4 ms·

Also, "the contract with MAEU did not specify that the satellite cannot be used for military purposes." I completely understand why they're doing this, but it'

Also, "the contract with MAEU did not specify that the satellite cannot be used for military purposes." I completely understand why they're doing this, but it's tough to see how it's legal.

WJW 6y ago
Concepts like legality have much less meaning between countries. It's not like there is a court where Myanmar can sue if it wants their satellite back. At this level, the ultimate recourse is declaring war and reclaiming it by force but we all know how that would turn out.
- TameAntelope 6y ago
  Diplomacy is a critical function of any government due to what you're saying, and IMO this could be a consequence of Myanmar neglecting that reality (for a myriad of valid and invalid reasons, I don't know enough about the current situation to speak with any intelligence about it).
- celtain 6y ago
  Not all international disagreements are disagreements between sovereign nations themselves. It's possible that MAEU could sue JAXA or Hokkaido University in a Japanese court if they think they're violating Japanese law. If that's not the case, or if the Diet passes a new law that protects their countrymen in this dispute, then yeah it becomes the type of conflict you describe.
- adinb 6y ago
  Isn’t that what the World Trade Organization (WTO) is for?
  - freeflight 6y ago
    The WTO has been effectively out of order these past years as the US has blocked the appointment of new judges to the appeals court. It's supposed to have seven judges, a minimum of three judges are required to issue rulings, but since 2019 there are only two judges left [0] So any ruling the WTO main body makes, like for example declaring US tariffs on China illegal [1], only needs to be appealed to be stuck in procedural limbo, which is exactly what ended up happening with the WTO ruling on US tariffs [2] [0] https://www.dw.com/en/wto-judge-blockage-could-prove-the-beginning-of-the-end/a-51613082# https://www.dw.com/en/wto-judge-blockage-could-prove-the-beg... [1] https://apnews.com/article/global-trade-china-archive-donald-trump-58a89252300408e255ed3a9a26004091 https://apnews.com/article/global-trade-china-archive-donald... [2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-26/u-s-appeals-wto-ruling-that-trump-s-china-tariffs-were-illegal https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-26/u-s-appea...
    - adinb 6y ago
      Thanks!
bilbo0s 6y ago
Don't they say that the great secret of international law, is that there is no international law? This situation is an example of what they mean by that.
ramphastidae 6y ago
According to what law? Tried in which court? And enforced by who? International law is basically: “Don’t like it? Well what ya gonna do about it?”
DigiDigiorno 6y ago
Imagine you were contracted to release a satellite and then you realize you might be providing military equipment to a hostile nation. Would you really think to yourself "Well the contract doesn't say I can't do this"?...
- tkgally 6y ago
  Also, the Japanese government and individual national universities, including Hokkaido University [1, in Japanese], have regulations on the export of technology that can be used for military purposes. I work at another national university in Japan, and there has been a lot of internal debate, with political overtones, about how strictly those regulations should be enforced and how to deal with technology that has both military and civilian applications. I can easily imagine the researchers at Hokkaido University deciding that the military coup in Myanmar meant that deploying the satellite would run the risk of violating the rules of either their own university or the Japanese government. [1] https://www.hokudai.ac.jp/research/export-control/ https://www.hokudai.ac.jp/research/export-control/

Also, "the contract with MAEU did not specify that the satellite cannot be used for military purposes." I completely understand why they're doing this, but it's tough to see how it's legal.

WJW 6y ago

Concepts like legality have much less meaning between countries. It's not like there is a court where Myanmar can sue if it wants their satellite back. At this level, the ultimate recourse is declaring war and reclaiming it by force but we all know how that would turn out.

TameAntelope 6y ago
Diplomacy is a critical function of any government due to what you're saying, and IMO this could be a consequence of Myanmar neglecting that reality (for a myriad of valid and invalid reasons, I don't know enough about the current situation to speak with any intelligence about it).
celtain 6y ago
Not all international disagreements are disagreements between sovereign nations themselves. It's possible that MAEU could sue JAXA or Hokkaido University in a Japanese court if they think they're violating Japanese law. If that's not the case, or if the Diet passes a new law that protects their countrymen in this dispute, then yeah it becomes the type of conflict you describe.
adinb 6y ago
Isn’t that what the World Trade Organization (WTO) is for?
- freeflight 6y ago
  The WTO has been effectively out of order these past years as the US has blocked the appointment of new judges to the appeals court. It's supposed to have seven judges, a minimum of three judges are required to issue rulings, but since 2019 there are only two judges left [0] So any ruling the WTO main body makes, like for example declaring US tariffs on China illegal [1], only needs to be appealed to be stuck in procedural limbo, which is exactly what ended up happening with the WTO ruling on US tariffs [2] [0] https://www.dw.com/en/wto-judge-blockage-could-prove-the-beginning-of-the-end/a-51613082# https://www.dw.com/en/wto-judge-blockage-could-prove-the-beg... [1] https://apnews.com/article/global-trade-china-archive-donald-trump-58a89252300408e255ed3a9a26004091 https://apnews.com/article/global-trade-china-archive-donald... [2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-26/u-s-appeals-wto-ruling-that-trump-s-china-tariffs-were-illegal https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-26/u-s-appea...
  - adinb 6y ago
    Thanks!

bilbo0s 6y ago

Don't they say that the great secret of international law, is that there is no international law? This situation is an example of what they mean by that.

ramphastidae 6y ago

According to what law? Tried in which court? And enforced by who? International law is basically: “Don’t like it? Well what ya gonna do about it?”

DigiDigiorno 6y ago

Imagine you were contracted to release a satellite and then you realize you might be providing military equipment to a hostile nation. Would you really think to yourself "Well the contract doesn't say I can't do this"?...

tkgally 6y ago
Also, the Japanese government and individual national universities, including Hokkaido University [1, in Japanese], have regulations on the export of technology that can be used for military purposes. I work at another national university in Japan, and there has been a lot of internal debate, with political overtones, about how strictly those regulations should be enforced and how to deal with technology that has both military and civilian applications. I can easily imagine the researchers at Hokkaido University deciding that the military coup in Myanmar meant that deploying the satellite would run the risk of violating the rules of either their own university or the Japanese government. [1] https://www.hokudai.ac.jp/research/export-control/ https://www.hokudai.ac.jp/research/export-control/