Expensive Access to Space has merit. Well, maybe? Hmm.

>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 10:19:27 -0500
>
> Any physical entity relevant to space launch capabilities is considered
> an "armament" by the US government, and since 1996 or so subject to
> state department approval for export licenses - and if the export is to
> China or a few other countries, I believe the approval has to come
> directly from Congress. That's likely, right. Any technical discussion
> between a launch component enterprise in the US and one overseas (for
> example between a satellite manufacturer and any non-US rocket launch
> company) is subject to onerous regulatory paperwork and potential jail
> time for violations of the information-sharing restrictions agreed upon
> in the paperwork. ANY launch that includes a US component (even a
> non-space-specific component like a semiconductor chip) is supposed to
> be subject to these US regulatory contraints - which has made overseas
> satellite manufacturers, launch service providers, etc. very careful
> about the components they use.
>

The ITAR regulations predate 1996 by a long time, they just became somewhat tougher.

One of the most prominent early cases was when the USA refused to launch the French
Symphonie satellite in the 1960's - this motivated France to develop Ariane.

Export restrictions were well established in the early 1980s (from personal experience).