On the whole it is a success for Europe. This is how one should consider the Council's decision in favour of the Galileo project. I do not just mean a technical success but a success more generally: a success from the political, military, economic, technological, industrial and "society" points of view.
A question of independence: It is a political success, because the fifteen governments unanimously decided not to take American opposition into account. The United States had spared no effort to convince the Union that its project was not necessary, of no purpose and even, from the "defence" point of view, dangerous. A few months ago, the financial and technical reservation voiced by several European governments was considered by some observers as a way to hide the true reason for their reticence, linked to American opposition. This impression proved wrong, as even the governments most sensitive to Washington's attitude waived their reservation after receiving the explanations and assurances required. Germany's about-turn was a determining factor. At the end of the day, no Member State bowed before pressure from across the Atlantic. They all felt that, if the programme were valid and useful, then it should be carried out. President Prodi stressed that Galileo represents an aspect of the EU's emancipation from the United States. He said: "It is a matter of independence. Europe cannot depend on the American GPS system over which it has no control, which is sometimes suspended for military reasons and which can be modified at any moment. If the United States had suggested that we take part in GPs management, then the situation would have been different. As it was, it did not". In his opinion, the decision to develop Galileo comes within the objective of boosting Europe's confidence through the concrete construction of instruments for independent action. That is why it is a political victory.
Intelligence from reliable sources. It is a positive result at military level. I shall say no more on this because I have neither the general knowledge nor the specific information that would make any comment on my part justified. I shall simply quote the essential part of what was written by Alain Lallemand, who obviously did have reliable sources, though clearly biased (1).
Investment and employment. It is an economic success, because investment is considerable and the future profitability and expected impact are substantial. Figures forecast (although considered by experts as somewhat uncertain, especially with regards incoming revenue) are well-known: investment by 2007 EUR 1.2 billion for the development phase and 2.15 billion for the deployment phase; a market by way of EUR 8-10 billion annually; growing receipts reaching EUR 370 million annually from 2010; and the creation of 140,000-150,000 highly qualified jobs. By way of comparison, experts cite the computer market twenty years ago or that of the Internet more recently. In a field as fundamental as this, Europe cannot be just a consumer of services provided by others, observed Commission Vice-President Loyola de Palacio and the President of the Transport Council, Francisco Alvarez-Cascos.
Return to major projects. It is a technological success as, since Ariane and Airbus, Europe had not launched any major avant-garde projects, and doubts were being cast as to its determination and ability to do so. What is new is that, whereas the two projects, Ariane and Airbus, were intergovernmental projects, carried out by a certain number of European countries, Galileo is a European project in which all Member States will participate in the context of the EU. It is partially financed by the common budget and comes under the creation of a joint undertaking. It was also decided by Community procedures, under the impetus of the Commission with the support of the European Parliament.
Space industry regains confidence. It is an industrial success because, according to the spokesman for one of the companies involved, the "launching of Galileo is the first good news that the European space industry has had for some time". The market was shrinking. During the nineties, orders were for around thirty satellites a year. By 2001 this number had fallen to twenty and only fifteen are expected for the current year. The 30 Galileo satellites (one of which must be launched in 2004 to conserve the frequencies reserved, the others between 2006 and 2008) will not resolve all the problems but will give fresh confidence. Astrium, Alcatel Espace and Alenia have grouped together within the "Galileo Industries" consortium and may look at the future with greater optimism (although some analysts consider restructuring is necessary in order to cut down from three to two companies). Renewed confidence is even more obvious among the members of the second consortium, "Galileo Services", which will provide ground installations: receptor and telecommunications equipment, etc.
Over and beyond our imagination. It is a success for "society" in the sense that utilisation of Galileo will take many forms, well over and beyond what the public can imagine. Some of its uses directly concern the everyday lives of us all. Transport, telecommunications, health, security, agriculture, fisheries, finance, volcanoes, and earthquakes. The list of possible utilisations, using practical examples as a support, is impressive. The identification of the exact place where a car is to be found will become banal, and it will be essential not only for guiding drivers through city traffic or along mountain roads, but also in the fight against theft and aggression, when the simple opening of an airbag will set off an alarm with immediate and precise location of the vehicle concerned. The management of public transport and road transport will be considerably facilitated. At sea, the follow-up of fishing fleets will allow each ship's activity to be monitored, and the fight against dumping at sea of oil waste or dangerous substances will be more effective, thus improving the protection of the marine environment. On land, the final destination of waste may be controlled metre by metre, putting an end to abuse. It will be enough to put a sensor in place. Geo-physicians may survey the expansion of volcanoes, follow the splitting of seismic faults or the movements of icebergs, and assess continental drift. The tracking of persons by satellite may become more generalised (for those who really want it …) by fitting sensors to mobile phones, watches and electronic terminals. The synchronisation of financial transactions or electricity exchanges will be assured.
What has still to be done and questions still unanswered. The Council's decision this week does not of course solve all the problems. First of all, there are still unanswered questions regarding the final financial availability. The Council has released EUR 450 million which, added to the 100 million already available and an identical amount provided by the European Space Agency, will finance the development phase of the project. After this, there is private funding as a majority. Industries, grouped within the two consortia, "Galileo Industries" and "Galileo Services", are very interested, as we explained above, but they will no doubt seek to obtain a share of public financing that is as high as possible.
Secondly, there must be negotiations with the United States, which, by noting the European decision in a moderate and balanced tone (see our bulleting of 27 March, p.8), called for discussions to be opened over coming months with the European Commission on the technical aspects of security. It will be a top priority to make the European signal definitively compatible with the American signal, in order to guarantee indispensable interoperability between the two systems.
At the industrial and technological level, the European industry is still far from being fully independent. Currently, it depends on Japan to provide the "microchips" that will allow the Galileo signal to be picked up, and on the United States for other ground equipment and for atomic timekeeping. Industrialists should be helped to improve their degree of autonomy. And, for launching the first Galileo satellite, it is a true race against time. The frequencies obtained during the last world telecommunications conference will be lost if they are not used before the end of 2005. After this, the 2008 deadline for Galileo to be fully operational must be respected, or it will be overtaken by the new American rival project. The last aspect: designation of the headquarters for the Galileo Agency, which, when it exists, should comprise several hundred highly qualified technicians and have an operational budget of around EUR 270 million per year. Three countries, it seems, have already presented their candidature: Germany, italy and Spain. Things could get quite lively. (F.R.)
- - - - - - - -
(1) "So much caution is being taken to attenuate something that is obvious: the major Galileo asset is a military one (…). It will allow Europe to regain a certain independence in military intelligence faced with the American arbitrary. What is the situation? There is a Russian system, Glonass, which is not very reliable (with 60 metre reliability, a plane can miss the landing strip). The American GPs is reliable up to 16 metres for military applications, 20 metres in the public field. But it can be scrambled according to the whims of the American military, which, in another style, demonstrated that they could traffic the satellite pictures forwarded to Europe when military interests in Washington and Brussels were not concordant. The GPS is, moreover, regularly scrambled by Washington in conflict zones, not allowing Europeans to collect topographical information in a reliable manner. Far from being a detail - in moments of crisis, this places Europe under American strategies (…). Galileo, which will be reliable up to one metre, is one of the elements of response, one of the tools for European military autonomy (…). If the Galileo project is abandoned, we shall lose our defence autonomy in the next 20 to 30 years. Because the range of frequencies used cannot be extended, because these frequencies are subject to licensing and because, if Europe does not take its frequencies now, then Washington will have the monopoly of them tomorrow". (Alain Lallemand, "Le Soir" of 27 March 2002i).