{"id":{"repo_id":"kings","oai_identifier":"oai:kclpure.kcl.ac.uk:studenttheses/7ca7559f-44e1-495f-b777-69652e4962ac"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/kings/oai:kclpure.kcl.ac.uk:studenttheses/7ca7559f-44e1-495f-b777-69652e4962ac","repository":{"repo_id":"kings","name":"King's College London","base_url":"https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/ws/oai"},"display":{"title":"Challenges to American Military and Economic Dominance in Space","abstract":"The US competed for leadership in space with the Soviet Union throughout the Cold War. Losing to the Soviet Sputnik and failing to achieve the first manned flight in space hurt US pride and gave credibility to Russian missile claims. Rising to this challenge under the leadership of President Kennedy, the nation rallied behind the cause of sending a man to the moon and safely returning him to earth, galvanising the might of American civil, military, economic and political power to win the Space Race and recapture American prestige, technological dominance and leadership in space. The US has nurtured this dominance by extending the military use of space to create an asymmetric advantage that remains beyond the reach of any other nation. Leakage of any space-related technology has been smothered by regulation and attempts to formalise the governance of activities in space through international treaties have been vigorously resisted. The growing hubris of American foreign policy strategy has contributed to resistance to American hegemony and challenges to US dominance in space. Rising great powers seek to emulate US military technological dominance in space whilst seeking ways to level the playing field. Confined by regulation to their home market, the US space industry has been unable to compete, leaving the non-US space industry to thrive, challenging the traditional US lead. Debris, proliferation of satellites from a variety of actors and the potential vulnerability of US capability from small satellites has contributed to US nervousness. Stretched by other pressing national security matters, the true imperative of challenges to US dominance in space are not apparent. Recognition of the challenges is essential if America is to maintain dominance in space.","abstract_html":"The US competed for leadership in space with the Soviet Union throughout the Cold War. Losing to the Soviet Sputnik and failing to achieve the first manned flight in space hurt US pride and gave credibility to Russian missile claims. Rising to this challenge under the leadership of President Kennedy, the nation rallied behind the cause of sending a man to the moon and safely returning him to earth, galvanising the might of American civil, military, economic and political power to win the Space Race and recapture American prestige, technological dominance and leadership in space. The US has nurtured this dominance by extending the military use of space to create an asymmetric advantage that remains beyond the reach of any other nation. Leakage of any space-related technology has been smothered by regulation and attempts to formalise the governance of activities in space through international treaties have been vigorously resisted. The growing hubris of American foreign policy strategy has contributed to resistance to American hegemony and challenges to US dominance in space. Rising great powers seek to emulate US military technological dominance in space whilst seeking ways to level the playing field. Confined by regulation to their home market, the US space industry has been unable to compete, leaving the non-US space industry to thrive, challenging the traditional US lead. Debris, proliferation of satellites from a variety of actors and the potential vulnerability of US capability from small satellites has contributed to US nervousness. Stretched by other pressing national security matters, the true imperative of challenges to US dominance in space are not apparent. Recognition of the challenges is essential if America is to maintain dominance in space.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Presley, Mark"],"institution":"University of Cambridge","degree_name":"Master of Philosophy","degree_level":"Master's Thesis","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2008,"date_issued":"2008-5-10","date_published":"2008-5-10","updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:44:31Z","subjects":[],"languages":["eng"],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["oai:kclpure.kcl.ac.uk:studenttheses/7ca7559f-44e1-495f-b777-69652e4962ac"],"render_values":[{"text":"oai:kclpure.kcl.ac.uk:studenttheses/7ca7559f-44e1-495f-b777-69652e4962ac","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/en/studentTheses/7ca7559f-44e1-495f-b777-69652e4962ac","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Presley, Mark"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2008-5-10"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2008-5-10"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.department","label":"Dc Publisher Department","values":["Defence Studies"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.institution","label":"Dc Publisher Institution","values":["University of Cambridge"]},{"key":"dc:relation.isreferencedby","label":"Dc Relation Isreferencedby","values":["https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/en/studentTheses/7ca7559f-44e1-495f-b777-69652e4962ac"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationlevel","label":"Dc Type Qualificationlevel","values":["Master's Thesis"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationname","label":"Dc Type Qualificationname","values":["Master of Philosophy"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["eng"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["oai:kclpure.kcl.ac.uk:studenttheses/7ca7559f-44e1-495f-b777-69652e4962ac","https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/en/studentTheses/7ca7559f-44e1-495f-b777-69652e4962ac"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/files/12065194/Studentthesis-Mark_Presley_2008.pdf"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The US competed for leadership in space with the Soviet Union throughout the Cold War. Losing to the Soviet Sputnik and failing to achieve the first manned flight in space hurt US pride and gave credibility to Russian missile claims. Rising to this challenge under the leadership of President Kennedy, the nation rallied behind the cause of sending a man to the moon and safely returning him to earth, galvanising the might of American civil, military, economic and political power to win the Space Race and recapture American prestige, technological dominance and leadership in space. The US has nurtured this dominance by extending the military use of space to create an asymmetric advantage that remains beyond the reach of any other nation. Leakage of any space-related technology has been smothered by regulation and attempts to formalise the governance of activities in space through international treaties have been vigorously resisted. The growing hubris of American foreign policy strategy has contributed to resistance to American hegemony and challenges to US dominance in space. Rising great powers seek to emulate US military technological dominance in space whilst seeking ways to level the playing field. Confined by regulation to their home market, the US space industry has been unable to compete, leaving the non-US space industry to thrive, challenging the traditional US lead. Debris, proliferation of satellites from a variety of actors and the potential vulnerability of US capability from small satellites has contributed to US nervousness. Stretched by other pressing national security matters, the true imperative of challenges to US dominance in space are not apparent. Recognition of the challenges is essential if America is to maintain dominance in space."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Challenges to American Military and Economic Dominance in Space"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:creator":["Presley, Mark"],"dc:date":["2008-5-10"],"dc:date.issued":["2008-5-10"],"dc:description.abstract":["The US competed for leadership in space with the Soviet Union throughout the Cold War. Losing to the Soviet Sputnik and failing to achieve the first manned flight in space hurt US pride and gave credibility to Russian missile claims. Rising to this challenge under the leadership of President Kennedy, the nation rallied behind the cause of sending a man to the moon and safely returning him to earth, galvanising the might of American civil, military, economic and political power to win the Space Race and recapture American prestige, technological dominance and leadership in space. The US has nurtured this dominance by extending the military use of space to create an asymmetric advantage that remains beyond the reach of any other nation. Leakage of any space-related technology has been smothered by regulation and attempts to formalise the governance of activities in space through international treaties have been vigorously resisted. The growing hubris of American foreign policy strategy has contributed to resistance to American hegemony and challenges to US dominance in space. Rising great powers seek to emulate US military technological dominance in space whilst seeking ways to level the playing field. Confined by regulation to their home market, the US space industry has been unable to compete, leaving the non-US space industry to thrive, challenging the traditional US lead. Debris, proliferation of satellites from a variety of actors and the potential vulnerability of US capability from small satellites has contributed to US nervousness. Stretched by other pressing national security matters, the true imperative of challenges to US dominance in space are not apparent. Recognition of the challenges is essential if America is to maintain dominance in space."],"dc:identifier":["oai:kclpure.kcl.ac.uk:studenttheses/7ca7559f-44e1-495f-b777-69652e4962ac","https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/en/studentTheses/7ca7559f-44e1-495f-b777-69652e4962ac"],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/files/12065194/Studentthesis-Mark_Presley_2008.pdf"],"dc:language":["eng"],"dc:publisher.department":["Defence Studies"],"dc:publisher.institution":["University of Cambridge"],"dc:relation.isreferencedby":["https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/en/studentTheses/7ca7559f-44e1-495f-b777-69652e4962ac"],"dc:title":["Challenges to American Military and Economic Dominance in Space"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"dc:type.qualificationlevel":["Master's Thesis"],"dc:type.qualificationname":["Master of Philosophy"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:44:31Z"}