Outer space as international space: lessons from antarctica

Antarctica and outer space have a lot in common. Like Antarctica, outer space is dangerous for humans; like Antarctica, outer space has a high strategic value; like Antarctica, outer space is quite interesting for research purposes. This means a lot for lawyers because the nature of a space has a great impact on its legal status. Nevertheless, for historical reasons Antarctica and outer space are rather different as far as their legal statuses are concerned. In fact, despite the existing claims by some states on Antarctica, on the one hand, and the acceptance of the nonappropriation principle of outer space, on the other, the common natural, strategic, and scientific aspects of both spaces make a comparison of their legal framework and governance very efficient. In 1959 activities in Antarctica were already important, and the Antarctic Treaty succeeded in breaking the vicious circle that impeded scientific activities on this disputed territory.1 The freezing of the claims and refusal of new claims made possible efficient scientific activities on the cold continent. Outer space activities were at their very beginning, and the cold war and a significant balance between both superpowers made possible the recognition of a legal status that in many ways was copied from the Antarctic Treaty. Both Antarctic and outer space activities were boosted by the International Geophysical Year, 1957–1958. Sputnik, the first artificial satellite of the Earth, was launched on 4 October 1957; Explorer 1 launched on 1 February 1958, opening the way to the discovery of the Van Allen belt. Fifty years later, it is interesting to go on comparing both regimes. Doing so, we must keep in mind that outer space is much more sensitive for strategy and defence than Antarctica; the vision of a dominance of the Earth through space dominance is commonplace in geostrategic theories. Economically, outer space is also quite important, for instance, in telecommunications and remote sensing. Still, on many issues, this comparison may be quite useful. For a lawyer and a specialist in space law the hypothesis for this paper is that we have a rather evolved legal framework for outer space, but we have too few cooperation mechanisms. For the time being, the treaties governing outer space are Outer Space as International Space: Lessons from Antarctica