Golden Dome Project: Challenge to Space Governance 

Context: The Golden Dome Project of the United States reveals legal loopholes in space governance and risks triggering a global arms race in space.

About Golden Dome Project

• $175-billion space-based missile shield announced in May 2025 by the US.
• It is a multi-layered, next-generation missile defence system designed to shield the US mainland from long range ballistic, hypersonic, and orbital threats.
• The plan involves deploying a constellation of satellite interceptors, potentially armed with kinetic or directed-energy weapons to form a protective layer over the US.

Global Concerns

• Exposes loopholes in Outer Space Treaty: Article IV of the Outer Space Treaty (OST), 1967:
  • Prohibits placing “nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction” in orbit or stationing them “in outer space in any other manner” but does not ban conventional weapons in space.
  • It further mandates that celestial bodies shall be used “exclusively for peaceful purposes”.
  • The Golden Dome uses non-WMDs (conventional weapons that are not classified as weapons of mass destruction), so it does not violate the letter of Article IV, but challenges its spirit.
• Weaponisation of Space: Golden Dome will normalise the weaponization of outer space. If the U.S. crosses this threshold without facing legal repercussions, China, Russia, and other actors are likely to follow suit. 
• Destabilise strategic balance: Even if the weapons are “defensive,” they give the U.S. a first-strike advantage, threatening mutual deterrence and may prompt other space powers like China, Russia etc. to respond with similar systems or asymmetric warfare (cyberattacks, jamming, space debris).
• Dual-use problem: The same interceptor could be used to take out enemy missiles or communication satellites. This ambiguity causes mistrust and fear, especially among rivals like China and Russia, who have condemned the project.
• Undermines Global Norms: Even though UN resolutions under the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS) treaty are not legally binding, they have created a norm against militarising space. Golden Dome violates this normative consensus.

India’s Strategic Dilemma: 

• India is a rising space power and a key US partner in satellite tracking and space situational awareness. 
• India is also a vocal champion of peaceful space use. It has consistently supported PAROS resolutions and has positioned itself as a leader of the Global South in advocating for equitable and demilitarised space governance.
• Support or cooperation with the Golden Dome could undermine India's credibility as a responsible space power, weaken its leadership role in shaping future space governance norms and be a potential norm-setter in future treaty negotiations.
• Non-cooperation might strain its growing strategic ties with the US. 
• This dilemma becomes even more consequential in the context of India’s pending Space Activities Bill, which will shape how the country defines and regulates dual-use platforms, private-sector participation, and treaty compliance. 

Way Forward

• Strategic partners, such as India, along with like-minded spacefaring nations, should notably push to clarify and modernise the OST, especially the parts pertaining to dual-use and conventional space-based weapons.
• Advocate for legally binding instruments on the non-deployment of weapons in space .
• International agreements should be complemented by establishing comprehensive transparency mechanisms for military space projects to reduce ambiguity and mistrust. 
• National laws, such as India’s Space Activities Bill, must include clear guidelines for defence cooperation in space, fostering responsible practices both domestically and globally.

The Golden Dome is thus more than a US policy issue: it is a litmus test for India’s own legal and diplomatic posture and could significantly influence the direction and content of India’s Space Activities Bill.