"I myself am made entirely of flaws, stitched together with good intentions."
-- Augusten Burroughs, best-selling author of Running with Scissors: A Memoir.

Some subjects are so ugly that, no matter how hard polite company tries to exclude them from sociable chit-chat, their gruesome reality cannot be repressed. Beastly subject inevitably intrudes. Emotions flare. A pleasant afternoon tea becomes a no-holds-barred, over-the-top-rope Battle Royal. So it is with the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and the United States (U.S.) government's regime for space export controls. The ugly beast has been around long enough that we've all learned to live with it. But beneath the space industry's veneer of civility temperatures remain near the boiling point.

Though Augusten Burroughs, quoted above, was not talking about ITAR, the sentiment expressed is apt. The current U.S. policy governing the transfer of space technology is made entirely of flaws. While there are those who would strenuously argue the point, I am willing to concede that it may have been stitched together from good intentions. At this point intentions hardly matter. It is the effect of ITAR that needs to be the focus of our attention.

ITAR is killing us.

It impedes the ability of U.S.-based space companies to compete in the international marketplace, which in turn erodes the industrial base that our national defense relies upon.

It impedes the ability of our friends in the world, be they corporations, government agencies, military allies or university research colleagues, to collaborate with us, thus eroding our access to intellectual and investment capital, technologies, complementary systems and suppliers. It impedes innovation, while adding costs and slowing operational tempo for industry.

The collateral damage from ITAR is not hard to see. Where U.S. companies once commanded three-fourths of the global satellite manufacturing market, today U.S. market share is well below half. The result is a loss of thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in sales. But this injury is just the tip of the iceberg. No longer able to depend upon U.S. partners for components, technologies or research, our foreign partners have been compelled to develop indigenous, non-U.S. sources - in effect creating an autonomous, non-U.S.-dependent global trade in space technologies. If it did not reflect so sadly upon U.S. policy, it would almost be a great, thigh-slapping laugh that Europe now offers and advertises an "ITAR Free!" communications satellite to global customers.

The more deeply one looks, the more troubling ITAR becomes. Without entering the debate about China's recent ASAT test, it is very instructive to study the number of joint space programs that China has established with other nations around the world. Some of these countries are our allies, some are ambivalent and some are out-and-out hostile toward us. The point is that, once upon a time, they would have all been aspiring to build relationships with the U.S. as a means of advancing their technical, political and economic interests. While the Great Wall of China may once have protected the Asiatic giant from invading Mongol hordes, the Great Wall of ITAR has isolated the U.S. from political, economic and technology leadership opportunities in the emerging global community.

So, if ITAR is the equivalent of political, industrial and economic antimatter, how can this situation have persisted? What, if anything, can be done to fix it?

Well, to mix Arabian and Transylvanian metaphors, the genie is already out of the bottle and there is no silver bullet. While much discussion has taken place, and much information, data and testimony has been gathered by boards and commissions (dating back to the 2001 Commission on the Future of the United States Aerospace Industry) we, as an industry, have not adequately synthesized this information and marshaled our resources to convey the dire strategic implications for national security embodied in the current policy.

When the space community gathers in Colorado Springs, Colo. for the 23rd National Space Symposium (Apr. 9-12), we will not have a single panel session or featured speaker assigned to "speak to" the ITAR issue. We won't have to. It will permeate virtually every topic and discussion on the Symposium agenda.

The Space Foundation has made reforming ITAR one of its top Policy Agenda issues for 2007. The view from here is that we need to toss this beast over the top ropes and out of the ring, and it won't be easy. We look forward to working with anyone who is like-minded and willing.

Elliot G. Pulham
President & Chief Executive Officer