The Space Settlement Initiative

> > There seems to be a general consensus among these people who know
> the
> > history of the UN space treaties inside and out, that the language
> of
> > the Outer Space Treaty, despite what it may seem to say about
> > nation-state responsibility, does NOT preclude private property
> claims,
> > or at best leaves the situation very legally ambiguous.
>
> They make this claim for ideological reasons and base it on the fact
> that the OST doesn't make specific mention of private property,
> therefore it can't govern that area. Their argument is specious. If
> I am incorrect in the above, please provide me with the basis for
> their claims.
>

Well, the peer-reviewed "Journal of Space Law" has been published by
the U. Miss. folks since 1973 - they seem to be well respected. I
don't know why you are viewing this particular group as "ideological" -
they seemed pretty typical lawyers to me (well, except for Larry Roberts).

On the history side, that was from a personal conversation with Amanda
Moore (the NSS UN representative), but if I recall correctly what she
said, the US administration at the time very specifically selected the
wording of the Outer Space Treaty to allow for (but not explicitly discuss)
private ownership - what they were trying to prevent was a claim to the Moon
by the Soviet Union; the Soviets wanted to prevent the same thing by the US.
The subsequent Moon Treaty was opposed by the US because it did not
have the private ownership protections. Now maybe I'm misremembering what
she said, or she had the history wrong there, but it seemed pretty clear
what the process had been, and there was more knowledgeable US involvement in
the writing of the OST than I had expected. I'm no lawyer, but I believe
intent is a major factor in deciding the meaning of laws where there
is any ambiguity.

Now, let's suppose your approach of declaring the Moon a new nation
goes ahead before or around the same time as the first settlements are
established. Say we have 10 people on the Moon - would they suddenly
become citizens of this new nation, and lose their previous national
status? Suppose people are only there for 6 month stints, as for ISS,
what then? What rights would these people have with regard to equipment
owned by Earth corporations, which would be just about everything
up there? What rights would they have to being paid, to working in
safe conditions, etc. etc. - wouldn't all those things have to be
determined on Earth, not within the settlement? What good would
settlement self-government actually do at that stage? Or any stage
below 10's of thousands of people? In the long run, yes, it's the
right thing, but to start with? I don't think it makes sense...

Arthur