a frequently-held view of the organization. Many observers seem to ignore the organization’s conflicted development in praising its current smooth functioning and in suggesting that INTELSAT be used as a model for multilateral management of other large-scale technical enterprises. But the history of how the various elements of INTELSAT came into being seems as relevant as that they exist and function well. While the particular structures into which INTELSAT is organized may not be suitable for framing a SPS, the processing of bargaining, negotiation, and compromise through which those structures were created does stand as a powerful example of international cooperation in an area of high national stakes and strongly-held differences in views. Why was the process which led to INTELSAT ultimately successful in terms of producing an organizational design to which all could subscribe, whatever their organizational preferences? First of all, the process was almost totally political in character, despite the highly technical issues under negotiation. Bargainers did not try to reach agreement on specific technical issues. Rather they tried to define an acceptable political context within which a specialized organization could operate. They recognized the reality that the expertise and capabilities needed for organizational success were concentrated in Comsat, and that both Comsat and the U.S. Government were strongly motivated to retain their control over these resources. They also recognized that in the long term, this was unacceptable to other participants vital to organizational stability and growth. It was political skill at its best that found a way to reconcile these views. The INTELSAT structure, while creating a policy and political framework within which the organization had to operate, also gave the organization a high degree of freedom from the short-term ebb and flow of international politics. The Assembly of Parties meets only every two years, and voting on the Board of Governors was weighted so those most “responsible” controlled the organization. The tradition of competent technical management which was begun under Comsat was carried through during a transition period to an international management staff; few appointments were made on a patronage basis. INTELSAT was created, despite the surrounding disputes, as an institution which had the organizational capabilities needed to perform its function. Its creation was an act of organizational innovation of the highest quality. LIMITS TO INTELSAT MODEL The argument so far in this paper is that if it was possible to create a viable institution framework for communications via satellite, it ought to be possible to create a viable framework for SPS, should the decision to develop such a system be taken. There are plenty of holes in this line of argument, most of them linked to the differences between the SPS concept and the character of an international satellite communications network. In addition, the political, technological, and economic context within which a SPS would be developed is much different than the context in being during INTELSAT's formative years. Major differences between SPS and communications satellite systems include the following: (a) Costs — Most projections of the cost of creating a major SPS capability are several orders of magnitude greater than the investment required to bring the INTELSAT system on-line and to expand and update it. Current estimates of the costs
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==