId":35153,"journal":{"name":"Astropolitics","volume":"29 1","pages":"238 - 250"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90442822","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/14777622.2022.2143043
Nils Holger Schreiber
ABSTRACT This paper aspires to contribute to the limited field of neorealist scholarship on security affairs in outer space by conducting a case study of the Russian Federation’s security policy in the celestial sphere. In recent years, Russia has emerged as one of the key players in the international politics of outer space. However, Russia’s strategy of developing its space defense assets, while in parallel launching diplomatic initiatives in international organizations calling for the avoidance of an arms race in outer space, is ambiguous. I argue that the neorealist paradigm elucidates this case by highlighting the intensifying balancing trajectories of contemporary outer space security affairs. In a first step, hypotheses on states’ behavior in the field of outer space armament and arms control are derived from the body of neorealist scholarship on terrestrial international politics. This is followed by hypothesis testing against the case of Russia’s space security politics. It is contended that Russia is engaging in a predominantly competitive endeavor vis-à-vis the United States by utilizing a hybrid approach of internal and external balancing, as well as a pragmatic instrumentalization of international institutions to leverage its own economically disadvantaged position in outer space.
{"title":"Man, State, and War in Space: Neorealism and Russia’s Counterbalancing Strategy Against the United States in Outer Space Security Politics","authors":"Nils Holger Schreiber","doi":"10.1080/14777622.2022.2143043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14777622.2022.2143043","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper aspires to contribute to the limited field of neorealist scholarship on security affairs in outer space by conducting a case study of the Russian Federation’s security policy in the celestial sphere. In recent years, Russia has emerged as one of the key players in the international politics of outer space. However, Russia’s strategy of developing its space defense assets, while in parallel launching diplomatic initiatives in international organizations calling for the avoidance of an arms race in outer space, is ambiguous. I argue that the neorealist paradigm elucidates this case by highlighting the intensifying balancing trajectories of contemporary outer space security affairs. In a first step, hypotheses on states’ behavior in the field of outer space armament and arms control are derived from the body of neorealist scholarship on terrestrial international politics. This is followed by hypothesis testing against the case of Russia’s space security politics. It is contended that Russia is engaging in a predominantly competitive endeavor vis-à-vis the United States by utilizing a hybrid approach of internal and external balancing, as well as a pragmatic instrumentalization of international institutions to leverage its own economically disadvantaged position in outer space.","PeriodicalId":35153,"journal":{"name":"Astropolitics","volume":"99 1","pages":"151 - 174"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85816714","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/14777622.2022.2143633
Andrew Dowse, D. Blake, Emmet O’Sullivan
ABSTRACT Australia is currently experiencing a reinvigorated space program with a new space agency, significant industry investment in space ventures, and the Australian Defence Force embracing the military advantage conferred by space systems. Coincidentally, geostrategic instability has led Australia’s government to raise its military preparedness in the face of increased risk of state-on-state conflict. Accordingly, military planners are considering not only what future space capabilities are needed by Australia, but the prospect of space warfare and what the state should do to protect its equities in the space domain. We conclude that developing a stronger normative framework is the best option for the preservation and growth of Australia’s future space capabilities.
{"title":"An Australian Approach to Space Warfare","authors":"Andrew Dowse, D. Blake, Emmet O’Sullivan","doi":"10.1080/14777622.2022.2143633","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14777622.2022.2143633","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Australia is currently experiencing a reinvigorated space program with a new space agency, significant industry investment in space ventures, and the Australian Defence Force embracing the military advantage conferred by space systems. Coincidentally, geostrategic instability has led Australia’s government to raise its military preparedness in the face of increased risk of state-on-state conflict. Accordingly, military planners are considering not only what future space capabilities are needed by Australia, but the prospect of space warfare and what the state should do to protect its equities in the space domain. We conclude that developing a stronger normative framework is the best option for the preservation and growth of Australia’s future space capabilities.","PeriodicalId":35153,"journal":{"name":"Astropolitics","volume":"1 1","pages":"192 - 213"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90866476","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/14777622.2022.2141433
K. Szocik, Martin Braddock
ABSTRACT Synthetic biology is a new and promising way of managing challenges which may be faced by astronauts during human space missions. Due to specific constraints, which include long term travel and future settlement where in-situ resources are limited, synthetic biology provides a rational solution. In this paper, we start from an evaluation of ethics of synthetic biology, and propose application of a systematic consequentialist approach for deployment. We discuss possible applications of synthetic biology in resource utilization and life support, which have direct applications to sustaining human-kind both on Earth and in space.
{"title":"Synthetic Biology for Human Space Missions: Ethical Issues and Practical Applications","authors":"K. Szocik, Martin Braddock","doi":"10.1080/14777622.2022.2141433","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14777622.2022.2141433","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Synthetic biology is a new and promising way of managing challenges which may be faced by astronauts during human space missions. Due to specific constraints, which include long term travel and future settlement where in-situ resources are limited, synthetic biology provides a rational solution. In this paper, we start from an evaluation of ethics of synthetic biology, and propose application of a systematic consequentialist approach for deployment. We discuss possible applications of synthetic biology in resource utilization and life support, which have direct applications to sustaining human-kind both on Earth and in space.","PeriodicalId":35153,"journal":{"name":"Astropolitics","volume":"101 1","pages":"251 - 263"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73683645","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/14777622.2022.2145190
G. Doucet
ABSTRACT Outer space is a domain beyond national jurisdiction where the governance regime is generally permissive. However, as actors and activities increase, additional governance is required. Other domains beyond national jurisdiction already benefit from functioning governance structures that have enabled activities to be conducted in an orderly, peaceful, and equitable manner. Although, as a physical domain, space is unique, the actors and interests are not. The actors are states and private entities. The interests are economic gain, safety and sustainability, national security, and international relations. Governance regimes for international civil aviation, telecommunications, and commercial shipping share common characteristics essential to achieving the consent and cooperation of states. Since the actors in the outer space domain are also states and private entities, and their interests are similar to those which they, by their very nature, pursue in other domains, the common characteristics shared among actors can guide the quest for future governance regimes of outer space.
{"title":"Characteristics of Governance for Domains beyond National Jurisdiction: Lessons for Future Outer Space Governance","authors":"G. Doucet","doi":"10.1080/14777622.2022.2145190","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14777622.2022.2145190","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Outer space is a domain beyond national jurisdiction where the governance regime is generally permissive. However, as actors and activities increase, additional governance is required. Other domains beyond national jurisdiction already benefit from functioning governance structures that have enabled activities to be conducted in an orderly, peaceful, and equitable manner. Although, as a physical domain, space is unique, the actors and interests are not. The actors are states and private entities. The interests are economic gain, safety and sustainability, national security, and international relations. Governance regimes for international civil aviation, telecommunications, and commercial shipping share common characteristics essential to achieving the consent and cooperation of states. Since the actors in the outer space domain are also states and private entities, and their interests are similar to those which they, by their very nature, pursue in other domains, the common characteristics shared among actors can guide the quest for future governance regimes of outer space.","PeriodicalId":35153,"journal":{"name":"Astropolitics","volume":"80 1","pages":"214 - 225"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78192612","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/14777622.2022.2141958
Bohumil Doboš
ABSTRACT After 50 years, the Moon is becoming a center of attention in the geopolitical competition among space powers. The planned lunar settlements to take place starting in 2025, or soon thereafter, will hold geopolitical considerations and impacts. This paper highlights and summarizes factors that will affect the process of lunar settlement in the context of the importance of lunar poles. The poles include the location of key resources – permanent sunlight for power generation and water – for the state actors involved in the settlement projects. Access to these resources will influence relations among the actors. The paper points to the need to participate in the lunar settlement process for state actors not to be left behind or in a disadvantaged position for access to key resources. Further discussed is the geopolitical context concerning settlement of the geographically advantageous polar regions, primarily the south lunar pole. If this is undertaken by adversarial states, a space power, dependent on the outcome of that competition, would be limited in its own efforts to develop an independent settlement.
{"title":"The Eagle Returned: Geopolitical Aspects of the New Lunar Race","authors":"Bohumil Doboš","doi":"10.1080/14777622.2022.2141958","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14777622.2022.2141958","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT After 50 years, the Moon is becoming a center of attention in the geopolitical competition among space powers. The planned lunar settlements to take place starting in 2025, or soon thereafter, will hold geopolitical considerations and impacts. This paper highlights and summarizes factors that will affect the process of lunar settlement in the context of the importance of lunar poles. The poles include the location of key resources – permanent sunlight for power generation and water – for the state actors involved in the settlement projects. Access to these resources will influence relations among the actors. The paper points to the need to participate in the lunar settlement process for state actors not to be left behind or in a disadvantaged position for access to key resources. Further discussed is the geopolitical context concerning settlement of the geographically advantageous polar regions, primarily the south lunar pole. If this is undertaken by adversarial states, a space power, dependent on the outcome of that competition, would be limited in its own efforts to develop an independent settlement.","PeriodicalId":35153,"journal":{"name":"Astropolitics","volume":"20 1","pages":"121 - 134"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86975864","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/14777622.2022.2145191
Shawn P. Cameron
ABSTRACT A wide range of states support national space agencies. The United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, France, and Australia are developing, or have developed, distinct space divisions within their military. The world is increasingly reliant on the sea for trade and prosperity, but the future will likely shift focus to space with an increasing dependence on space-based technology for a wide range of functions on Earth. Space requires a tailored strategy for states wishing to maintain security beyond the atmosphere and in its links to Earth. The maritime school of thought offers valuable insights for such a strategy. Sea control and denial are important tenets of maritime strategy and are important in space. States wishing to freely navigate, trade, and project power require control over space and the lines of communication upon common routes and orbital domains. Denial of access to key infrastructure, disabling space assets, and interfering with information exchange are an important feature of strategy. Control and denial can be accomplished with a focus on strategic geography around launch sites, and access to orbital domains and lines of communication.
{"title":"To Rule the Cosmic Waves: Maritime School of Thought and Space Strategy","authors":"Shawn P. Cameron","doi":"10.1080/14777622.2022.2145191","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14777622.2022.2145191","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT A wide range of states support national space agencies. The United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, France, and Australia are developing, or have developed, distinct space divisions within their military. The world is increasingly reliant on the sea for trade and prosperity, but the future will likely shift focus to space with an increasing dependence on space-based technology for a wide range of functions on Earth. Space requires a tailored strategy for states wishing to maintain security beyond the atmosphere and in its links to Earth. The maritime school of thought offers valuable insights for such a strategy. Sea control and denial are important tenets of maritime strategy and are important in space. States wishing to freely navigate, trade, and project power require control over space and the lines of communication upon common routes and orbital domains. Denial of access to key infrastructure, disabling space assets, and interfering with information exchange are an important feature of strategy. Control and denial can be accomplished with a focus on strategic geography around launch sites, and access to orbital domains and lines of communication.","PeriodicalId":35153,"journal":{"name":"Astropolitics","volume":"46 1","pages":"113 - 120"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79401319","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14777622.2022.2078194
Ritu S. Lauer
ABSTRACT The United States, Russia, China, and India are the only states that have tested anti-satellite weapons (ASATs) by deliberately destroying orbiting satellites. In this paper, a mix of practical and aspirational factors are investigated in the context of heightened propensity for a state's testing of ASATs. The strategic competition and rivalry between these global and regional space powers generates an environment of conflict and insecurity. In the absence of an international treaty to constrain behavior, these states are driven to amass counterspace capabilities to secure their assets and establish space dominance.
{"title":"When States Test Their Anti-Satellite Weapons","authors":"Ritu S. Lauer","doi":"10.1080/14777622.2022.2078194","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14777622.2022.2078194","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The United States, Russia, China, and India are the only states that have tested anti-satellite weapons (ASATs) by deliberately destroying orbiting satellites. In this paper, a mix of practical and aspirational factors are investigated in the context of heightened propensity for a state's testing of ASATs. The strategic competition and rivalry between these global and regional space powers generates an environment of conflict and insecurity. In the absence of an international treaty to constrain behavior, these states are driven to amass counterspace capabilities to secure their assets and establish space dominance.","PeriodicalId":35153,"journal":{"name":"Astropolitics","volume":"23 1","pages":"1 - 26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88090809","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14777622.2022.2098014
Matthea Brandenburg, S. Lieberman
ABSTRACT Space is an area characterized by geopolitical positioning the past seven decades. Over that time, agencies and institutions have developed, charged with the task of ensuring the safe usage and exploration of orbits. In the United States, NASA is synonymous with space travel, and in Europe there is the European Space Agency in conjunction with the European Union and state actors all funded at a lower level than NASA and charged with fewer responsibilities. In this paper, we ask why these institutions developed in such different ways and to such different extents? Using the concept of historical institutionalism, we examine the history of each and discuss the path-dependent nature of the institutions in question. Broadening the discussion, we note that while institutional formation engenders a profound impact on the current activity of each agency, geopolitical factors cannot be disregarded, and power structures within the global system are of a greater impact than historical institutionalism.
{"title":"Critical Spaces: European and U.S. Institutions for Outer Space","authors":"Matthea Brandenburg, S. Lieberman","doi":"10.1080/14777622.2022.2098014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14777622.2022.2098014","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Space is an area characterized by geopolitical positioning the past seven decades. Over that time, agencies and institutions have developed, charged with the task of ensuring the safe usage and exploration of orbits. In the United States, NASA is synonymous with space travel, and in Europe there is the European Space Agency in conjunction with the European Union and state actors all funded at a lower level than NASA and charged with fewer responsibilities. In this paper, we ask why these institutions developed in such different ways and to such different extents? Using the concept of historical institutionalism, we examine the history of each and discuss the path-dependent nature of the institutions in question. Broadening the discussion, we note that while institutional formation engenders a profound impact on the current activity of each agency, geopolitical factors cannot be disregarded, and power structures within the global system are of a greater impact than historical institutionalism.","PeriodicalId":35153,"journal":{"name":"Astropolitics","volume":"39 1","pages":"93 - 111"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81296663","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：