Space-Based Espionage Under International Law: Legal Ambiguities and the Case of Israel

[Amir Hossein Asgari is a Ph.D. candidate in public international law at the University of Tehran, Iran]

Introduction

Israel’s recent launch of the reconnaissance satellite (Ofek-19), aimed at enhancing regional surveillance and intelligence capabilities, raises serious questions in the fields of international space law and public international law. The use of satellite technology for collecting security and military data is not only a matter of technical and strategic considerations but also a subject of legal controversy. Fundamental principles of international law, particularly the prohibition of unlawful interference and the restrictions concerning espionage, may affect the legitimacy of such an action. International treaties, such as the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, along with customary rules governing the peaceful use of outer space, provide a framework for analyzing these activities. From this perspective, the satellite launch is not merely a technological undertaking; it is an issue that must be assessed in light of binding legal principles and the ethical and political standards of the international community. This note examines the legal dimensions and the potential lack of international legitimacy of this act.

The Framework of International Space Law and the Role of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty

The primary binding instrument governing space activities is the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, to which Israel is also a party. This treaty is widely regarded as the backbone of international space law and establishes fundamental principles: the prohibition of national appropriation of outer space and celestial bodies, the obligation to use outer space for peaceful purposes and for the benefit of all humanity, and the responsibility of states for their space activities and any potential consequences for other countries. Under this treaty, satellites placed in Earth orbit are considered part of outer space, and their passage over national airspace does not constitute a violation of state sovereignty. The sovereignty of states is limited to their terrestrial territory and airspace up to the Kármán line (approximately 100 kilometers above the Earth’s surface); beyond this boundary, activities are subject to the regime of international space law.

Espionage in International Law: Legal Complexities and Substantive Distinctions

Espionage has long occupied an ambiguous and intermediate position in international relations. Unlike military operations, which are explicitly prohibited under international instruments, espionage in international law does not enjoy a general and absolute prohibition. The prohibition applies only when unauthorized intrusion into the territory or airspace of states occurs, as such acts violate the fundamental principle of state sovereignty. Within this framework, a distinction must be made between terrestrial and aerial espionage on one hand, and space-based technological espionage on the other.

Reconnaissance satellites, by virtue of being situated in outer space, fall under the rules governing that domain. According to the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, outer space constitutes a global commons and is not under the sovereignty of any state. Therefore, the launch and deployment of reconnaissance satellites, in the absence of direct violations of territorial or airspace boundaries, do not constitute a clear breach of international law. In customary international practice, such activities are generally described as “unfriendly acts” but lack binding enforcement mechanisms. Many legal scholars argue that while space-based espionage is not explicitly prohibited, it nevertheless poses a threat to regional stability and the security of targeted states.

The substantive distinction between aerial and space-based espionage is also significant. The overflight of reconnaissance aircraft in national airspace constitutes a clear violation of sovereignty and is prohibited under international law. In contrast, reconnaissance satellites operate in orbits above the Kármán line (approximately 100 kilometers above the Earth’s surface) and are therefore outside the territorial jurisdiction of states; accordingly, their intelligence-gathering activities are not legally prohibited. This distinction arises from the inherent differences between terrestrial and outer space domains, as well as the limitations of the existing space law regime.

Despite this legal gap, some states have attempted to regulate space-based espionage through restrictive policies. For instance, the United States has established regulations prohibiting the sale of satellite imagery of sensitive regions to third countries. However, no binding international treaty explicitly prohibits the use of reconnaissance satellites. This lack of uniformity reflects geopolitical considerations and the balance of power in the international system more than any deficiency in legal principles.

Israel’s Spy Satellite Launch: A Practical Case in the Light of International Law

A clear example of the challenges in this area can be observed in Israel’s recent actions. With the aim of enhancing its intelligence and surveillance capacities and as part of a long-term security strategy, Israel launched a reconnaissance satellite from the “Ofek” series into Earth orbit. From the perspective of space law and under the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, such an action can be justified within the framework of the free use of outer space, as the satellite is deployed in orbits above the atmosphere and its utilization is not exclusively controlled by any single state.

However, the practical and strategic implications of this action extend beyond mere surveillance enhancement. The launch of this satellite provides a platform for facilitating Israel’s future military operations, as the collected intelligence data can play a role in military planning, coordination with international partners, and even in shaping regional and extra-regional balances of power.

Thus, while this action does not constitute a direct violation of binding space law rules, it may be interpreted, under general international law and political custom, as provocative and potentially threatening to regional security. Consequently, Israel’s spy satellite launch not only aims to strengthen intelligence capabilities but also serves as a potential tool to facilitate future interventions and military operations on the international stage, a situation that illustrates the clear intersection between legal legitimacy and strategic functions in the realm of security and international politics.

Conclusion

While the existing framework of international space law does not classify Israel’s launch of a reconnaissance satellite as an explicit legal violation, this conclusion should not be read as an endorsement of the activity’s broader legitimacy. Rather, the case illustrates a structural limitation within the current space law regime, which permits technologically advanced forms of intelligence-gathering without offering clear normative guidance on their security implications. The absence of a prohibition on reconnaissance satellites under the 1967 Outer Space Treaty reflects not a deliberate acceptance of space-based espionage, but a regulatory gap shaped by Cold War–era assumptions and enduring geopolitical interests. In this sense, Israel’s Ofek satellite functions less as an exceptional case and more as a practical manifestation of a systemic ambiguity in international law, where legality is determined by formal compliance with treaty obligations, while questions of stability, trust, and responsible conduct in outer space remain largely unresolved.

However, the absence of an explicit prohibition does not imply absolute legitimacy. Fundamental principles of public international law—including the prohibition of intervention in the domestic affairs of states, the principle of good neighborliness, and even norms related to respect for human rights—provide a basis for the implicit condemnation of activities such as the launch of reconnaissance satellites. Such actions, especially when primarily aimed at gathering military or security intelligence against other states, can potentially threaten regional and global stability and security.

A key point of contention lies in the interpretation of the term “peaceful use” in the Outer Space Treaty. Divergent understandings by states of what constitutes “peaceful” have led to situations in which activities like launching reconnaissance satellites, although not formally prohibited, are viewed by many countries as strategic and provocative acts. This situation reflects a significant gap in the international legal regime, as space-based espionage is not clearly defined or prohibited in any binding international instrument and has largely been addressed only in political and ethical discourse.

Therefore, while Israel’s action may not constitute an offense or violation under space law, its political and ethical legitimacy remains highly debatable. This situation not only highlights the existing shortcomings in international law in responding to emerging technological and security challenges but also serves as a stimulus for reconsidering and potentially developing new rules regarding the military and intelligence use of space. Establishing such regulations appears essential to balance the right to freely utilize outer space with the need to ensure security and mutual trust among states.