[Anonymous]

Legal Systems Governing Exploration in Fiction and Reality

            Criticism of science fiction, by the very nature of the genre, usually includes forays in to fields other than literature.  Often a discussion of scientific fields, whether astronomy, engineering, biology, geology or physics, seems necessary to the study of a work   Discussion of how scientific advances validate, or invalidate, a work along with a focus on how fiction in turn influences scientists garners much attention in the science fiction criticism community.[1]  Another unusual field tangential to the genre is the legal systems that arise to govern newly explored areas.  Although usually dealing with celestial bodies, the laws arising to govern the conduct of nations on areas of Earth, such as Antarctica, also tread new waters in the post-colonial era.  The laws governing newly explored areas, as well as the global (or universal) organizations that create and enforce such laws often bear startling similarities in both science fiction and reality. 

In Stranger in a Strange Land, Heinlein discusses repercussions when private groups enter the space race.  General Atomics, a private enterprise, trumps the multinational coalition in the race to place a human on the moon.  Although a Russians, Canadians and Americans manage to land remote vessels, the enterprise claims ownership of the moon based on its human occupation.  A “High Court” makes the “Larkin Decision,” which forbids corporations from owning celestial bodies.  Only those who actually reached the object first could claim ownership.  After the court declares these men a sovereign nation, “the Federation” includes them in the international legal/ruling organization.  Similar in purpose to the United Nations, the Federation creates a set of planetary laws based on the Larkin Decision.  These laws effectively crown Valentine Michael Smith as the sole owner/ruler of Mars, as he is the only surviving member of the first group of humans to reach the planet.  In addition, the fact that a later expedition left colonists behind as Smith left the planet validates his ownership. 

Apparently, without continuous occupation, Smith’s claim to the planet would be void.  Ben Caxton remarks that “If the skipper of the Champion had not left colonists behind, Smith’s tenure might have failed.  But he did. And that continues occupation even though Smith came to Earth.  But Smith doesn’t have to split with them; they are mere immigrants until he grants them Martian citizenship” (44).  Caxton declares Smith the “sole owner of the planet Mars.” And the “King, President, sole civic body” (43). The Federation does not seem to require membership in its ranks before recognizing as a claim to newly explored land, and as a result of the Larkin Decision the force behind the expedition that lead to Smith’s occupation, whether that force be private or public, bears no effect on the ownership rights.

            In 1959 the United Nations passed a resolution to create the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS) which reviews peaceful ventures in space, encourages scientific research and concerns itself with legal problems resulting from space exploration.  The legal subcommittee of this committee is the foremost organization for the development of legal principles regarding the exploration and use of outer space.  COPOUS has overseen five treaties regarding legal principles in space: the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (The Outer Space Treaty), the Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space, the Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, the Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space, and the Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies.[2]

The U.N. plays the same function in reality as the Federation does in Stranger in a Strange Land. A concept similar to the Federation of Stranger in a Strange Land exists in The Left Hand of Darkness.  Though grander in scope and purpose, the Ekumen, which is “devoted to the general interests of mankind” resembles a more benign, if more commercial, U.N. or Federation (19).  Genly Ai, an Ekumenical mobile, proclaims that “Material profit. Increase of knowledge. The augmentation of the complexity and intensity of the field of intelligent life. The enrichment of harmony and the greater glory of God. Curiosity. Adventure. Delight.” are the Ekumen’s motivations (34). Due to the logistics of space travel, the Ekumen does not interfere with planetary politics, instead focusing on intellectual and commercial exchange.  The U.N. does not directly fund or legislate space exploration, but provides guidelines for behavior once the goal has been achieved.  If permanent communities develop in outer space, perhaps the U.N. will then coordinate legislation for the governing of those communities in a fashion similar to the one Red Mars.

In the meantime, the Outer Space Treaty, effective in October 1967, provides “the basic framework on international space law.”  The treaty states that space exploration should be free to all nations, should benefit all mankind, that nations are not able to appropriate sovereignty over outer space, and that nations are responsible for national space activities, whether governmental or non-governmental.[3]  In addition, the treaties designate astronauts as “the envoys of mankind,” reminiscent of the way Genly Ai represented all the members of the Ekumen in his visit to Winter.  [4]

The Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, or the Moon Treaty, goes one step further than the Outer Space Treaty and specifically addresses the exploitation of the moon. Although the U.N. General Assembly adopted the resolution in 1979, the treaty did not go into effect until July 1989 due to a delay in the obtaining the necessary ratifications.  The treaty includes rather vague articles like the one mandating that the moon’s environment should not be “disrupted” as well as slightly clearer statement like the one mandating that no military installations may be located on the moon.  Article Five states that all moon missions lasting over a period of sixty days must make reports, including scientific results, to the U.N. every thirty days.  The treaty also stipulates that any exploitation of the moon’s resources must be governed by an “international regime.”[5]

            Recently, Dennis Hope, a private businessman, declared himself head of the “Lunar Embassy” and began selling titles to plots of land on various moons and planets.[6]  The website declares the embassy “the founders and leaders of the extraterrestrial real estate market.”[7]  Hope will not sell certain areas of lunar land such as the Apollo landing sites because he believes that certain areas “should remain for the good of all mankind.”[8] However, all other areas are available for  $15.99 per plot, which includes a deed and a map.[9]  Plots of land are available on other planets and moons, such as Mars, Venus and Io, as well. 

Hope markets the land in outer space as a novelty gift, yet maintains that his ownership claim is perfectly legal under the U.N. treaties.  The Outer Space Treaty, while forbidding ownership by nations, does not specifically mention ownership by individuals or commercial ventures.[10]  The treaty states that:  “Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.”[11]

Several major countries have not signed the Moon Treaty, which does specifically forbid private ownership, including the United States and Russia.  In dispute are the provisions forbidding any weapons, banning private ownership of the moon for commercial exploitation, and the establishment of an Outer Space Regime, which would oversee the use of lunar resources.[12]  However, legal experts still maintain that Hope’s claims are invalid because private ownership rights falls under the jurisdiction of national laws, and as national laws do not exist in space, individual claims have no basis.[13]

Nonetheless the controversy generated by the Moon Treaty proves that the exploitation of space uncovers old and familiar disputes.  For example, the wealthier nations feel that the treaty would require exploring nations to share the wealth from any commercial ventures with all member nations, as the moon is a common heritage.  They also fear that the Outer Space Regime would consist of a one-nation, one-vote system rather than a system that weights influence by contributions. In turn, other nations fear that commercial interests will drive the world’s industrial nations to exploit outer space exclusively for their own material gain.[14]

The Antarctic treaty is another endeavor to limit the commercialization of newly explored land.  The U.N. treaties governing space bear some resemblance to the Antarctic Treaty, signed by twelve nations in 1959.  Although not a byproduct of the U.N. and originally signed by only twelve nations, eventually thirty-two other nations would sign, bringing the total population represented by signing countries to two-thirds of the world’s population.  Despite this difference, other similarities are clear. For example, Article I of the Antarctic Treaty states that “Antarctica shall be used for peaceful purposes only. There shall be prohibited, inter alia, any measures of a military nature, such as the establishment of military bases and fortifications, the carrying out of military maneuvers, as well as the testing of any type of weapons.”  Section 2 of the same article goes on to state that “The present Treaty shall not prevent the use of military personnel or equipment for scientific research or for any other peaceful purposes.”[15]

In comparison Article 3, Section 4 of the Moon Treaty states that: “The establishment of military bases, installations and fortifications, the testing of any type of weapons and the conduct of military maneuvers on the moon 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 and use of the moon shall also not be prohibited.”[16]

Both treaties hold establishing the newly explored land as a peaceful center for scientific research as a primary goal.  Both treaties emphasize articles that seek to prevent both celestial bodies and continents from becoming pawns in the military maneuvers of powerful nations.  Just as the explorers in Red Mars must consult with UNOMA before spreading lichen over the Martian landscape, the U.N. treaty implies, though in vague terms, that changes to planetary environments must be approved through them.  However, the treaty does not specify a protocol. 

The Antarctic Treaty provides specific guidelines for preserving a peaceful environment, including requiring permits in order to disturb flora or fauna, even specifying which species fall into a separate category and require additional protection.  Thus far the Antarctic Treaty, originally signed in 1959, has proved successful in fostering scientific cooperation and preventing the use of Antarctica as a military testing grounds.  The successful treaty could prove a convenient blueprint for further space treaties or amendments to existing treaties.