3 ms·

Has there been any discussion on "nations" on mars? I just always assumed Mars would have colonies like ISS spread around. I wonder if anyone is planning on ma

by mlacks 5y ago

Has there been any discussion on "nations" on mars? I just always assumed Mars would have colonies like ISS spread around. I wonder if anyone is planning on marking territory

bryananderson 5y ago
The Outer Space Treaty prohibits the claiming of territory in space or on other planetary bodies. This treaty is signed by all of the major spacefaring states. If states begin to extract resources or establish permanent habitation beyond scientific expeditions such as the ISS, the terms of this treaty will not be tenable. There is no magic solution to prevent states from being self-interested and claiming resources for themselves, but hopefully the resolution will be a new treaty which provides a framework for peaceful, fair, and sustainable development of space. Some self-enrichment can be allowed while also ensuring that some of the benefits flow to all of humanity. The alternative, if no such agreement can be reached between the spacefaring powers, is a free-for-all in which states withdraw from the OST and do whatever they want. This seems likely to lead to monopolization of the solar system’s resources by a few states. It also seems likely to lead to confrontation between the spacefaring powers.
- mc32 5y ago
  they may need a treaty to resolve issues between private companies as well and not only nations give we are seeing more private enterprise enter spa(ce)tial frontier.
  - bryananderson 5y ago
    Space treaties (like sea treaties) consider states to be the parties to the treaty, and states are responsible for ensuring compliance from their private companies. Private companies are not directly party to the treaty. So, for example, if a treaty requires the United States to do something (such as avoid using a certain type of resource), the United States is responsible for making US companies (like SpaceX or ULA or whoever) comply. Again, this comes from the sea law tradition: private ships at sea must be registered in some state, which is responsible for ensuring compliance with the international laws to which that state is party.
- simonh 5y ago
  I believe the current treaties do allow for extracting resources, but as you say, you can't stake claims. What this means, as far as I understand it, is that if you take a resource it's yours but once you leave the extraction site such as an asteroid, someone else can come along and take what's left. You can't claim it's yours because you visited it. I think this is a reasonable approach and I doubt it would be much of a problem in practice. While you are physically present or have assets in place anyone else interfering with you would be infringing on your property - equipment, personnel, etc. That should be enough to establish functioning regulations, although there will be a lot fo details to work out.
  - ALittleLight 5y ago
    What is "leave" in this context? If I leave my robominers or rovers somewhere do I still own them? If they aren't operational? If they are operational but not operating?

by mlacks 5y ago

Has there been any discussion on "nations" on mars? I just always assumed Mars would have colonies like ISS spread around. I wonder if anyone is planning on marking territory

bryananderson 5y ago

The Outer Space Treaty prohibits the claiming of territory in space or on other planetary bodies. This treaty is signed by all of the major spacefaring states. If states begin to extract resources or establish permanent habitation beyond scientific expeditions such as the ISS, the terms of this treaty will not be tenable. There is no magic solution to prevent states from being self-interested and claiming resources for themselves, but hopefully the resolution will be a new treaty which provides a framework for peaceful, fair, and sustainable development of space. Some self-enrichment can be allowed while also ensuring that some of the benefits flow to all of humanity. The alternative, if no such agreement can be reached between the spacefaring powers, is a free-for-all in which states withdraw from the OST and do whatever they want. This seems likely to lead to monopolization of the solar system’s resources by a few states. It also seems likely to lead to confrontation between the spacefaring powers.

mc32 5y ago
they may need a treaty to resolve issues between private companies as well and not only nations give we are seeing more private enterprise enter spa(ce)tial frontier.
- bryananderson 5y ago
  Space treaties (like sea treaties) consider states to be the parties to the treaty, and states are responsible for ensuring compliance from their private companies. Private companies are not directly party to the treaty. So, for example, if a treaty requires the United States to do something (such as avoid using a certain type of resource), the United States is responsible for making US companies (like SpaceX or ULA or whoever) comply. Again, this comes from the sea law tradition: private ships at sea must be registered in some state, which is responsible for ensuring compliance with the international laws to which that state is party.
simonh 5y ago
I believe the current treaties do allow for extracting resources, but as you say, you can't stake claims. What this means, as far as I understand it, is that if you take a resource it's yours but once you leave the extraction site such as an asteroid, someone else can come along and take what's left. You can't claim it's yours because you visited it. I think this is a reasonable approach and I doubt it would be much of a problem in practice. While you are physically present or have assets in place anyone else interfering with you would be infringing on your property - equipment, personnel, etc. That should be enough to establish functioning regulations, although there will be a lot fo details to work out.
- ALittleLight 5y ago
  What is "leave" in this context? If I leave my robominers or rovers somewhere do I still own them? If they aren't operational? If they are operational but not operating?