Posted on 06/22/2004 11:37:31 AM PDT by atomic conspiracy
SPACE PRIVATIZATION: ROAD TO CONFLICT? June 21, 2003
By Bruce Gagnon
The news brings us the story of "space pioneers" launching privately funded craft into the heavens. A special prize is offered to the first private aerospace corporation who can successfully take a pilot and a "space tourist" into orbit.
Is this "privatization" of space a good thing? Is there any reason to be concerned about the trend? Are there any serious questions that should be raised at this historic moment?
Three major issues come immediately to mind concerning space privatization. Space as an environment, space law, and profit in space.
We've all probably heard about the growing problem of space junk where over 100,000 bits of debris are now tracked on the radar screens at NORAD in Colorado as they orbit the earth at 18,000 m.p.h. Several space shuttles have been nicked by bits of debris in the past resulting in cracked windshields. The International Space Station (ISS) recently was moved to a higher orbit because space junk was coming dangerously close. Some space writers have predicted that the ISS will one day be destroyed by debris.
As we see a flurry of launches by private space corporations the chances of accidents, and thus more debris, becomes a serious reality to consider. Very soon we will reach the point of no return, where space pollution will be so great that an orbiting minefield will have been created that hinders all access to space. The time as certainly come for a global discussion about how we treat the sensitive environment called space before it is too late.
When the United Nations concluded the 1979 Moon Treaty the U.S. refused, and still does, to sign it. One key reason is that the treaty outlaws military bases on it but also outlaws any nation, corporation, or individual from making land "claims" on the planetary body. The 1967 U.N. Outer Space Treaty takes similar position in regard to all of the planetary bodies. The U.N., realizing we needed to preempt potential conflict over "ownership" of the planetary bodies, made claim that the heavens were the province of all humankind.
As the privateers move into space, in addition to building space hotels and the like, they also want to claim ownership of the planets because they hope to mine the sky. Gold has been discovered on asteroids, helium-3 on the moon, and magnesium, cobalt and uranium on Mars. It was recently reported that the Haliburton Corporation is now working with NASA to develop new drilling capabilities to mine Mars.
One organization that seeks to rewrite space law is called United Societies in Space (USIS). They state, "USIS provides legal and policy support for those who intend to go to space. USIS encourages private property rights and investment. Space is the Free Market Frontier." Check their web site at http://www.space-law.org
The taxpayers, especially in the U.S. where NASA has been funded with taxpayer dollars since its inception, have paid billions of dollars in space technology research and development (R & D). As the aerospace industry moves toward forcing privatization of space what they are really saying is that the technological base is now at the point where the government can get out of the way and lets private industry begin to make profit and control space. Thus the idea that space is a "free market frontier."
Of course this means that after the taxpayer paid all the R & D, private industry now intends to gorge itself in profits. One Republican Congressman from Southern California, an ally of the aerospace industry, has introduced legislation in Congress to make all space profits "tax free". In this vision the taxpayers won't see any return on our "collective investment."
So let's just imagine for a moment that this private sector vision for space comes true. Profitable mining on the moon and Mars. Who would keep competitors from sneaking in and creating conflict over the new 21st century gold rush? Who will be the space police?
In the Congressional study published in 1989 called Military Space Forces: The Next 50 Years we get some inkling of the answer. The forward of the book was signed by many politicians like former Sen. John Glenn (D-OH) and Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL). The author reported to Congress on the importance of military bases on the moon and suggested that with bases there the U.S. could control the pathway, or the "gravity well", between the Earth and the moon. The author reported to Congress that "Armed forces might lie in wait at that location to hijack rival shipments on return."
Plans are now underway to make space the next "conflict zone" where corporations intend to control resources and maximize profit. The so-called private "space pioneers" are the first step in this new direction. And ultimately the taxpayers will be asked to pay the enormous cost incurred by creating a military space infrastructure that would control the "shipping lanes" on and off the planet Earth.
After Columbus returned to Spain with the news that he had discovered the "new world," Queen Isabella began the 100 year process to create the Spanish Armada to protect the new "interests and investments" around the world. This helped create the global war system.
Privatization does not mean that the taxpayer won't be paying any more. Privatization really means that profits will be privatized. Privatization also means that existing international space legal structures will be destroyed in order to bend the law toward private profit. Serious moral and ethical questions must be raised before another new "frontier" of conflict is created.
A piece of paper is an exceedingly thin shield. Especially way out on the frontier. Arm yourself to the teeth and protect your property. Governments are nice, when they work as they should. Seen one around lately?
Thin, yes, but stronger than any other. Not 100% sure against everything, of course, as the Munich and Ribbentrop agreements proved, but still the best there is.
So are Colts. My Colt has a higher reliability rate than the government.
"No one will invest in asteroid mining while they can have no private rights to the asteroid body or minerals."
Let the economic incentive become strong enough, and the law will either be changed or circumvented. If, as I said earlier, the government has little or no power to enforce its edicts in the asteroid belt; it will, by the same token, have little power to enforce property rights. The difficulty would come in retaining the right to market the products of, say, asteroid mining. The government would retain power over that. But which government? Why can't space entrepreneurs register in a country that doesn't recognize the Outer Space Treaty? Since this will all be done by corporations, the citizenship of the principals will not matter.
I think this will sort itself out. Society is not going to leave trillions of dollars worth of resources untouched because of Gagnon's ersatz idealism.
And, yes, I am aware of the North Slope and similar controversies. They are not comparable unless the Gagnons of the world can extend their habitat preservation ethic to dead rocks.
BTW, I've never pinged FR.
Techincly, the Muslem terrorists should be adhering to international law. Guess what...
As I said, the sure prospect of death is a lot more "convincing" to would be claim jumpers than a possible lawsuit would be.
Find one that would be willing to recognize your claim. Be prepared to do all your earthside business in that country. I'll ping FR when the day comes; growing numbers do so.
They'll let you do whatever you want out there figuring that outer space will take care of the problem on its own. But the other end of the business is right here, and they know how to deal with that.
Honduran.
At least until cross pollenization of the markets in space reaches a critical, self sustaining mass. Colony finding it easier and more profitable to trade with colony. Then the dirt huggers can go bark up a tree.
Knowing human nature... count on at least one major war being fought over it.
As in "Those X-Prize scum are trying to steal our air, which will result in gloobal cooling!"?
Uhh... the free market ?? It generally makes the most efficient decisions here on earth, I don't see why it wouldn't work up there as well.
Of course once we get off this mudball and get started we would be looking at the usual Declaration of Independence, No Taxation Without Representation, Don't Tread On Me developments. National power would probably never extend beyond a single planet. When there is a second self-sustaining planet, it would want to make its own way. In the meantime, though, there is that pointless, useless, UN Outer Space Treaty.
Just like private shipping has destroyed the law of the sea. This guy's a socialist who's afraid that government might no longer control access to space and the unwashed masses might actually escape this world.
Personally, I'd like to see a "space voucher" plan. We all know that the NASA thing is a bloated bureaucracy that can't take individuals up into space for years, if ever.
Instead of my taxes going to NASA, I want my share is space vouchers.
I think I see where you're coming from, but you aren't doing an exemplary job of articulating your position, which is leading many (including me, initially) to read it wrong.
We don't have private property rights in outer space. What's hard to understand?
I seriously doubt you will find such resources in such abundance. I'm not sure you'd find diamonds at all. Precious metals will be veined within other materials -- just like here at home.
However, there is a lot of nickel and iron out there, along with all sorts of lovely organic ices that would turn a nice profit.
we didn't have a lot in the way of property Right in the Wild West either. Didn't stop us then, shouldn't stop us now. Especially as seeing how there do not appear to be much in the way of hostile indians in the rest of our Solar system.
"In the meantime, though, there is that pointless, useless, UN Outer Space Treaty."
Indeed. Thank you for taking the time to share your insight into this.
"Space tourism" is a lightweight activity compared to mining the Moon and the asteroids, but it has the great advantage of being possible in the immediate future.
If it leads to a capability for profitable resource extraction, the treaties will become one of the most important issues of the day.
Unfortunately, we cannot afford to wait for that before we confront the treaties and the issues they raise:
Gagnon and the luddite left have already shown a clear understanding of the potential, and of the fatal damage it can do to their cause. They also understand that the existing legal structure gives them a critical advantage. They are positioning themselves and their philosophical heirs for a future showdown.
The advocates of space enterprise must match this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.