The resurgent interest in lunar exploration makes an urgent need for a clearer policy on the economic utilization of space. Evolving legal frameworks for space activities will soon be put to the test
First of all, many space lawyers argue that Liability convention mechanisms were involved during Kosmos 954 incident settlement, ex. Pietkiewicz, M., 2023. THE “LIABILITY CONVENTION” IN A CLASH WITH PRACTICE – EXAMPLE OF THE “KOSMOS 954” SATELLITE. Studia Iuridica, vol. 97, pp. 54-69. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31338/2544-3135.si.2023-97.4.
Therefore citing this incident as an example of convention application is doubtful.
Second, I am really doubtful that unilaterally developed "Artemis accords" is the way forward to develop sustainable and future-proof legal basis fir future Moon exploration. As they are not signed and anyhow accepted by two significant space powers: China and Russia - they can not be, therefore, anyhow bound with its provisions. It lays the ground for the future conflicts in Outer space, instead of uniting the mankind in quest for space exploration.
Even if the provisions of Accords are reasonable, it is necessary that they would be jointly developed and agreed with all space-faring nations. It can be UN or other international organization, but the dialogue and consensus even with the countries that don't share your own opinion on many important topics is something that must be in basis of any agreement related to Outer Space.
I wish to respectfully push back on your second point. While I understand the argument that a truly accepted system should be developed by all interested parties, I think that this process can lead to multiple difficulties.
First, there is the desire of states who are not spacefaring (and have little immediate plans to become so) to put onerous regulations which slow down progress to their benefit. This is in my eyes a clear negative; I believe in encouraging others to make strides to catch up, rather than slowing down those who have already developed space technologies. The UN and most other international organizations do not provide an opportunity for an agreement to be drafted by spacefaring nations; they provide a platform for those who can’t to try and bind those who can to their mutual detriment. What technologies will come from the struggle and challenge of creating a permanent presence on the moon? Imagine if an agreement had been made to keep earth orbits free and clear. We would not have GPS nor communication satellites. It would be a lose-lose, and it is reasonable to fear that any agreement that draws in too many outside parties would be the same.
Second, has mankind ever been previously united? While space provides an idealistic final frontier, it stretches credulity to assert that this is a requirement. The Artemis Accords provide a framework to move forward for all countries willing to agree. Do you claim that it is unfair or biased towards the United States, or is it purely a matter of pride that China should be able to draft their own agreement?
As a parting shot, is Russia a significant space power these days? Doubtless the USSR was. I feel little but sadness when thinking of the changes in the Russian space program over time, but it seems difficult to argue there is development or improvement being made beyond riding the coattails of the greats that came before.
First of all, many space lawyers argue that Liability convention mechanisms were involved during Kosmos 954 incident settlement, ex. Pietkiewicz, M., 2023. THE “LIABILITY CONVENTION” IN A CLASH WITH PRACTICE – EXAMPLE OF THE “KOSMOS 954” SATELLITE. Studia Iuridica, vol. 97, pp. 54-69. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31338/2544-3135.si.2023-97.4.
Therefore citing this incident as an example of convention application is doubtful.
Second, I am really doubtful that unilaterally developed "Artemis accords" is the way forward to develop sustainable and future-proof legal basis fir future Moon exploration. As they are not signed and anyhow accepted by two significant space powers: China and Russia - they can not be, therefore, anyhow bound with its provisions. It lays the ground for the future conflicts in Outer space, instead of uniting the mankind in quest for space exploration.
Even if the provisions of Accords are reasonable, it is necessary that they would be jointly developed and agreed with all space-faring nations. It can be UN or other international organization, but the dialogue and consensus even with the countries that don't share your own opinion on many important topics is something that must be in basis of any agreement related to Outer Space.
Ivan,
I wish to respectfully push back on your second point. While I understand the argument that a truly accepted system should be developed by all interested parties, I think that this process can lead to multiple difficulties.
First, there is the desire of states who are not spacefaring (and have little immediate plans to become so) to put onerous regulations which slow down progress to their benefit. This is in my eyes a clear negative; I believe in encouraging others to make strides to catch up, rather than slowing down those who have already developed space technologies. The UN and most other international organizations do not provide an opportunity for an agreement to be drafted by spacefaring nations; they provide a platform for those who can’t to try and bind those who can to their mutual detriment. What technologies will come from the struggle and challenge of creating a permanent presence on the moon? Imagine if an agreement had been made to keep earth orbits free and clear. We would not have GPS nor communication satellites. It would be a lose-lose, and it is reasonable to fear that any agreement that draws in too many outside parties would be the same.
Second, has mankind ever been previously united? While space provides an idealistic final frontier, it stretches credulity to assert that this is a requirement. The Artemis Accords provide a framework to move forward for all countries willing to agree. Do you claim that it is unfair or biased towards the United States, or is it purely a matter of pride that China should be able to draft their own agreement?
As a parting shot, is Russia a significant space power these days? Doubtless the USSR was. I feel little but sadness when thinking of the changes in the Russian space program over time, but it seems difficult to argue there is development or improvement being made beyond riding the coattails of the greats that came before.