Transatlantic space policy will define the military and commercial contours of the space domain. Against this backdrop, a CEPA roundtable convened experts from government, industry, and the policy community to examine avenues for coordination between the US and Europe on space policy. The conversation covered the invisible reach of space in daily life, the fraying of transatlantic trust, Europe’s push for sovereign capability, and the regulatory and financial choices that will shape a market forecasted to be $1.8 trillion by 2035.
The Invisible Infrastructure
To most, the reliance of everyday technology on space is imperceptible. GPS guides navigation, satellites manage air traffic control, and low Earth orbit (LEO) connectivity reaches places where terrestrial infrastructure falls short. Space is omnipresent, and new applications are constantly in development. For instance, direct-to-device service from LEO constellations could disrupt the traditional telecommunications market and redefine connectivity.
Trust and Sovereignty
Roundtable attendees described an erosion of transatlantic trust on space issues, which some attribute to a series of recent shocks. Disruptions in Starlink access and satellite imagery for front-line Ukrainians unsettled European partners. NASA’s Ignition announcement compounded the unease, creating uncertainty over European contributions to the Artemis Program. Participants consider dependence on a single provider as a strategic vulnerability.
Crucially, what trust exists appears to rest largely with the private sector. In the absence of streamlined regulation, an industry coalition has voluntarily agreed to a set of standards. Further, participants noted confusion over legal supremacy. Member states seem to be unsure whether EU regulation or the international treaties they have signed, but the EU has not, take precedence.
In this environment, Europe is aiming to increase its sovereign space capabilities. This is reflected by efforts such as the IRIS² satellite constellation for secure communications, with initial services due in 2030. Nevertheless, attendees agreed that full sovereignty remains unrealistic. The gap is structural: Europe still lacks a dynamic, novel space launch company of its own. Participants also cautioned against duplicative US and EU efforts, warning that parallel programs waste time and resources that collaboration could conserve.
Rules, Money, and Competition
The proposed EU Space Act drew the sharpest debate. Participants warned it could trigger a transatlantic regulatory arms race. This would mean leaving the door open for China to dominate the commercial market. Some were encouraged by recent collaboration between industry and government, which resulted in eliminating the giga-constellation category from the draft act. Notably, the current draft of the EU’s Multiannual Financial Framework earmarks €131 billion for defense, security, and space. This five-fold increase is a clear sign that Europe now views the domain through a security lens.
Takeaways
The throughline was interoperability. Attendees maintained that the future of transatlantic space cooperation depends on technical trust, regulatory consistency, and systems that work together rather than in parallel. As the debate over the EU Space Act shows, the alternative is a regulatory race that hands the advantage to Beijing. With the space market on track to surpass $1.8 trillion within a decade, the contours of that domain are a matter policymakers must watch.
Jack Galloway is a Program Assistant with the Tech Policy Program at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA).
Alina Kreynovich is a Program Assistant for External Affairs at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA).
This event was held at the Center for European Policy Analysis under the Chatham House Rule.
CEPA is a nonpartisan, nonprofit, public policy institution. All opinions expressed are those of the author(s) alone and may not represent those of the institutions they represent or the Center for European Policy Analysis. CEPA maintains a strict intellectual independence policy across all its projects and publications.
