Abstract
This study analyzes the fundamental differences in the legal frameworks, policy drivers, and strategic objectives of the four major space actors—the United States, the European Union, Russia, and China—against the backdrop of a multipolar post-Cold War global space landscape, exploring the resulting geopolitical competition and potential for conflict. The research finds that national space laws and policies are distinctly contrasted: The United States pioneers a highly commercialized and resource privatization model through domestic laws like the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act and the Artemis Accords alliance, challenging the existing international legal order to maintain its global leadership. The European Union adheres to multilateralism and sustainable development. Its multi-level governance system, despite internal coordination challenges, seeks strategic autonomy through initiatives like the proposed EU Space Act, emphasizing regulation and environmental protection. Russia continues its state-dominated, security-first tradition, with a legal system characterized by high centralization and militarization, serving national security and the goal of revitalizing its great power status. China employs a unique “civil-military fusion” strategy, advancing its “space power” goals systematically through top-level design and policy white papers rather than a dedicated space law, pursuing technological autonomy and strategic rise. These fundamental divergences have led to the formation of two opposing camps in deep space exploration and resource utilization: the US-led Artemis Accords alliance and the China-Russia core International Lunar Research Station (ILRS) alliance. The competition's essence has transcended technology, becoming a deep game concerning future rules and standards for space governance. Potential conflict points stem from space resource disputes (e.g., lunar water ice), space militarization (e.g., ASAT tests), and the challenges of orbital debris and traffic management. These risks are exacerbated by the “dual-use” nature of technology and the lagging international legal regime. In conclusion, the contemporary space race is a deep-seated contest involving law, rules, and geopolitical alliances. Despite increasing rivalry, space as a common frontier for humanity necessitates strengthened multilateral dialogue within the international community to establish binding codes of conduct, balancing national interests with global common goods to collectively ensure the peace and sustainability of outer space.
Keywords: Space Competition, Space Resources, Space Militarization, Space Debris, Space Traffic Management