"Russia Challenges the U.S. Monopoly on Satellite Navigation"
TAKEN FROM: New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/04/business/worldbusiness/04gps.html?ex=1333339200&en=d9fb675674c894aa&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
Even though the Cold War can be considered "officially" over, Russia and the United States are still competing over "space supremacy" and satellite navigation technology. With the great demand in the last decade for GPS technology, Russia, along with China and the European Union are competing with the U.S. for rights of navigation technology. By the end of the year, Russia hopes to rival the U.S.'s current system by launching eight navigation satellites that would complete "Glonass," Russia's first Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS).
Currently, the U.S. has a natural monopoly over satellite navigation as the technology is controlled and operated by the U.S. military. Russia is able to send signals by using their own satellites, but work only in stages and are not as effective as an operational system would be in the long-run.
So why the need to break the monopoly in the first place? For starters, GPS's beneficial uses are ever-increasing and should be controlled by more than one political entity. GPS today is able to assist in agriculture and banking operations, military efforts, as well as a host of other operational uses. Andrei Ionin fom the Russian defense ministry proved the need for navigation technology by stating, "In a few years, business without navigation signal will become inconceivable. Everything that moves will use a signal-airplanes, trains, people, rockets, valuable animals and favorite pets."
Although the U.S. is not technically discouraging entry into the market (Ronald Regan during the Korean Air flight wanted to make GPS available to the average civilian throughout the world), what statement are we making by being the only country controlling this technology? We are by far not the only country benefiting from GPS, so why are we the only ones controlling it? If the U.S. really wanted to, couldn't the military just switch or alter navigation signals in a time of crisis? Interesting thing to think about...
TAKEN FROM: New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/04/business/worldbusiness/04gps.html?ex=1333339200&en=d9fb675674c894aa&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
Even though the Cold War can be considered "officially" over, Russia and the United States are still competing over "space supremacy" and satellite navigation technology. With the great demand in the last decade for GPS technology, Russia, along with China and the European Union are competing with the U.S. for rights of navigation technology. By the end of the year, Russia hopes to rival the U.S.'s current system by launching eight navigation satellites that would complete "Glonass," Russia's first Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS).
Currently, the U.S. has a natural monopoly over satellite navigation as the technology is controlled and operated by the U.S. military. Russia is able to send signals by using their own satellites, but work only in stages and are not as effective as an operational system would be in the long-run.
So why the need to break the monopoly in the first place? For starters, GPS's beneficial uses are ever-increasing and should be controlled by more than one political entity. GPS today is able to assist in agriculture and banking operations, military efforts, as well as a host of other operational uses. Andrei Ionin fom the Russian defense ministry proved the need for navigation technology by stating, "In a few years, business without navigation signal will become inconceivable. Everything that moves will use a signal-airplanes, trains, people, rockets, valuable animals and favorite pets."
Although the U.S. is not technically discouraging entry into the market (Ronald Regan during the Korean Air flight wanted to make GPS available to the average civilian throughout the world), what statement are we making by being the only country controlling this technology? We are by far not the only country benefiting from GPS, so why are we the only ones controlling it? If the U.S. really wanted to, couldn't the military just switch or alter navigation signals in a time of crisis? Interesting thing to think about...
5 comments:
oh, that is a freaky thought! this is obviously a monopoly that needs to be broken up, perhaps by the UN? don;t know how the US will feel about that tho... and how much power does the UN yield in cases like this?
other than russia, do any countries have their own GPS-type programs? and how good is the US at "sharing" the GPS technology?
I can see this issue becoming a fairly big deal, depending on how important it is to the other countries to break up the monopoly. I could see terrotories in space being divided much like they are on the globe "Your system can not cross over this line" and so forth. Although a monopoly like that may not be the best for all the countries, if one country does have a monopoly i guess im glad its ours!
I don't think I'd ever really thought about who controlled the satellites for GPS...this is weird! Wouldn't it be odd if the UN did step in? When's the last time that the UN did something to sanction us?
Would this be something that would be unsafe for someone/thing other than our military to control? I don't know enough about it - if a private company controlled the GPS satellite, would that lead to leaks in security?
Very interesting analysis, Joelle! :)
Wow! I never knew that the U.S. had a natural monopoly over satellite navigation. I really do not know much about satellites actually. Don't other countries use satellites too, so how does it work if the US controls them?
Gina, I would think it would be similar to the internet - no one owns, but all use...?
Yeah. I'm so not sure. :)
Post a Comment