 |
| Image source- Google Image by-Leticia Riente |
ASAT: A SHED FOR DESTRUCTION
“Searching for satellites and celestial spheres
nurturing acolytes down through the years”
-Searching for satellites, Wishbone Ash 2011
Lyrics are like a code that you decipher from your own perspective. The lyrics above artfully express Wishbone Ash’s discreet tribute to public international law. But that’s my perception.
In our current political climate, it is of utmost importance that we safeguard outer space. ASAT, an anti-satellite weapon, threatens to endanger the peaceful exploration of space due to unwanted space debris unless the international laws come to our rescue. But the Outer Space Treaty, often hailed as “The Magna Carta of International Space Law” does not define the term "outer space" comprehensively. Consequently, ASATs jurisdiction comes under the illusion; as if any experiment has been targeted from the ground to disrupt the satellite revolving in Earth’s orbit comes under terrestrial boundary or outer space act.
It’s high time that we consider negotiating a new outer space disarmament pact to prevent the world from using ASATs and enlarge the ambit of existing laws for outer space security.
METHODOLOGY OF INTERPRETATION
Open the curtains of our international laws in regards to the pursuit of outer space safety. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has adopted a method to interpret treaties under Art.31 and Art.32 of The Vienna Convention:
Article 31: General Rule of Interpretation, states:
1. A treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose.
2. The context for the purpose of the interpretation of a treaty shall comprise, in addition to the text, including its preamble and annexes:
(a) any agreement relating to the treaty which was made between all the parties in connection with the conclusion of the treaty;
(b) any instrument which was made by one or more parties in connection with the conclusion of the treaty and accepted by the other parties as an instrument related to the treaty.
3. There shall be taken into account, together with the context:
(a) any subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions;
(b) any subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation;
(c) any relevant rules of international law applicable in the relations between the parties.
4. A special meaning shall be given to a term if it is established that the parties so intended.
Article 32: Supplementary Means of Interpretation, states:
Recourse may be had to supplementary means of interpretation, including the preparatory work of the treaty and the circumstances of its conclusion, in order to confirm the meaning resulting from the application of article 31, or to determine the meaning when the interpretation according to article 31:
(a) Leaves the meaning ambiguous or obscure; or
(b) Leads to a result which is manifestly absurd or unreasonable.
JURISDICTION OVER ASATs
Hitherto, the horizons of customary laws have limited the states parties’ activities in outer space through various international agreements and treaties. Among all of them, the King of multilateral treaties for security in outer space is the 1967 Outer Space Treaty.
There are also various provisions of the UN charter which apply to the space activities, such as Art.2 (3), 2(4), 5(1), 4. Edward R. Finch, Jr. argues that, "... express prohibition is intended ...against 'the testing of any types of weapons' in outer space in Article IV’.
ASATs VIOLATE OUTER SPACE TREATY. Unleashing a satellite in the name of exploration has caused environmental disbalance in outer space by creating debris hazards. An amendment to the Outer Space Treaty has become inevitable post ASATs.
Art.1 of the Outer Space Treaty deals with the interests of all the states, which are being violated by the launch of ASATs.
Art. I
The exploration and use of outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries, irrespective of their degree of economic or scientific development, and shall be the province of all mankind.
Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall be free for exploration and use by all States without discrimination of any kind, on a basis of equality and in accordance with international law, and there shall be free access to all areas of celestial bodies.
There shall be freedom of scientific investigation in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, and States shall facilitate and encourage international co-operation in such investigation.
Art. III provides that only states parties can explore outer space maintaining international peace and security.
Article III
States Parties to the Treaty shall carry on activities in the exploration and use of outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, in accordance with international law, including the Charter of the United Nations, in the interest of maintaining international peace and security and promoting international cooperation and understanding.
Art. IV prohibits the use of weapons of mass destruction in orbit of the earth.
Article IV
States Parties to the Treaty undertake not to place in orbit around the earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction, install such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner.
The moon and other celestial bodies shall be used by all States Parties to the Treaty exclusively for peaceful purposes. The establishment of military bases, installations and fortifications, the testing of any type of weapons and the conduct of military maneuvers on celestial bodies shall be forbidden. The use of military personnel for scientific research or for any other peaceful purposes shall not be prohibited. The use of any equipment or facility necessary for peaceful exploration of the moon and other celestial bodies shall also not be prohibited.
ARGUING ON ASATs THREATS
Art.1, which uses the term ‘interests of all countries’, states that the exploration and use of outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall be carried out for the benefit and in the ‘interests of all countries’.
The objective of the provision is to obtain from all States Parties and mainly from space-faring countries, the required domestic legislative and executive implementing acts, to ensure that use of outer space should be "for the benefit and in the interests of all countries".
Permitting such destructive weapons that end up creating massive amounts of debris, leads to hazardous situations for future launches.
How come these launches are in the interests of all states?
What is the legal status of non-prohibitive military activities under this treaty?
Secondly, under Art. IV, the treaty has created a loophole in its interpretation by not defining the legal term “peaceful purposes”, which has been used across multiple provisions of the treaty as well as in UN General Assembly resolutions and declarations.
What is the meaning and scope of ‘peaceful purposes’ in the context of the above provisions?
Lastly, Art. IV (2) states that the use of the moon and other celestial bodies should be made “exclusively for peaceful purposes.”
In terms of legality is there any difference between “exclusively for peaceful purposes” and ‘peaceful purposes’.
Reading further they permit military personnel for scientific research or any other ‘peaceful purposes’. Allowing the military to conduct scientific research for peaceful purposes using ‘any’ equipment or facility necessary for exploration without defining the limits of ‘peaceful purpose’, makes it virtually impossible to hold the states answerable for their actions.
How can military personnel use ‘any’ equipment or facility necessary for exploration by ‘peaceful purposes’ in the context of Art.IV?
Conclusion
The Treaty is silent on appropriate measures or authoritative evaluations to determine whether a State has taken appropriate measures to avoid harmful contamination. There are no conjunctures regarding destruction made by the launch of ASATs. We should be looking to improve our international laws, to prevent avoidable launches in future. Mount Stromlo has one of the remarkable tracking tools across the globe. States should show ardour to improve their technologies as well.
True ... their should be improvement by states...👏👏
ReplyDelete