[ad_1]
Most likely, it is the most famous portrait of the flag ever taken: Buzz Aldrin, located next to the first American flag planted on the moon. For those who knew their world history, there was an alarm bell for them. Less than a century ago, back on Earth, by putting a national flag in the other part of the world, this country still has the money to claim this area. What stars and bandages on the moon show the establishment of an American colony ?
The question that they pose most regularly, often with a big smile or a glimmer in the eye, is: When people learn for the first time that I practice and teach a lawyer named "Space Law", then tell me, who is the owner of the moon ? "
European habit, which was applicable to non – European parts of the world Especially Portuguese, Spanish, Dutch, French and English created huge colonial empires. again, when their arrogance was accurate with respect to Europe, the permissible argument was declining, it was a performance of the institution of dominance and recognized as part of the law of nations and parcel, globally
Obviously, instead of considering the legal meaning of the flag and the results of the space flag, there were more important things in the world. mind of the astronauts, but fortunately the question was settled before the mission.From the beginning of the space race, the United States knew that for many people around the world, the view of the American flag on the moon would raise the big political questions. There is a suggestion that the moon can become, legally speaking, some of the American cooking water can fuel such concerns, and perhaps the United States. Space programs and American interests can lead to harmful international conflicts .
Until 1969, decolonization could have destroyed any hypothesis that the non-European parts of the world, although the population was not decent, appropriately under European sovereignty – however, living on the Moon was not even a person; Even life was also absent.
Nevertheless, Armstrong and Aldrin gave simple answers to this question through their small ceremony that the moon was changed, or at least a large part to "no" the American zone, nor the NASA, nor only the US government had the effect of the American flag for this purpose
The first treaty of outer space
Maximum prominent, this the answer to was recognized in the 1967 Convention on Outer Space, in which the United States and the Soviet Union as well as all additional space birthdays also became a holiday. The two world powers have agreed that the "colonization" of the Earth was responsible for the wonderful human sadness and many armed struggles of the last century. They were convinced that the old European colonial powers should not reoffend error when it chooses the legitimate position of the Moon; the opportunity to "catch up" at least on the outer side of the space was to avoid the possibility of at least one more world war. As a result, the Moon has become a "common good" legally accessible to all countries of the world – two years before the real artificial moon
Thus, the American flag was not an expression of claim . sovereignty, but to honor the American taxpayers and engineers who made possible the mission of Armstrong, Aldrin and third astronaut Michael Collins. The two men took a plate and said that they "came in peace to all of humanity," and certainly Neil's famous words reflected the same spirit: their "small step for". man 'for the United States' huge jump ', but' humanity for it. In addition to this, the United States and NASA share soil cliffs and other soil samples from the surface of the Moon with the entire world in keeping with their commitment, either by giving them foreign governments or by enabling scientists from them for scientific analysis and discussion, worldwide. In the middle of the Cold War, scientists from the Soviet Union were also involved
Space lawyers are no longer needed now? It is not necessary to prepare students for the Nebraska-Lincoln Space Law for further discussions and disputes over the law of the moon ?
No space lawyers needed?
Not so fast. While Moon's legal position does not meet any significant resistance or challenge as a "global commons" accessible to all countries in peaceful missions, the Outer Space Treaty has not has been modified without further details. Contrary to the very optimistic ideas of the time, up to now, humanity has not returned to the moon since 1927, thus making the rights of the lunar land largely theoretical.
A few years ago, plans to return to the moon. At least two US automakers, Planetary Resources and Deep Space, which have significant financial support, have begun targeting asteroids to mine their mineral resources. Geek Note: As part of the Outer Space Treaty above, other celestial bodies such as the Moon and the asteroid, speaking legally, are in the same basket. One of them can become a sovereign state or a "region" of the other
Under the space treaty, by making a opportunity or by any other means, a very basic ban address the commercial exploitation of natural resources on the moon and other divine bodies. This is a big debate in the international community at the moment, where there is no clearly acceptable solution. In fact, two general interpretations are possible
So, you want to extract an asteroid?
The performances of the United States and Luxembourg as an entry into the European Union have decided that the Moon and asteroids are "Global Commons", which means that each country authorizes its own businessmen, provided that they are approved accordingly. In order to follow the rules of space law, go there and make money with them in accordance with other relevant, what they can do to remove the results. It's a bit like the law of the sea, which is not under the control of any individual country, but the citizens of all countries and companies are fully open to conducting fishing operations following a duly authorized law. Then, once the fish is in its trap, it is legally sold .
On the other side, a country like Russia and a little less obviously Brazil and Belgium believe that the Moon and the asteroid are related humanity. Therefore, the potential benefits of commercial exploitation should somehow be afforded to humanity – or at least guarantee benefits on the scale of humanity must be subject to a rule potentially rigid international It is a bit like the basic rule originally established for the harvesting of the mineral resources of the sea. In this case, an international licensing arrangement as well as an international business have also were created, who had to lose these resources and had to generally share the benefits between all the countries In my opinion, the old situation is definitely more legally and practically understood, the legal battle does not end not at all. Meanwhile, interest in the moon has also been updated – at least, there are serious plans to return to China, India and Japan, which also increases the share. Therefore, we will have to teach our students about these issues for many years at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. After all, it depends on the communities of the states to determine that the common agreement can be concluded either in one, or anywhere in the two positions; it is of vital importance that the agreement can be concluded one way or another. Such activities develop without any generally applicable and accepted law; it will be the worst case. Although it is not colonialism, but that it can have all the adverse consequences ?
Source link
