The Risks of Private Control in National Space Power: A Cautionary Tale
The Rise of Commercial Space: A Double-Edged Sword
The commercial space industry has experienced an extraordinary rise, with private companies now playing a pivotal role in U.S. space activities. From launching satellites and transporting cargo and astronauts to the International Space Station, to even sending landers to the Moon, these companies are no longer peripheral participants. This shift has been bipartisan and explicit, with the government setting objectives, and private industry building and operating the space systems.
However, this reliance on private companies has also revealed structural vulnerabilities. Access to space, particularly for crewed missions, remains heavily concentrated in one company, SpaceX. While the United States has begun developing alternatives, the concentration of power in the hands of a single company gives it disproportionate leverage. If private power and public strategy were to diverge, would Washington have a credible Plan B?
Commercial Integration as Official Policy
Commercial integration is now official policy, with the House Science Committee approving the NASA Reauthorization Act of 2026, directing the agency to partner with American commercial providers for operations in low-Earth orbit, lunar landings, and the transition beyond the International Space Station. The U.S. Space Force's 2024 Commercial Space Strategy also emphasizes speed and innovation through private partnerships.
From Cost Savings to Structural Dominance
The origins of this shift can be traced back to a moment of vulnerability. After the retirement of the space shuttle in 2011, the United States temporarily lost independent human spaceflight capability. NASA responded by turning to commercial providers through the Commercial Crew and Commercial Resupply programs, with the goal of reducing costs, restoring domestic launch capability, and accelerating innovation.
It worked. Launch costs fell by almost 70% in some cases, and the pace of launches increased. SpaceX, founded by Elon Musk, became central to this new architecture, with its Falcon 9 rocket carrying the majority of U.S. launches to orbit. Since 2020, its Crew Dragon spacecraft has also routinely transported NASA astronauts, restoring the U.S.'s ability to launch people to orbit after a 10-year gap.
The Musk Episode as a Warning
In 2025, during a public dispute over government contracts and regulatory matters, Elon Musk briefly threatened to decommission the Dragon spacecraft - the vehicle NASA relies on to transport astronauts to orbit. While Musk quickly backed off his threat, the moment was revealing. It exposed how tightly U.S. access to space had become linked to the stability of a single firm - and arguably a single individual.
Is There a Plan B?
A credible Plan B for space does not mean abandoning commercial partnerships. It means ensuring that alternatives exist. Historically, assured access to space has meant having more than one way to reach orbit. Today, that principle extends to crew transport, lunar logistics, satellite services, and data infrastructure.
Congress appears aware of this, with the current NASA reauthorization bill requiring the agency to diversify providers in key programs, particularly lunar landers. The intent is to build redundancy deliberately into the system, making it more resilient to potential shocks.
However, redundancy is expensive. Maintaining parallel systems, supporting multiple providers, and preserving internal government expertise require long-term funding and political commitment. Markets alone likely will not guarantee diversification in these expensive sectors.
Strategic Permanence in Space Requires Options
As the United States expands into cislunar space and looks to establish a sustained presence on the Moon, its reliance on commercial providers will deepen. Commercial dynamism has revitalized American leadership in space, but it has also revealed structural vulnerabilities. Durable systems rarely depend on a single center of power.
The United States has chosen a commercial path in space, and that choice has delivered extraordinary gains. But permanence beyond Earth will require a deliberate balance: multiple providers for critical services, overlapping capabilities, and alternatives robust enough to absorb shocks. Commercial space can underpin American leadership in the new space age, but only if access to orbit, and beyond, never rests on a single, indispensable company.
