U.S. ratification of UNCLOS will validate model for international governance of all global commons with adverse consequences for its military space program
Finally, this accord will establish problematic precedents for “managing” other, no-less-strategically-important “international commons,” including Outer Space. A number of America’s adversaries have long sought to impose arms control or other treaty arrangements that could make it more difficult if not, as a practical matter, impossible for the United States to maintain the access to and control of space required by our national security interests. If this country joins LOST, it will invite these adversaries to adapt the Treaty’s International Seabed Authority as a prototype for determining permissible and impermissible activities in space – likely in ways that will prove inconsistent with the United States’ military and intelligence requirements.
Quicktabs: Evidence
Arguments
Related argument(s) where this quote is used.
-
UNCLOS could set a bad regulatory precedent for the commercial development of space. Subjecting private space exploration and development to a similar regulatory system would discourage private ventures just now getting underway.Related Quotes:
- Applying UNCLOS model to outer space would stifle nascent commercial space industry
- Ratification of UNCLOS establishes flawed precedent for development of frontier that would carry over into space
- UNCLOS model could be extended to cyberspace with devastating economic impact
- Should reject UNCLOS before its model spreads to other commons including outer space and the internet
- UNCLOS model could be extended into outer space to the detriment of U.S. freedom of action
- U.S. ratification of UNCLOS will validate model for international governance of all global commons with adverse consequences for its military space program
Parent Arguments:Counter Argument: