Space Weaponization – 4 Week
Download 0.53 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- The agreement would fail – any space program would violate it
COC Fails – DefinitionMisunderstandings over the terms of the agreement spark international conflict – on Earth and in space David 11 [Leonard, past editor-in-chief of the National Space Society's Ad Astra and Space WOrld magazines, SPACE.com senior writer, "Play Nice Up There! Code of Conduct for Space Sought," 1-6, http://www.space.com/9701-surface-mars-possibly-shaped-plate-tectonics.html] "There has been commendable progress on defining what might evolve into a broadly acceptable Code of Conduct for safe and responsible space operations," said Scott Pace, director of the Space Policy Institute and professor of the practice of international affairs at the George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs in Washington, D.C. Pace said that work is under way to engage space-benefiting nations and emerging space powers as well as traditional spacefaring nations. But he pointed out that there have been fewer developments in defining what activities would be considered misconduct and appropriate international responses."What one country may see as misconduct — calling for a particular response — may not be seen in the same way by others, either party to the conflict, allied or neutral," Pace said. He encouraged further international discussion — as expressed within the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 — on what might be recognized as "harmful interference." "Failing to do so risks misunderstanding and misperceptions that could undermine international stability and security … not just in space but on Earth as well," Pace said. Some consider the jamming of satellites as misconduct, Pace noted. A case in point is the recent protest over the government of Iran's intentional jamming of satellite transmissions of the Voice of America’s Persian News Network and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty's Radio Farda, Pace said. "But it hasn't been brought up as an outer space treaty violation explicitly," he added. The agreement would fail – any space program would violate it Dr. Michael C. Mineiro 2008. Professor of law at McGill University Faculty of Law http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1268022 "Space weapon" is not defined within any international treaty, international customary law, or domestic US law. While treaty and customary law do provide some guidance on the legality of weaponization, no comprehensive definition of "space weapon" is provided. The importance of defining space weapon cannot be understated; for whoever defines space weapons defines the debate of weaponization. The question of what constitutes a "space weapon" is a matter of degree. One can theorize that a broad definition of space weapon would include terrestrial and space-based systems with the capacity to destroy, damage, or interfere with a space asset or Earth-based asset from space. Conversely, a narrow definition of space weapon would limit its application to systems in space whose designed purpose is to physically destroy or damage an object in outer space. One of the major difficulties in defining "space weapon" is that many space systems designed for peaceful purposes have the capacity to destroy or interfere with another object or being in space or in the Earth environment.26 For example, NASA recently launched their first autonomous robotic spacecraft, a repair robot called DART.27 DART is laying the groundwork for future projects like robotic delivery of cargo to space shuttles and automated docking and repair between spacecraft in orbit. DART is capable of maneuvering to satellites and physically interacting with satellites. DART's ability to maneuver and interact with other satellites gives it the potential to be used as an anti-satellite weapon (ASAT). A DART-like space system could target a satellite and force it out of its orbit, either destroying it or effectively negating its usefulness. Is a space robot like DART a "space weapon?" Is it a dual-use system? Or is it strictly a peaceful non-weaponized system? Lawyers and policy makers debating the issue of weaponization must consider the overlapping capabilities inherent in space systems. Most space systems, due to their very nature, will exhibit some weapon-like capabilities. Article IV of the Outer Space Treaty bans the placement of nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Earth orbit, in outer space, or on celestial bodies.28 Through logical inference, this WMD prohibition carves out a minimum definition of space weapons. A space weapon is, at the very minimum, a WMD placed in orbit, in outer space, or on a celestial body.29 Beyond this definitional inference, no clarity is provided under international law. No accepted definition of “space weapon” Lele, 10 [Ajey, “Trends in Space Weaponisation”; Indian Defense Review Issue: Vol 25.3 Jul-Sep 2010; October 6, 2010; http://www.indiandefencereview.com/defence-industry/Trends-in-Space-Weaponisation.html] For states like US and China, lack of any arms control regime for space weapons could be said to be advantageous. The United Nations Outer Space Treaty (OST, 1967) contains an undertaking not to place in orbit any nuclear or any other weapons of mass destruction.However, it is felt that the provisions made in this treaty are not sufficient to account for the existence of any space weapons.China and the US are taking advantage of the serious limitations of this treaty. Presently, at the UN level there is no agreement on how to define space weapon because at times anything and everything could be defined as a space weapon. The agreement would fall apart – all space policies would be seen as weaponization Billick 01 – USAF Air University (Thomas W. Billick, “Arms Control Implications for Military Operations in Space,” May 2001. Maxwell AFB, AL: USAF Air University, page 52) In an effort to diffuse the perceived threat space weapons pose to the international community, the U.S. could make several new points in statements issued to the CD. First, practically any active satellite has the potential to be used as a weapon to destroy or disrupt other satellites. Satellites are typically built with a limited capacity to maneuver in order to maintain attitude and position throughout their useful life. It would be a relatively simple proposition to maneuver a given satellite into striking or blocking another, especially one already in close proximity. The point is that a ban on space systems designed as weapons will not necessarily prevent the use of weapons in space. Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 0.53 Mb. Share with your friends:
|