Regina Ip• Ist Chairperson at Savantas Policy Institute – SpaceX Is More Than Just a Company 葉劉淑儀• 匯賢智庫政策研究中心創會主席 – SpaceX 不只是一家公司
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP8Gmvv7N/
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid0wjE1st1GJ4Df8mN1B5hLzv8VpzgA8nMfxmetTaeNfbRuY4WA29ky3FJJs7U8ACwAl&id=100036400039778&mibextid=wwXIfr
上回提到，有兩位歐洲學者撰文指，SpaceX 像曾延續近300年的東印度公司那樣，以企業之名，行主權國家之實。文章指出，1570至1860年間，帝國主義橫行的年代，歐洲國家透過特許公司向未發展的「東印度」擴展，足迹遍及今日的印度、巴基斯坦、孟加拉及香港等地。這些「公司」透過龍斷，利用法律漏洞制定對自己有利的規則，並執行近乎主權的職能，包括擁有軍隊、發動戰爭及簽訂條約。英國要到1858年，經過饑荒、財政危機和暴力起義接連爆發後，才能約束東印度公司。
現在，SpaceX 的發展正呈現出這種趨勢。SpaceX研發可回收火箭，大大減低成本，建立「星鏈」，現在NASA 也靠SpaceX 和藍色起源推動計劃。雖然1967年以美國為首、過百個國家簽署聯合國《外太空條約》，但當時是在政府斷太空活動的時代下制定，因此對象是國家，當中列明任何國家不得以主權壟斷外太空；換言之，這不適用於企業，聯合國亦沒有執法權。
美國面對這個漏洞，不但沒有加以約束，更於2015 年推出《商業太空發射競爭力法》（CSLCA），並於2020年推出《阿提米絲協議》（ArtemisAccords），主張開採太空資源不構成「佔有」。這等於為SpaceX 大開方便之門，霸佔大量低軌道空間與無線電頻譜資源，這些行為與當年霸佔未發展國家資源的東印度公司不謀而合。當年，英國向東印度公司發特許狀，防止荷蘭壟斷香料貿易；如今，美國在各方面賦予SpaceX 強大力量，正是為趕在中國之前，率先取得太空戰略優勢。但值得留意的是，美國覓依賴一個不會乖乖聽命的馬斯克，例如早前他與特朗普交惡，便威脅切斷美國政府進出國際太空站的權力。
從特許公司這段歷史獲得的教訓是，若這些企業的權力過大並根深概固，政府即使想收回主導權，也追悔莫及。現在SpaceX的走向正正令人有此憂慮，但我相信中國不會容許任何一間私人公司，在不受規管的情况下壟斷市場份額及霸佔貧源。
SpaceX豈止是企業（撰文：葉劉淑儀，原文刊於《明報》）
As mentioned last time, two European scholars wrote an article arguing that SpaceX, much like the East India Company that lasted nearly 300 years, acts as a sovereign state under the guise of a corporation. The article points out that between 1570 and 1860, during the heyday of imperialism, European states expanded into the underdeveloped “East Indies” through chartered companies, reaching territories that include present-day India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Hong Kong. These “companies” exploited monopolies and legal loopholes to craft rules in their own favor, and exercised functions akin to sovereign powers—including maintaining armies, waging wars, and signing treaties. It was not until 1858, after a succession of famines, fiscal crises, and violent uprisings, that Britain was able to rein in the East India Company.
Today, SpaceX’s development is displaying a similar trend. SpaceX has developed reusable rockets that drastically reduce costs and established Starlink; now even NASA relies on SpaceX and Blue Origin to drive its plans. Although the UN Outer Space Treaty was signed in 1967 by over 100 countries, led by the United States, it was drafted in an era when space activities were exclusively government-run, so its provisions target states—explicitly stating that no state may claim sovereign monopoly over outer space. In other words, it does not apply to private companies, and the UN has no enforcement powers.
Far from closing this loophole, the United States enacted the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act (CSLCA) in 2015 and introduced the Artemis Accords in 2020, which assert that the extraction of space resources does not constitute “appropriation.” This has effectively paved the way for SpaceX to dominate vast amounts of low‑Earth orbit and radio spectrum resources—actions strikingly similar to those of the East India Company when it seized resources in underdeveloped countries. Back then, Britain granted a charter to the East India Company to prevent the Dutch from monopolising the spice trade; today, the United States is empowering SpaceX in every way precisely to secure a strategic space advantage over China. Yet it is worth noting that the US relies on Elon Musk, who does not obediently follow orders—for instance, after falling out with Trump, he threatened to cut off US government access to the International Space Station.
The lesson from the history of chartered companies is that once these enterprises become too powerful and deeply entrenched, it may be too late for governments to reclaim control even if they wish to. SpaceX’s current trajectory rightly raises such concerns, but I believe China will never allow any private company to monopolise market share or seize resources without regulation.
SpaceX is more than just a company (Written by Regina Ip, originally published in Ming Pao)
Johnson Choi Biz 