Nebraska Virtual Space Law Week - Artemis Accords: Expanding and Implementing the Accords and Their Impact on Space Law

jredwine2 Author

10/12/2021 Added

37 Plays

Description

Day 4 of Nebraska Virtual Space Law Week features a discussion on the Artemis Accords, and their impact on space law with Panelists Mike Gold and Frans von der Dunk.

Searchable Transcript

Search:

[00:00:03.330]Good afternoon, everyone.
[00:00:04.540]And welcome to University of Nebraska College of Law's,
[00:00:07.640]14th annual Washington, D.C., Space Law Conference.
[00:00:10.810]And as you can tell, we're not
[00:00:12.060]all in Washington D.C, right now.
[00:00:16.190]We are having it as an online Space Law Week
[00:00:18.820]again this year, and hope to be back in person next year.
[00:00:22.530]We've had terrific sessions all week long,
[00:00:25.160]and really looking forward to hearing from Mike Gold
[00:00:27.630]and Frans von der Dunk on the Artemis Accords today.
[00:00:30.520]We started with the commercial panel on Monday,
[00:00:33.220]ASIL World Speaks Space Series for Africa.
[00:00:37.220]On Tuesday, had a great spectrum session yesterday,
[00:00:40.960]and today we move on to the Artemis Accords.
[00:00:44.780]So a couple of thank yous in order,
[00:00:47.210]first co-sponsors the American Society of International Law,
[00:00:51.340]especially the Space Law Interest Group.
[00:00:53.870]The American branch of International Law Association,
[00:00:56.640]especially the Space Law Committee thereof.
[00:01:00.392]I want to thank Josh Redwine, our new program coordinator
[00:01:04.040]for our Space Cyber and Telecom Law Program
[00:01:05.990]for all his help this week with Space Law Week.
[00:01:09.300]And of course, Elsbeth Magilton as well,
[00:01:11.230]who many of you know, our executive director,
[00:01:13.920]and also executive director
[00:01:15.250]of our new Governance and Technology Center.
[00:01:19.920]So with that, I'm gonna introduce our panelists.
[00:01:23.700]We're honored to be joined today by Mike Gold,
[00:01:26.350]Executive Vice President for Civil Space
[00:01:28.260]and External Affairs at Redwire Space.
[00:01:31.220]Mike is well known to this space community,
[00:01:35.140]formerly the Associate Administrator
[00:01:36.850]for Space Policy and Partnerships at NASA.
[00:01:40.410]A key person behind the Artemis Accords.
[00:01:45.810]He also served as a vice president MAXAR.
[00:01:48.530]And of course, when I first met him
[00:01:51.320]early on in these conference sessions,
[00:01:54.270]director of D.C. operations for Bigelow Aerospace.
[00:01:58.640]Also on the panel is our own professor Frans Von der Dunk,
[00:02:02.774]the Harvey and Susan Perlman
[00:02:03.960]Alumni and Othermer Professor of Space Law here.
[00:02:07.010]Frans has his own consultancy, Black Holes Consultancy.
[00:02:10.540]He's consulted with a number of different
[00:02:12.630]foreign governments, international organizations
[00:02:14.700]and private companies on space law matters.
[00:02:17.850]Very widely published in the space law arena,
[00:02:20.930]including his handbook on space law.
[00:02:23.780]And of course, a board member
[00:02:26.800]and director of public relations
[00:02:29.080]for the International Institute of Space Law.
[00:02:32.020]I'm also joined today with a co-moderator, Leana Brown.
[00:02:36.220]Leana's a third-year law student here
[00:02:38.160]at the University of Nebraska College of Law.
[00:02:40.670]She's also a legal fellow at the National Space Society
[00:02:44.730]and also a space law researcher here at the law college.
[00:02:48.870]Leana has done research on space debris
[00:02:50.820]and a number of other space law issues.
[00:02:53.980]So happy to be joined by her.
[00:02:55.600]And in fact, Leana, I'm going to turn it over to you
[00:02:57.940]to pose the first question.
[00:03:01.148]All right, hi.
[00:03:02.480]So the first question we have today,
[00:03:03.650]we're gonna start with you, Mike Gold,
[00:03:05.340]is going to be, could you just describe
[00:03:08.340]the Artemis Accords for any newcomers to the topic?
[00:03:12.150]Wonderful, I can do it in one word, terrific.
[00:03:16.000]I appreciate it, and first let me thank, you know, Matt,
[00:03:19.090]and yourself, and Josh, and everyone
[00:03:21.450]who puts this conference together.
[00:03:23.570]It really is terrific and deals
[00:03:25.940]with a lot of important topics.
[00:03:27.350]I would come for the space law
[00:03:28.910]and stay for the wonderful luncheons that we would have
[00:03:30.857]at the National Space Club, so I miss that.
[00:03:33.290]And look forward to getting together in person.
[00:03:35.830]To describe the Artemis Accords,
[00:03:37.840]you have to really begin with the Artemis Program.
[00:03:40.480]The first part of the name of the Accords.
[00:03:43.440]Which is to go back to the moon, put the first woman,
[00:03:45.990]first person of color onto the moon, still by 2024.
[00:03:51.862]And this was a very popular program, popular concept,
[00:03:56.210]not only domestically, but internationally.
[00:03:59.620]And due to that popularity,
[00:04:01.750]it was not only a terrific opportunity to be able to build
[00:04:06.850]the world's largest and most diverse Beyond LEO
[00:04:11.300]human space flight coalition in history,
[00:04:14.240]but also to leverage the popularity of the Artemis Program
[00:04:18.010]to ensure that we abide by existing
[00:04:21.370]international obligations and other common sense norms
[00:04:24.860]of behavior as we and our partners implement
[00:04:28.640]the Artemis Program.
[00:04:30.690]So again, two-fold purpose to create this broad and diverse
[00:04:34.610]global coalition to go back to the moon, and also to ensure
[00:04:38.950]that we do so in a peaceful and a prosperous fashion.
[00:04:43.470]And I do want to note that the Accords again,
[00:04:47.430]reinforce existing obligations.
[00:04:50.280]So the agreement on the rescue of astronauts,
[00:04:53.320]the registration convention, there are numerous references,
[00:04:57.591]United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space
[00:05:00.600]in the Accords.
[00:05:01.870]Where we go a step further, is in areas such as
[00:05:05.301]the full, free, and open release of scientific data.
[00:05:09.480]Certainly in the spirit of the Outer Space Treaty,
[00:05:12.160]but not necessarily explicitly required,
[00:05:14.820]but a practice that NASA
[00:05:16.240]and the other international partners
[00:05:18.410]have and will continue to traditionally do.
[00:05:20.850]And we think makes sense for others.
[00:05:22.930]And that's another important point to make with the Accords
[00:05:25.023]that they were written to be as inclusive as possible.
[00:05:29.440]And you see that in the composition
[00:05:31.200]of the Artemis Accords family, that there's both country
[00:05:34.490]like the U.S. that has traditionally been averse
[00:05:36.870]to the Moon Agreement, and then a country like Australia
[00:05:39.440]that has signed the Moon Agreement.
[00:05:41.790]So the Artemis Accords were designed
[00:05:43.561]to bring us all together to find the common ground
[00:05:47.400]relative to what can we all agree upon to ensure
[00:05:51.120]that we go forth in space peacefully and create prosperity
[00:05:56.700]and scientific information and discovery and wonder
[00:05:59.630]for all of us.
[00:06:00.463]So that in a nutshell, is the Accords with one last aspect
[00:06:04.630]I'd like to emphasize, which is preventing conflict.
[00:06:08.720]That at its very heart, whether it's transparency,
[00:06:12.228]or avoiding harmful interference, or even registration.
[00:06:17.610]So much of the Accords is geared towards avoiding conflict
[00:06:22.970]because we want the future
[00:06:23.950]to be more Star Trek and less Star Wars.
[00:06:30.840]Awesome, I actually quote you on that often, 'cause I,
[00:06:33.580]you came to one of my classes one time and said that.
[00:06:35.730]So now we're gonna actually hear
[00:06:36.630]from Professor von der Dunk, if you wouldn't mind
[00:06:39.790]also describing the Artemis Accords.
[00:06:41.690]Yeah, well, of course it's hard to describe
[00:06:43.730]the Artemis Accords coming after
[00:06:45.510]the godfather himself thereof.
[00:06:48.440]So I won't repeat what he said.
[00:06:50.160]I would just, as a law professor, of course,
[00:06:52.460]one looks at the, also at the details.
[00:06:57.230]The Artemis Accords consists of 13 principles,
[00:07:00.670]which are specifically offered
[00:07:02.347]as being non-legal principles.
[00:07:06.060]Part of that, I'm sure, has to do with the fact
[00:07:08.170]that they are basically Accords between space agencies
[00:07:11.650]rather than sovereign nations themselves.
[00:07:14.070]So there is no automatic implication
[00:07:16.660]that this can strictly valued.
[00:07:17.493]For example, it's not registered with the UN,
[00:07:21.310]which is what normal treaties undergo.
[00:07:24.290]And then the next step is that, of course,
[00:07:25.991]if you look at those 13 principles,
[00:07:27.820]you try to categorize them and you will,
[00:07:29.780]you sort of put a grid to them.
[00:07:31.520]And I, you know,
[00:07:33.250]not to cut a long story too short.
[00:07:37.360]I think they fall apart in three categories.
[00:07:40.090]There's kind of four principles,
[00:07:42.030]which are really talking about sort of
[00:07:44.630]implementation procedures, if you will.
[00:07:48.350]They talk about how the partners to the Artemis venture
[00:07:52.890]work together, which basically addresses
[00:07:55.610]only their internal mode of operation, I would almost say.
[00:08:01.840]And then there are six principles,
[00:08:03.680]which, some of which Michael touched upon already.
[00:08:07.680]Which basically refer to existing laws
[00:08:12.490]and sometimes go a little bit further
[00:08:14.130]or a little bit more precise because we're talking about
[00:08:16.510]a celestial body or a bunch of celestial bodies
[00:08:19.310]as opposed to outer space et al.
[00:08:21.710]And there is no real contentiousness in any of them.
[00:08:26.980]You know, it will be difficult, very difficult,
[00:08:28.710]to find anything of problematic character.
[00:08:34.270]Then of course, that leaves three principles,
[00:08:36.830]and they are 9, 10, and 11, where some issues
[00:08:40.450]have been raised, some claims have been made.
[00:08:43.240]And of course, we're going to go deeper into those soon
[00:08:48.470]that they might not be perhaps in compliance
[00:08:53.100]with at least the spirit of international law.
[00:08:55.724]And part of the problem I think is that they go a
[00:08:57.940]considerable step beyond what is actually arranged so far.
[00:09:02.890]Last remark on that is that they all have in common
[00:09:05.660]that the sort of crucial point is what do they mean
[00:09:10.630]with regard to this famous principle of Article 2
[00:09:13.760]of the Outer Space Treaty, that no states can act
[00:09:16.850]as if the moon is national territory.
[00:09:19.503]If you look at it sort of superficially,
[00:09:22.604]the first principle, Principle 9,
[00:09:24.650]talks about the cultural heritage.
[00:09:27.190]Well, normally states work this, protect cultural heritage,
[00:09:30.567]all known territory because they have all the powers
[00:09:32.840]necessary to do so.
[00:09:34.170]How's that gonna work on the moon?
[00:09:36.700]The second thing is of course, the famous resource issue
[00:09:39.710]where the question is, do you allow, in the absence
[00:09:43.760]of territorial sovereignty, private companies,
[00:09:46.840]if duly licensed to operate there,
[00:09:48.870]or are there other principles which should rule that?
[00:09:52.270]And then the last one is of course,
[00:09:53.700]the concept of safety zones.
[00:09:55.800]Which again, at least suggests that a state is gonna say,
[00:09:58.940]hey, you're now entering a safety zone.
[00:10:01.440]You don't get in with my permission.
[00:10:03.350]It's not necessarily that what it said, as we shall see.
[00:10:05.930]But that's, at least, what leads to a lot of suggestions
[00:10:10.040]that this may not be entirely a free space.
[00:10:12.690]I'll leave it at that, but I'm sure
[00:10:14.349]we're gonna come back to some of those issues.
[00:10:17.240]Oh yeah, I can't help but respond to all of that,
[00:10:19.860]of course, and Frans.
[00:10:21.100]It's wonderful to hear your thoughts,
[00:10:23.401]and again, appreciate everything you've done
[00:10:25.930]for the field of space and great to see you again,
[00:10:28.300]even virtually.
[00:10:29.580]A couple of things I'd like to respond to, quickly there.
[00:10:32.580]First on the treaty versus political commitment,
[00:10:35.890]the Accords are a political commitment and not a treaty.
[00:10:39.330]The Accords are actually designed
[00:10:40.790]to help inform future treaties.
[00:10:43.140]That you see in the Accords that we hope that
[00:10:45.060]from Artemis operations, we will gain experience
[00:10:48.490]with avoiding harmful interference.
[00:10:50.510]We'll gain experience with respecting heritage.
[00:10:53.160]We'll gain experience with transparency, and then bring that
[00:10:56.900]to UN COPUOS and other international forums,
[00:11:00.180]where it will inform future dialogue,
[00:11:02.800]future voluntary standards, future regulations,
[00:11:04.990]and future treaties.
[00:11:06.550]And part of the reason that the Accords
[00:11:08.367]are a political commitment, as opposed to a treaty
[00:11:10.330]is you don't want to regulate without good information.
[00:11:15.200]That we're still so far away from learning numerous secrets,
[00:11:19.460]I'm sure, that the moon has in store.
[00:11:21.110]It used to be, we thought the moon was bone dry,
[00:11:23.790]10 years ago, or so.
[00:11:25.310]Now we know there are voluminous amounts
[00:11:27.640]of water ice available.
[00:11:29.321]Right, right, right.
[00:11:30.154]And I guarantee that we don't even know
[00:11:32.130]the unknown unknowns yet when it comes to the moon.
[00:11:34.760]So she has a lot of secrets, I think,
[00:11:36.480]that are yet to be revealed.
[00:11:37.940]And that's why the Artemis Accords
[00:11:39.390]needed to be a political commitment
[00:11:40.610]to remain flexible and to inform future treaties.
[00:11:43.480]And the more information we get like that,
[00:11:45.280]the better off future treaties will be.
[00:11:48.080]Also treaties take a very, very long time to develop,
[00:11:51.840]a decade or more.
[00:11:53.550]And obviously our lunar exploration plans,
[00:11:56.430]both human and crewed are going to happen well before that.
[00:11:59.250]So we needed a commitment to be able to abide by
[00:12:02.950]the international principles that we've already got,
[00:12:05.220]as well as, as you mentioned Frans,
[00:12:06.420]places where we go a step further.
[00:12:08.280]You know, like the full, free, and open sharing
[00:12:09.980]of scientific information to ensure
[00:12:12.010]that the Artemis activities are done, again,
[00:12:13.980]in keeping with the existing multilateral agreements
[00:12:16.281]and other common sense ways and behaviors.
[00:12:18.330]So there were advantages to the political commitment
[00:12:20.751]as opposed to-
[00:12:22.010]Oh, absolutely, yeah. a treaty.
[00:12:23.720]Then relative to Article 2, right?
[00:12:26.960]I think any issues that people have with Article 2
[00:12:29.840]in the Accords is more perception than reality.
[00:12:33.550]And particularly when it comes to safety zones.
[00:12:36.270]And for anyone who's read the Accords,
[00:12:38.830]and I highly recommended it as a quick read
[00:12:40.760]and a real page turner,
[00:12:42.604]the safety zones are literally just that.
[00:12:47.150]That it's an area where we're not keeping anyone out of,
[00:12:52.000]but there are actually obligations for,
[00:12:55.080]whether it's the state, or the company,
[00:12:56.940]or what have you, to do two things.
[00:12:59.230]One to notify the United Nations and the public
[00:13:03.490]that you are operating in this area.
[00:13:06.170]And that hails back to the spine of the Accords,
[00:13:08.790]which is transparency.
[00:13:09.920]If we don't know where people are, and what they're doing,
[00:13:11.919]that can lead to conflict, that can lead to confusion.
[00:13:15.410]So one, it's basically a registration function.
[00:13:18.220]We need to know where you are, what you're doing
[00:13:19.700]through the United Nations and publicly.
[00:13:21.440]And two, when, and I'm sure this situation will arrive,
[00:13:25.440]a second party comes into the area.
[00:13:27.830]And when we say the area, the safety zone
[00:13:29.660]is comprised of area where if through either
[00:13:32.780]your nominal or off-nominal operations,
[00:13:35.030]you could create harmful interference with another party.
[00:13:37.350]So for example, if you've got a Rover,
[00:13:39.660]let's just say that the Rover exploded.
[00:13:41.810]It's the distance the debris could go
[00:13:43.400]where it would cause harm with another area.
[00:13:45.560]So that's, and that's why actually conversely,
[00:13:47.670]people say well, look at the safety zone you're gonna build.
[00:13:50.100]The larger the safety zone, the larger your obligations are
[00:13:53.470]for registration, and the second obligation, coordination.
[00:13:57.100]That if there's gonna be more than one party operating,
[00:13:59.350]which we absolutely envision to use these safety zones
[00:14:02.140]in no way shape and form should be confused
[00:14:04.190]with the stay-out zone.
[00:14:05.700]This is not us or anyone saying you can't come into the area
[00:14:08.770]as a matter of fact, the Accords explicitly anticipate
[00:14:12.670]more than one entity operating within the same safety zone.
[00:14:16.470]The only reason that you've got the zone
[00:14:18.170]is that's the area, where again, there's an obligation
[00:14:20.770]on the actor to coordinate with everyone
[00:14:23.810]to avoid harmful interference.
[00:14:26.270]That's basically already in the Outer Space Treaty.
[00:14:29.530]And when the Outer Space Treaty says
[00:14:31.240]avoid harmful interference, as Frans noted,
[00:14:34.280]we're just taking it one step further.
[00:14:36.200]How do you avoid harmful interference?
[00:14:38.360]Well, you tell people where you are, and you talk with them,
[00:14:41.930]and communicate and coordinate to avoid trouble.
[00:14:44.650]If there's another way of doing that,
[00:14:46.680]I don't know what it is.
[00:14:48.310]And that's why it in no way would violate,
[00:14:51.510]or even get close to violating Article 2.
[00:14:54.780]The safety zone concept is actually required
[00:14:57.260]by the Outer Space Treaty to implement the goal
[00:15:00.830]of avoiding harmful interference, and that's all it is.
[00:15:03.710]Oh, for clarity sake.
[00:15:05.410]I don't agree with, I don't disagree with you.
[00:15:07.560]I mean, I'm just saying that in the perception,
[00:15:09.947]and that's the key word here, the perception of many,
[00:15:13.660]it raises that issue.
[00:15:14.810]I've mean I've heard comparisons being made
[00:15:16.940]to air defense identifications ops,
[00:15:19.637]which is totally different ballgame.
[00:15:21.560]Yeah.
[00:15:22.393]But precisely where the political problems then,
[00:15:24.360]and some of the opposition comes from.
[00:15:26.360]And I don't know. I mean, it's easy to say,
[00:15:29.160]to stand on the sideline and said,
[00:15:31.200]well, maybe you shouldn't have called it safety zone,
[00:15:33.110]but notification zone or something.
[00:15:34.760]But in terms of substance,
[00:15:35.910]I completely agree with you, obviously.
[00:15:38.170]Yeah, and appreciate that Frans.
[00:15:39.913]And you're exactly right, that perception is out there.
[00:15:43.100]And again, it's so frustrating that if people
[00:15:45.810]would just read the text, I think that would be disposed of.
[00:15:48.940]And you're also correct relative to the nomenclature issue.
[00:15:52.230]That what we're talking about,
[00:15:54.150]if you wanted to be more verbose,
[00:15:56.420]is it's a coordination and notification zone.
[00:16:00.300]But in the end, you know, I think safety zone made sense
[00:16:03.570]because that's what we're trying to achieve, is safety.
[00:16:07.830]Yet again, there was that perception issue.
[00:16:10.240]I would also just note the safety zones
[00:16:11.810]is not a unique or new idea to the Accords.
[00:16:14.880]That it's a concept that has been around for quite a while
[00:16:17.800]and was actually developed via the
[00:16:19.460]Hague International Space Resources Governance Working Group
[00:16:21.930]was an example of somebody who had done a lot
[00:16:24.030]with safety zones, that safety zone work by the Hague
[00:16:26.290]helped inform the Artemis Accords.
[00:16:29.290]So we really tried to bend over backwards,
[00:16:31.560]particularly in the text, to be explicit,
[00:16:33.490]that in no way, shape, or form, would this be preventing
[00:16:37.720]free access to any area on lunar surface.
[00:16:41.850]That we were doing this to coordinate, to notify.
[00:16:45.220]And like you say, Frans,
[00:16:46.460]it's just a matter of communication, which is candidly,
[00:16:48.790]why I always try and participate in activities like this
[00:16:52.230]to spread the gospel of the truth with the Accords.
[00:16:55.100]There you go.
[00:16:55.933]And that's what we hope.
[00:16:57.310]We hope discussions like this can help
[00:16:59.380]eliminate misperceptions about the Accords.
[00:17:02.650]And of course, we also have to realize that some of that,
[00:17:07.930]it may not be that someone doesn't understand
[00:17:11.120]what's in the Accords, but that
[00:17:12.790]there is politics and diplomacy being played
[00:17:15.310]for broader geopolitical reasons, too.
[00:17:17.340]But to the extent that it's a misperception
[00:17:20.760]that can be overcome through education and discussion,
[00:17:23.720]that's really the, what we're seeking to provide here
[00:17:26.830]in forms like this.
[00:17:29.070]Well, that's a great discussion on safety zones.
[00:17:31.970]Let's turn to one of the other principles
[00:17:35.410]that have some misperceptions about it, right?
[00:17:38.100]That creates discussion and whatnot.
[00:17:41.570]And that's on property rights and extracted resources.
[00:17:45.330]It's a long-standing U.S. view, going all the way back
[00:17:48.800]to testimony of Secretary of State Vance,
[00:17:51.570]then State Department Legal Advisor Owen in the seventies
[00:17:55.120]that the U.S. believes that there can be
[00:17:56.880]property rights and extracted resources.
[00:17:58.637]And that doesn't violate
[00:18:00.800]the non-appropriation principle of Article 2.
[00:18:03.240]That's been enshrined in U.S. law
[00:18:05.260]and the laws of a couple other nations here recently
[00:18:07.960]in the past five, six years.
[00:18:11.560]And just wondering,
[00:18:15.604]and to tie it into something else Mike mentioned
[00:18:17.880]about the Accords, the hope that experienced under Artemis
[00:18:21.540]will lead to broader multilateral discussions.
[00:18:24.430]What has happened now that we have this principle
[00:18:28.533]enshrined in the Artemis Accords,
[00:18:30.580]are we making progress internationally to coalesce
[00:18:34.550]around this viewpoint and where do you see it going forward?
[00:18:41.380]I think the answer to that last question is yes.
[00:18:44.140]I mean, obviously there was a lot of flack,
[00:18:46.260]certainly originally, when in 2015,
[00:18:48.720]the U.S. was the first to add this Title IV
[00:18:51.170]to the U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness,
[00:18:54.600]Competitiveness Act.
[00:18:56.470]Each time I have to keep, stick to my tongue
[00:18:59.040]in order to, no not stumble over it, but anyway.
[00:19:02.808]And much of that was basically political.
[00:19:06.740]I think in particular from the Russian side,
[00:19:09.260]they were simply felt themselves realizing,
[00:19:12.380]hey, we have been running behind the curve
[00:19:15.270]for a number of years now and suddenly
[00:19:16.687]all these things are happening and we're not part of it.
[00:19:18.990]Which must have hurt their pride, you know, immensely.
[00:19:21.837]And so they started using all sorts of arguments
[00:19:24.300]and as a lawyer, I'm already, wants to always point out,
[00:19:28.550]well, even those who try to use the Moon Agreement,
[00:19:31.970]as an argument for saying this is not appropriate,
[00:19:35.550]even though obviously neither the United States, nor Russia,
[00:19:38.370]nor any other major space-faring country,
[00:19:40.270]with the exception, as Mike already noted, of Australia.
[00:19:44.750]Even the Moon Agreement speaks about the prohibition
[00:19:48.500]of appropriation of resources in place,
[00:19:51.040]which means that every good lawyer says,
[00:19:53.100]well, the normal interpretation isn't apparently
[00:19:55.530]after you've removed them they can very well be appropriated
[00:20:00.480]it's just that you can't reserve them until everyone else,
[00:20:03.790]you know, hands-off until I, until it suits my purposes
[00:20:07.330]50 years from now to go there and get them.
[00:20:09.580]So that's by way of a legal remark.
[00:20:11.360]Now, going to your more political remark,
[00:20:13.260]I see things moving the right way.
[00:20:16.300]And without being too boastful, I hope I have played
[00:20:20.540]a small role in that because the two of the countries,
[00:20:22.964]which I consulted, Luxembourg and the United Arab Emirates,
[00:20:26.530]have adopted, as you noted a law already,
[00:20:29.585]basically following the same general approach.
[00:20:33.400]And it's broader than that.
[00:20:34.660]I mean, what is interesting to me is that if you look
[00:20:36.897]at the 12 countries signing up to Artemis Accords,
[00:20:40.590]one of them is Brazil.
[00:20:42.450]Which was originally one of the most vocal opposers
[00:20:45.900]against U.S., what they called unilateral move
[00:20:50.700]to do something that should have been done multilaterally.
[00:20:54.600]I'm paraphrasing, of course.
[00:20:56.150]So that already tells me that things are moving.
[00:21:00.410]Russia, of course, can't overstep its own pride
[00:21:04.030]in directly going to the U.S. or becoming a party
[00:21:06.877]to the Artemis Accords, at least not yet.
[00:21:09.250]Maybe Mike knows more about that,
[00:21:10.840]but they have already intimated indirectly
[00:21:14.880]to be interested in talking to Luxembourg.
[00:21:17.880]Which could either mean that the Russians think
[00:21:20.810]they can convince the Luxembourgs to, you know,
[00:21:24.680]to retract on their supposed error,
[00:21:27.050]and see the error of their ways of siding with the U.S.
[00:21:29.940]and come back to them.
[00:21:31.360]Or they might try to be looking for a way,
[00:21:34.050]without loss of face, of getting back into the game.
[00:21:37.420]And a similar interesting development
[00:21:39.830]takes place in the case of China.
[00:21:42.460]Which is, of course, from a geopolitical perspective,
[00:21:46.110]you would expect, you know, anything that
[00:21:47.980]would hurt the U.S. or would stop the U.S.
[00:21:50.970]or make it more difficult for the U.S. they would use,
[00:21:54.160]but they've been very silent
[00:21:55.638]and sitting on the fence in this part.
[00:21:57.850]And they also have actually agreed with Luxembourg
[00:22:01.380]on a cooperation accord in terms of how to develop
[00:22:06.340]future rules for the exportation
[00:22:11.034]of lunar resources.
[00:22:13.670]Which again tells me that the Chinese, you know,
[00:22:16.770]behind their face may do something else than just
[00:22:21.970]blatantly qualifying this as going the wrong route.
[00:22:26.280]And then finally a country like Belgium,
[00:22:28.070]which was also for some personal reasons
[00:22:30.339]originally considerably, you know, worried,
[00:22:33.900]let me put it that way, with the way things were going,
[00:22:37.430]because they were a Moon Agreements party.
[00:22:39.983]And they felt like they should defend it.
[00:22:42.490]Belgium was also consulted with Luxembourg,
[00:22:45.810]and I wasn't privy to the details
[00:22:47.753]of the Hague Working Group, which Mike referenced,
[00:22:51.980]I was there at the very beginning, but that was about it.
[00:22:55.190]I understand that there you see a general convergence
[00:22:58.450]on yes, basically this is okay.
[00:23:00.790]What we need actually, is to establish
[00:23:04.290]a little bit more detail on what is harmful interference.
[00:23:08.520]What is the, you know, what is the right of a company
[00:23:11.660]to see its investment protected against the public interest
[00:23:15.800]and safety, security, and the environment.
[00:23:17.680]And as Mike pointed out, well, the Artemis Accords,
[00:23:20.280]by already gently pushing the principle
[00:23:23.300]and putting it on the table
[00:23:25.350]is one step further in that direction.
[00:23:28.150]I'm not sure whether I answered all parts of your questions
[00:23:31.390]but this is at least what I wanted to say.
[00:23:33.870]And again, I can't resist, but chime in.
[00:23:37.860]And I have to push back a little bit on the perception
[00:23:41.010]that the Accords is the American position
[00:23:45.350]on space resources, 'cause, and again,
[00:23:48.880]Frans correctly putting out that that's a perception
[00:23:50.580]that's out there.
[00:23:51.950]The Accords are a unifying document.
[00:23:54.830]It represents the common ground between the nations
[00:23:59.840]relative to norms of behavior that everyone could agree on,
[00:24:04.443]that these principles are universal, simple, and intuitive.
[00:24:09.300]And relative to resources, again,
[00:24:12.130]the question was not what is the U.S. position?
[00:24:14.930]Of course it's partially reflected,
[00:24:16.770]but it's, what could we all agree to?
[00:24:19.670]Whether it's the United States that again,
[00:24:22.080]has traditionally been opposed to the Moon Agreement
[00:24:24.300]or a country like Australia
[00:24:26.060]that is a signatory to the Moon Agreement.
[00:24:28.870]Party, in the.
[00:24:30.470]Exactly, so either way you couldn't have
[00:24:34.330]just the U.S. position.
[00:24:36.097]And it represents, what can we all agree upon?
[00:24:40.020]And what that is is really quite simple.
[00:24:42.550]It's that yes, you can extract resources,
[00:24:45.690]and yes, you can utilize those resources
[00:24:47.227]and it should be done in a fashion that is in keeping
[00:24:51.464]with the Outer Space Treaty, particularly Article 2,
[00:24:55.184]as well as done in a sustainable fashion.
[00:24:58.500]I just don't think anyone can argue with that.
[00:25:01.090]As a matter of fact, that's in full compliance
[00:25:03.744]with the Moon Agreement and full compliance
[00:25:06.250]with the Outer Space Treaties.
[00:25:07.510]There are many ways, the Moon Agreement actually
[00:25:09.824]is more explicit about extracting and utilizing resources.
[00:25:14.900]Now where the American position diverges
[00:25:17.930]from the agreement is what happens after that.
[00:25:20.150]Relative to sharing regimes,
[00:25:22.040]or what occurs with any profits from the resources.
[00:25:25.273]And the Artemis Accords don't resolve that issue.
[00:25:28.300]They simply say that you should extract, you can utilize,
[00:25:31.400]but all such activities should occur under the auspices
[00:25:33.770]of the U.S. Outer Space Treaty in compliance with Article 2
[00:25:36.930]and in a sustainable fashion.
[00:25:38.440]So again, the Accords represent a beginning
[00:25:41.270]of a conversation, not an ending.
[00:25:43.470]We've actually got a very long way to go
[00:25:46.200]relative to the resources discussion
[00:25:48.360]and looking at our position, the U.S. position,
[00:25:50.510]relative to the Moon Agreement.
[00:25:51.520]But again, relative to the Accords, it's unifying,
[00:25:54.620]it's what can we all agree to,
[00:25:56.450]and what have countries already agreed to relative
[00:25:59.650]to both the Outer Space Treaty and the Moon Agreement.
[00:26:03.970]So I think that's just very important to point out
[00:26:06.880]when it comes to that resources aspect.
[00:26:09.340]That, again, it's a misperception
[00:26:11.210]that I don't think anyone would disagree with that.
[00:26:13.870]And the Accords nominally move the ball forward
[00:26:17.470]in terms of simply acknowledging, you can extract,
[00:26:19.003]you can utilize, do so in compliance with Article 2.
[00:26:22.170]Because let's go back to the first word of the Accords,
[00:26:24.070]the Artemis Program.
[00:26:25.420]We want to make sure that the activities of Artemis Program
[00:26:28.920]are covered and that we are implementing Artemis
[00:26:31.720]in a responsible way that is in keeping
[00:26:34.240]with the multilateral commitments that we've made
[00:26:36.890]in common sense norms of behavior.
[00:26:40.010]Yeah, and as I said, I think we're moving
[00:26:42.320]in the right direction.
[00:26:43.690]I mean, you have already four new entrants, kind of
[00:26:46.160]four new signatories, drew them after the original eight.
[00:26:50.650]And I, wouldn't, you know,
[00:26:53.230]I wouldn't exclude more coming in the next couple of years.
[00:26:55.600]Which again goes back to the base question
[00:26:57.610]I think Matt was trying to put on the table.
[00:27:00.940]Yeah, and in terms of process again, Frans exactly right.
[00:27:04.140]In particularly Brazil, like you mentioned, was a great get,
[00:27:06.690]I think we are going to see new countries join the Accords
[00:27:09.507]and even more diverse countries join the Accords.
[00:27:12.030]I think it's very important that we should have
[00:27:13.570]African representation in the Accords.
[00:27:16.230]I think Africa represents a great untapped resource
[00:27:19.140]in terms of just human capital, creativity,
[00:27:21.900]as well as just some very interesting,
[00:27:24.340]innovative ideas coming from the continent.
[00:27:25.960]It's very important they be a part of space development
[00:27:28.710]in the global dialogue.
[00:27:29.950]And I hope that the Accords, you know,
[00:27:32.330]will soon be going there.
[00:27:34.770]And there isn't anything really from policy perspective.
[00:27:38.480]Now politics is different, but preventing
[00:27:40.470]a Russia or a China from agreeing to the Accords,
[00:27:42.831]already 90% of it they have to abide by
[00:27:46.289]as signatories of the Outer Space Treaty.
[00:27:49.100]So I hope that, you know, there's a future
[00:27:51.170]where they can also, if not signing the Accords,
[00:27:53.740]at least committing to the principles of the Accords.
[00:27:56.210]And again, that's what the Accords were intended to do.
[00:27:58.690]To begin a global dialogue on these vital norms of behavior,
[00:28:02.310]now, so that we're not facing conflict down the road.
[00:28:06.690]And then the final thing I'll say on the topic,
[00:28:08.770]as we've been discussing the Hague International Space
[00:28:10.420]Resources Governance Working Group,
[00:28:11.970]gee, we talked about safety zones.
[00:28:13.300]That name rolls off the tongue, right?
[00:28:16.610]Then we've got what I'll consider a little bit
[00:28:19.240]of an outgrowth of that.
[00:28:20.840]Let me see if I can get the acronym, right.
[00:28:22.630]The Global Experts Group on Sustainable Lunar Activities,
[00:28:27.190]the GEGSLA.
[00:28:28.740]And just like I participate in the Hague,
[00:28:31.080]I'm participating in GEGSLA.
[00:28:32.490]What's been very encouraging is that it's a robust
[00:28:36.160]global conversation involving not only
[00:28:40.450]commercial U.S. officials like myself,
[00:28:42.640]but a lot of Chinese officials, Australians, Canadians.
[00:28:46.780]And this is a challenge that we have
[00:28:48.470]with the international space legal system
[00:28:51.610]that there's no chair for the private sector at COPOUS.
[00:28:56.440]There's no chair for the private sector at the UN,
[00:28:58.220]and even domestically, we're having issues.
[00:28:59.620]Now I love COPOUS, and STSC does a wonderful job
[00:29:03.130]and it's a very important institution,
[00:29:05.860]but that is a challenge that the institutions,
[00:29:08.710]the structures were not created for the reality
[00:29:11.730]of commercial space today.
[00:29:13.330]And that's where I see these NGOs
[00:29:15.320]playing a very important role where I can sit down
[00:29:18.520]as a private sector with government officials
[00:29:20.810]side-by-side all on an equal basis, and we can come up with
[00:29:24.880]ideas, strategies, policies that can then be fit in
[00:29:29.340]to UN COPOUS and into our national policy discussions
[00:29:33.610]that can benefit all.
[00:29:35.140]And it's been good to see robust Chinese participation
[00:29:38.576]in those conversations.
[00:29:40.850]And there was a little bit of debate over mooncake
[00:29:43.690]versus moon pies, but we managed to overcome that
[00:29:47.027]and it's just been a.
[00:29:48.900]It's all a wonderful. Results timeline.
[00:29:50.246]Spacecake, Mike,
[00:29:51.656]Hey, we were having enough trouble as it is Frans.
[00:29:54.240]Don't try and start a fight on that, right?
[00:29:55.740]But I hear ya, and wouldn't disagree, but yeah,
[00:29:59.440]it's been a terrific conversation.
[00:30:01.190]That's why I think we're making progress
[00:30:03.330]if not on the policies themselves,
[00:30:05.410]at the very least on the dialogue,
[00:30:08.000]which is so important to have now,
[00:30:10.470]before problems and conflict develop again.
[00:30:13.220]The idea is to prevent conflict,
[00:30:14.810]to preserve the peaceful future.
[00:30:16.640]And that's all of our goals
[00:30:18.470]and I'm seeing great progress in that area.
[00:30:22.700]Okay, so moving on to another question
[00:30:24.840]concerning the principles, is the Protection of Heritage
[00:30:28.660]principle concerning to any countries
[00:30:30.940]or has that come up as a conflict at all?
[00:30:34.130]And we'll start with you, Mike, sorry.
[00:30:35.690]Yeah, so I don't think the principle has been a problem.
[00:30:40.340]The application, however, can be very tricky.
[00:30:43.800]I was just talking about my work on the GEGSLA,
[00:30:46.460]and I'm chairing subgroup two.
[00:30:49.090]And one of the topics is heritage, the other is safety zones
[00:30:52.380]and the other is debris mitigation.
[00:30:54.420]And, you know, we had almost thought, well,
[00:30:56.410]heritage who can disagree with that?
[00:30:58.530]You know, this'll be the easy one, this is the softball.
[00:31:01.590]Instead it has proven to be quite a complex issue.
[00:31:04.650]And you can see again with the Artemis Accords,
[00:31:07.440]it's a beginning of discussion where we say
[00:31:09.080]preserve heritage, but we don't really go into detail
[00:31:12.770]in the Artemis Accords relative to how to do that.
[00:31:16.360]And candidly, you could have pages of requirements,
[00:31:22.130]of descriptions of details,
[00:31:23.950]in terms of what is a heritage site,
[00:31:26.320]how you preserve the heritage site.
[00:31:27.820]And we do need to have that conversation.
[00:31:30.890]And I think the concerns that arrive with heritage
[00:31:33.570]actually go back to some of the concerns
[00:31:35.400]that we were discussing with Article 2.
[00:31:37.830]But is it an appropriation if you describe
[00:31:40.990]a particular site as heritage.
[00:31:42.600]Or if you take your Rover and spin it around an area
[00:31:45.890]a couple of times, you want to preserve the tracks.
[00:31:48.450]Have you just creative, constructive, private property
[00:31:52.090]or a stay-out zone?
[00:31:54.340]So those are more the challenges that we have with heritage.
[00:31:57.330]I don't think anyone disagrees with it,
[00:31:59.410]but implementing is not necessarily simple.
[00:32:01.950]And will take some time and thought.
[00:32:04.710]Yeah, so I fully agree with that.
[00:32:06.816]And I think that I haven't seen, at least,
[00:32:09.900]any major concerns about that.
[00:32:12.010]I must also add that NASA has always gone out of its way
[00:32:15.487]not to suggest that they are going to impose anything
[00:32:19.670]or really demand something.
[00:32:21.460]They always just kindly ask, could you please be careful
[00:32:24.870]with Neil Armstrong's first steps.
[00:32:27.320]And so far people have complied.
[00:32:29.910]So I don't think that's really a hot issue.
[00:32:32.370]I had a, just a few months ago,
[00:32:35.090]someone at the University of Luxembourg
[00:32:36.810]defended his dissertation on applying
[00:32:39.670]existing cultural heritage laws potentially to the moon.
[00:32:43.370]So when in future things get more, you know,
[00:32:46.440]get more down to, well, down to Earth, I would almost say.
[00:32:49.560]But at least down to the ground on the moon
[00:32:51.320]and we have to start thinking, well,
[00:32:53.070]now we see a activity which might seriously threaten that.
[00:32:56.940]How are we going to handle it?
[00:32:58.100]That might be something to be discussed,
[00:32:59.540]but I agree with Mike,
[00:33:00.590]it's not really high on the agenda of things
[00:33:04.220]that need to be solved now.
[00:33:07.730]Luckily we don't have guys like, you know,
[00:33:10.759]IS up there who, who blow up ancient old Buddha statues
[00:33:15.840]or something like that.
[00:33:18.830]Great, we're gonna move on to another principle
[00:33:21.760]and Leana, I'm actually going to combine questions
[00:33:24.410]four and six, 'cause they had a good discussion
[00:33:26.990]on safety zones, question five already.
[00:33:29.390]And four might be considered a specific
[00:33:33.440]or narrower example of the broader question six.
[00:33:37.560]So there's the interoperability principle there.
[00:33:40.330]When it first came out,
[00:33:41.660]there was some concern amongst commercial actors,
[00:33:43.840]hey, this could stifle innovation.
[00:33:46.140]And I think reading the Artemis Accords
[00:33:48.370]and hearing from Mike before, I think I know the response
[00:33:52.130]to this, but I think it will be important to hear it.
[00:33:55.180]But then more generally, so going beyond
[00:33:57.400]the interoperability principle, what's been the reaction
[00:34:00.520]generally to the private sector, to the Artemis Accords.
[00:34:05.000]And it'd be interesting to hear, Mike from you,
[00:34:07.900]who's been in NASA and now in private sector.
[00:34:10.810]And Frans, you've dealt with government
[00:34:12.640]and private sector as well.
[00:34:15.030]So maybe we'll kick it to Frans first.
[00:34:17.410]And then Mike, interoperability principle,
[00:34:19.970]and then just the general reaction
[00:34:21.830]of the private sector to Artemis.
[00:34:24.560]Yeah, I didn't notice much which no race,
[00:34:30.070]really a lot of interest there.
[00:34:31.420]I mean, if you talk about interoperability,
[00:34:33.710]the way I read this particular principle
[00:34:35.560]but of course Mike can correct me,
[00:34:37.360]is that it's fairly open-ended
[00:34:40.730]as to how these standards and principles will arise.
[00:34:44.940]It just points out that it's ultimately
[00:34:46.900]in everyone's interest, in the interest
[00:34:49.560]of not spoiling resources on duplicative
[00:34:52.860]or conflicting technologies.
[00:34:56.146]That there should be one standard,
[00:34:57.810]but how this standard arises,
[00:35:00.770]and I actually assumed that there would be
[00:35:04.400]a major role to play for the private sector in terms of
[00:35:08.863]finding out what the most efficient standard would be.
[00:35:11.920]And that would then sort be, you know,
[00:35:15.010]raised to the statutes of an official guideline
[00:35:17.520]or an official standard, a recommendation,
[00:35:19.330]something like that.
[00:35:20.297]But this is one of the examples I think, where we have to,
[00:35:24.000]you know, learn as we move ahead, what makes a lot of sense.
[00:35:28.630]And since, certainly the countries
[00:35:31.340]now party to the Artemis Accords, they're all, you know,
[00:35:35.830]free market economies, they're all, you know,
[00:35:41.060]very aware of the benefits that private sector ingenuity
[00:35:44.510]brings to society.
[00:35:46.010]So I'm pretty sure that they are willing to enter
[00:35:51.487]in to a continuous dialogue on what is the best,
[00:35:54.770]on what is the best technology.
[00:35:57.180]So I, again, I don't see much of an opposition there
[00:36:00.030]for those reasons.
[00:36:01.580]Yeah, as a representative of the private sector,
[00:36:04.560]I can tell you that we're very excited by
[00:36:06.420]and fully supportive of the Artemis Accords.
[00:36:08.650]Now you've let me pitch and hit the ball myself as well,
[00:36:12.650]just by going from government to the profit sector.
[00:36:15.863]So relative to interoperability in the Accords generally,
[00:36:19.910]to be a little less glib.
[00:36:21.300]I have seen great support by the private sector
[00:36:24.160]for the Accords.
[00:36:25.800]And Matt, I forget if it might've been you or I,
[00:36:28.320]who was moderating a panel where we had both
[00:36:31.370]SpaceX and Blue Origin representatives on a year ago or so,
[00:36:35.770]and both were very supportive of the Accords
[00:36:38.340]because they felt like it helped provide definition
[00:36:42.050]to the Outer Space Treaty.
[00:36:43.610]And that's what the private sector is looking for,
[00:36:45.910]specificity, predictability.
[00:36:48.030]And to the extent the Accords, at least help move the ball
[00:36:51.620]down the field in terms of predictability
[00:36:54.550]and what the actual provisions
[00:36:56.250]of the Outer Space Treaty mean.
[00:36:58.620]They viewed it as helpful.
[00:37:01.400]Additionally, I think there are several principles
[00:37:04.000]of the Accords, which are particularly relevant
[00:37:06.640]for the private sector, and interoperability, candidly,
[00:37:09.140]being one of them as Frans so correctly described.
[00:37:12.880]Interoperability is essentially aspirational in nature.
[00:37:16.820]And so are many principles.
[00:37:18.580]That we know that it needs to be taken in moderation.
[00:37:21.820]And that's why it wasn't written in some form
[00:37:24.200]of draconian manner, that the goal is to be interoperable.
[00:37:27.480]The more interoperable things are, the more conducive
[00:37:29.860]the environment will be for private sector growth,
[00:37:32.362]as well as civil international collaboration.
[00:37:35.960]However, you know, I think Matt,
[00:37:37.350]you do make good point that if you take it to an extreme,
[00:37:39.780]it could be a drag on innovation.
[00:37:41.530]So it's a goal, but something that shouldn't be taken
[00:37:45.300]to an extreme or enforced in a draconian fashion.
[00:37:48.320]And to the extent that's the case,
[00:37:49.920]I think it's actually very helpful to the private sector.
[00:37:53.000]Then we get to space resources.
[00:37:54.730]And again, while it's not definitive,
[00:37:56.920]it's a beginning of a conversation.
[00:37:58.840]It's at least consolidating the position,
[00:38:01.560]yes, you can extract and utilize resources.
[00:38:03.530]So that's very helpful to the private sector
[00:38:05.760]in registration, avoiding harmful interference,
[00:38:08.490]to know when the private sector operates
[00:38:10.350]on the surface of the moon or elsewhere
[00:38:12.790]that at least they know what that means,
[00:38:15.110]avoiding harmful interference and the protection
[00:38:16.970]that they can expect and they can expect others to use.
[00:38:20.090]So I think generally the reception of the Accords,
[00:38:23.070]particularly among the private sector
[00:38:24.550]has been very positive.
[00:38:25.920]Although I'd like to use this to point out an opportunity
[00:38:28.120]that the Accords are not necessarily directed
[00:38:30.900]to and for the private sector.
[00:38:32.930]That there are other principles of the Accords
[00:38:35.450]that you wouldn't want to enforce on the private sector.
[00:38:38.260]Such as for example,
[00:38:39.180]the full free and open release of scientific data.
[00:38:42.110]That if you've got a private sector project,
[00:38:44.100]that's been financed by a commercial entity,
[00:38:47.170]they shouldn't necessarily be obligated
[00:38:49.240]to give up all of their data.
[00:38:51.020]Whereas on a government program,
[00:38:52.510]that's the very purpose of the activity.
[00:38:54.480]So I really think that we need to develop,
[00:38:57.580]candidly a Artemis Accords or Artemis Accords-like agreement
[00:39:02.230]for the private sector.
[00:39:03.530]Where you would take many of these same principles, yes,
[00:39:06.760]but would modify or leave out others
[00:39:09.094]relative to how the private sector should operate
[00:39:12.890]and norms behavior that the private sector would abide by.
[00:39:16.160]And then I think there's a similar effort
[00:39:17.650]that should be made for national security.
[00:39:19.550]How close is too close?
[00:39:21.206]There should be an Artemis Accords-like coalition
[00:39:23.800]of the winning to try and establish those norms.
[00:39:26.250]Again, to prevent conflict and keep the peace in space.
[00:39:30.774]Allow me to jump in on that scientific information part,
[00:39:34.940]Mike, because obviously on paper, it makes perfect sense.
[00:39:39.180]But then of course you start thinking about
[00:39:41.350]where exactly is the boundary line, right?
[00:39:45.610]How do you determine that that something
[00:39:48.880]is scientific information.
[00:39:50.830]And in particular, when it comes
[00:39:52.350]to private public partnerships where,
[00:39:56.110]in some of these Space Act Agreements,
[00:39:59.330]intellectual property rights, and its kind of a, you know,
[00:40:01.920]similar type of dichotomy.
[00:40:04.810]Where the discussion was, well,
[00:40:06.300]if private money is invested, but there's also
[00:40:09.150]public money invested, should the IP still go through
[00:40:11.670]the private operator or should it be public,
[00:40:13.710]NASA or whoever's engaged.
[00:40:15.820]Now they find the kind of,
[00:40:17.120]they found a kind of solution there.
[00:40:18.991]Have you already given some thought about how to draw
[00:40:21.970]that guiding line because we also don't want to happen,
[00:40:25.470]a private company to say, well, everything,
[00:40:28.190]I don't show you a scientific information
[00:40:30.370]because I can't show it to you, you're never gonna find out
[00:40:32.620]whether it's really scientific information
[00:40:34.103]or whether it's other stuff of information,
[00:40:37.010]other kinds of information, right.
[00:40:38.740]So I've certainly give it some thought personally, Frans,
[00:40:41.870]but let me say, there's a lot of work left for attorneys
[00:40:44.990]and consultants and everyone on this topic, so.
[00:40:47.940]You hear that, Leana?
[00:40:50.404]You know, it's, and again, this is why we,
[00:40:52.390]I appreciate what University of Nebraska does
[00:40:54.290]and all the young, you know, space lawyers,
[00:40:56.234]Leana's is in a LLL, and I'm jealous by the way.
[00:40:58.630]When I graduated,
[00:40:59.550]there were no such opportunities like this in space law,
[00:41:02.980]but, you know, Frans makes an important point.
[00:41:05.120]This is work for the future.
[00:41:06.450]So we've got the Artemis Accord's obligation
[00:41:09.362]for governments, but as Frans is pointing out,
[00:41:12.850]even that can get a little tricky, like you say,
[00:41:15.320]with the public private partnership.
[00:41:17.190]My thinking is that when an entity
[00:41:20.310]is acting on behalf of the government,
[00:41:23.570]then they have to abide by everything that the government
[00:41:26.440]would otherwise have to abide to.
[00:41:27.990]However, if that same company then conducts
[00:41:30.530]a purely private sector activity, that's different.
[00:41:34.870]Then they wouldn't be bound
[00:41:36.190]by the same agreements of government.
[00:41:38.080]Now, if we were to do an Artemis Accords,
[00:41:40.820]a commercial version, again, you'd have to think about that.
[00:41:44.140]What is scientific information, what isn't,
[00:41:46.250]what should people release, what shouldn't they?
[00:41:48.090]So that's a whole 'nother conversation to come,
[00:41:50.880]which I think is worth having.
[00:41:52.240]And I think it's important by the way,
[00:41:54.255]for the private sector to step forward
[00:41:57.100]when it comes to space policy.
[00:41:58.980]That it's not enough for the private sector
[00:42:01.030]to drive technology.
[00:42:02.470]But commercial space entities have a responsibility
[00:42:05.500]to space law and space policy to be engaged,
[00:42:09.080]since often they're in the best position
[00:42:11.300]to know what needs to happen in their technology.
[00:42:14.090]So I'm trying to lead by example,
[00:42:16.284]and follow my own advice and admonitions when I was at NASA
[00:42:20.530]that private sector needs to step up,
[00:42:22.530]participate in discussions like this and groups like GEGSLA,
[00:42:26.320]engage at UN COPOUS to ensure that their voices are heard.
[00:42:30.354]Because it is so important and vital for the private sector
[00:42:34.290]to be at the table for these discussions.
[00:42:38.450]Awesome, okay, so I'm actually gonna skip down
[00:42:40.680]to my last question, just due to time.
[00:42:44.060]And we wanna be able to answer some of the Q&A questions.
[00:42:47.070]So what competition, if any,
[00:42:49.267]is the International Lunar Research Station roadmap
[00:42:52.960]of China and Russia?
[00:42:54.435]Are they asking other countries to join these efforts
[00:42:57.775]and also, do they elaborate principles for activities?
[00:43:05.336]Would you like me to go first or Frans?
[00:43:06.720]Yes, I'm sorry, yes, Mike.
[00:43:08.914]Oh yeah, always happy to.
[00:43:11.140]And again, I think this is another misperception
[00:43:14.050]that can sometimes arise with the Accords.
[00:43:16.230]That they somehow prevent other partnerships.
[00:43:19.760]And that's absolutely not the case.
[00:43:22.035]The only thing that the Accords would prevent
[00:43:25.020]is irresponsible activities on the moon or elsewhere.
[00:43:28.610]That if a nation were to engage in harmful interference
[00:43:32.810]or appropriate land, et cetera, you know,
[00:43:36.773]that would be a violation of the Accords.
[00:43:38.740]But relative to partnerships with any other countries,
[00:43:42.510]as long as they're abiding by the Outer Space Treaty
[00:43:44.730]in no way, shape, or form would prevent that.
[00:43:47.880]So it's not competition.
[00:43:49.010]As a matter of fact, one would hope that the values
[00:43:52.080]of the Accords would be reflected
[00:43:54.340]even if they're not a signatory, on the operations
[00:43:57.235]of the lunar base that Russia or China would put together.
[00:44:02.050]And what I haven't seen is Russia or China or others
[00:44:06.840]put forward a analog to the Accords
[00:44:10.430]in terms of norms of behavior.
[00:44:12.760]And I think such a document would be welcomed.
[00:44:15.752]That the idea with the Accords is to inspire a conversation
[00:44:19.990]around these vital norms of behavior.
[00:44:22.700]And it'd be preferable for every country
[00:44:25.380]to sign the Accords.
[00:44:26.390]But for those who don't, it would also be very helpful
[00:44:29.560]and important to hear how they are going to implement
[00:44:33.880]their obligations under the Outer Space Treaty.
[00:44:36.700]And if they will honor norms of behavior such as
[00:44:39.360]the full free and open release of scientific data,
[00:44:41.620]I hope that everyone will.
[00:44:43.710]And I hope that even if again,
[00:44:45.820]China, Russia aren't signing the Accords,
[00:44:47.190]and I still hope that they would, that at the very least
[00:44:50.210]that their operations would reflect the values
[00:44:52.930]of the Accords and any principles that they put out
[00:44:56.220]echo the Accord's values and attempt
[00:44:59.120]to create a peaceful and prosperous future.
[00:45:03.700]Yeah, I can only echo that
[00:45:04.777]and maybe add a few points to that.
[00:45:08.310]What I've seen, which is not much, I should say,
[00:45:11.140]because it's not clear what the details are,
[00:45:15.790]tells me on the one hand that to the extent
[00:45:18.050]that they are going for something.
[00:45:20.240]It's a very specific project,
[00:45:22.220]rather than a general roadmap or the beginning of a roadmap,
[00:45:27.260]which the Artemis Accords in many ways are,
[00:45:29.610]that first laying down, how shall we act
[00:45:32.650]and then start finding certain details.
[00:45:35.410]So as Mike said in principle,
[00:45:37.392]any of these specific projects in this case,
[00:45:42.430]this Lunar Research Station could still be part
[00:45:45.411]of whatever activities are conducted somehow
[00:45:50.430]within the scope of the Artemis Accords.
[00:45:52.320]I mean, just to remind you that Europeans
[00:45:55.730]are still having this idea of the global moon village,
[00:45:58.580]which is also a very open-ended concept.
[00:46:01.160]Which could still fit in, you know,
[00:46:03.061]with much of what the Artemis Accords are,
[00:46:05.540]and what the Artemis Program focusing on,
[00:46:07.920]and actually there are a number of areas
[00:46:09.990]where that's already happening.
[00:46:11.720]So the one part is this.
[00:46:14.580]And the other part is that it tells me
[00:46:16.210]that it's probably at this point a little bit more
[00:46:18.270]of a political move, kind of, again,
[00:46:20.610]there's politics behind that.
[00:46:23.530]They didn't want the U.S. to steal the thunder
[00:46:26.830]because Mike may be right,
[00:46:28.020]the Artemis Accords are an international group of countries
[00:46:30.640]that are like-minded.
[00:46:32.390]But the perception is still that this is U.S. driven
[00:46:35.253]and that NASA is more powerful than all the other
[00:46:38.200]11 space agency put together.
[00:46:40.450]So the reality, that's kind of the perception,
[00:46:42.700]so they want to bank on this by saying,
[00:46:46.040]hey, here's another approach.
[00:46:49.360]And while they call it an International Lunar Research
[00:46:52.480]Station so far, the only two nations concerned
[00:46:55.640]are the Russians and the Chinese.
[00:46:56.890]And I have no clue on how they are going to contribute that.
[00:47:00.930]And some people are saying, well,
[00:47:03.020]it's basically the Chinese who are in control.
[00:47:04.913]And because they have this all-encompassing,
[00:47:07.840]very ambitious space program, not just going to the moon,
[00:47:11.160]they have their own satellite navigation system,
[00:47:13.420]they have their manned spaceflight capabilities,
[00:47:15.480]and they're doing this, that, and the other.
[00:47:18.500]And they think, they're thinking very pragmatically.
[00:47:21.420]If we can get a political ally
[00:47:23.230]against the supremacy of the United States.
[00:47:26.690]If we can get an ally who has a enormous
[00:47:29.810]track record in space and who can help us out
[00:47:32.210]in some of the things that we are not probably yet
[00:47:34.640]up to scratch with, let's buy the Russians.
[00:47:37.160]And the Russians are scrambling for attention
[00:47:39.310]and for anyone who wants to see them as a, you know, as the,
[00:47:44.621]as the historical grand nation space that they were.
[00:47:48.420]So in that sense, it's hard to draw any specific conclusions
[00:47:52.960]from what I've seen so far on what this really has gonna be.
[00:48:00.610]Well, thanks very much.
[00:48:02.020]Let's turn to audience questions and answer.
[00:48:04.400]And actually there was a couple of questions
[00:48:05.966]in the audience Q&A box that Leana just asked.
[00:48:10.700]And another one that was on our list,
[00:48:12.840]that's also in the audience Q&A, just to combine a few.
[00:48:17.140]So we're at 12 countries now,
[00:48:21.067]when might we see more developing countries,
[00:48:26.140]global south countries, African countries,
[00:48:29.450]join the Artemis Accords.
[00:48:32.840]How long of a process would that be?
[00:48:36.830]And there's also a question in the Q&A box
[00:48:39.670]on capacity building.
[00:48:42.660]And it also raises the question,
[00:48:45.330]would a country only sign up to the Artemis Accord
[00:48:48.200]Principles if they were involved in the Artemis Program,
[00:48:53.060]or is there a way for the principles to be signed onto
[00:48:56.920]in the absence of participation and are these things linked?
[00:49:01.210]So how soon will we see growth from the 12 countries
[00:49:05.910]that are there, will it include countries,
[00:49:07.889]developing countries?
[00:49:09.750]What about capacity building?
[00:49:11.670]And is there a necessary linkage between
[00:49:14.780]involvement in Artemis Program from a technology standpoint
[00:49:19.670]and signing onto the principles?
[00:49:21.550]Sorry, that's four questions,
[00:49:22.850]but all came in and somewhat related.
[00:49:27.290]Mike, you want to go first?
[00:49:28.710]Sure, and I'll need someone
[00:49:31.310]to remind me of the last two questions
[00:49:33.270]as I try and tackle the first, Frans.
[00:49:35.410]But, you know, relative to when will countries come on,
[00:49:39.650]what does it look like?
[00:49:40.890]It should be a never-ending process.
[00:49:42.760]Until we get all of them.
[00:49:44.240]That again, the Accords were written
[00:49:46.020]to be as inclusive as possible.
[00:49:48.380]And it's with great frustration that I sometimes
[00:49:51.442]read articles or hear statements about the U.S.
[00:49:55.560]twisting arms or leveraging the Artemis Program
[00:49:59.292]for countries to join the Accords.
[00:50:01.602]I wish those people could have been with us
[00:50:04.250]and watched the negotiations.
[00:50:06.660]Where, I can assure you, every attempt was made
[00:50:12.500]to build a document that represented
[00:50:16.230]common ground among nations.
[00:50:18.940]That consensus among nations, and not only the nations
[00:50:22.670]that were negotiating, but United Arab Emirates
[00:50:24.970]in particular was a strong voice to ensure
[00:50:27.840]that other countries that weren't part of the negotiations
[00:50:30.190]could also sign without issue or trouble.
[00:50:33.070]And that's like, so, and again, just,
[00:50:36.410]if you look at the simple principles of the Accords,
[00:50:38.400]they don't just reflect the U.S. position, far from it.
[00:50:41.480]They represent common ground,
[00:50:43.180]and that was always the intent.
[00:50:44.380]And I think because of that,
[00:50:45.770]we've seen Brazil sign up, we've seen South Korea join.
[00:50:48.930]We've seen New Zealand join, and because you know,
[00:50:52.530]many of the larger countries already members of the Accords,
[00:50:55.580]then we're naturally going to see more
[00:50:57.810]smaller space agencies and more developing countries
[00:51:01.210]be a part of it.
[00:51:02.140]Which I think is so important that we all applaud Apollo.
[00:51:05.470]And we all honor what went before us.
[00:51:07.460]But one of the issues with Apollo
[00:51:09.630]was that it was largely American.
[00:51:12.140]Now under Artemis, we're bringing the whole world
[00:51:15.470]on the journey back to the moon, and this time to stay.
[00:51:18.720]And I can tell you candidly,
[00:51:20.270]looking at a document like the IGA,
[00:51:22.303]the International Government Agreement for,
[00:51:24.810]governance agreement for the International Space Station,
[00:51:27.350]it's very difficult, if not constructively impossible
[00:51:30.350]for nations to join the ISS IGA.
[00:51:33.300]The Accords were built to be as inclusive
[00:51:37.150]and broad as possible, so that whether
[00:51:39.180]you're a large country with substantial resources
[00:51:43.090]or you're a smaller developing country,
[00:51:45.480]and maybe it's just a few professors
[00:51:47.060]or a few students you can contribute,
[00:51:48.880]no matter how robust or how modest your contribution,
[00:51:52.220]you can be a part of the Artemis Program.
[00:51:54.700]And the Accords were intended to be that vehicle.
[00:51:57.990]And I think that diversity is so important,
[00:52:00.870]both in people and in nations and thought,
[00:52:04.060]and that Artemis will succeed because of the
[00:52:07.410]distinct global points of view that will allow us
[00:52:10.640]to innovate and conquer many of the problems
[00:52:13.270]that we probably don't even know about when it comes to
[00:52:16.140]lunar development, lunar settlement, to stay on the moon.
[00:52:19.560]So I welcome and applaud my former colleagues at NASA
[00:52:23.560]working to bring a much more diverse,
[00:52:26.160]and again, the broadest, largest, most diverse group
[00:52:29.070]ever to tackle beyond low-Earth orbit exploration.
[00:52:33.320]So I think you'll see a lot more in the future,
[00:52:36.440]and hopefully that's an ongoing and never-ending process
[00:52:38.930]until we have everyone signed up to these principles.
[00:52:41.250]And let me go back to, I think, what was the last question.
[00:52:44.812]Ideally, everyone's contributing to the Artemis Program
[00:52:48.590]and the Accords are meant to be a vehicle
[00:52:50.070]to bring such countries in, but there's certainly
[00:52:52.360]nothing preventing any country that simply wants to stand up
[00:52:56.250]for norms of behavior for international obligations
[00:53:00.240]and support their multilateral obligations
[00:53:02.700]under the treaties to sign the Accord.
[00:53:04.300]So I think it could be a both situation,
[00:53:07.020]although ultimately we would want everyone
[00:53:08.670]to contribute to the Artemis Program.
[00:53:10.340]And that's the idea of the Accords that facilitate it.
[00:53:12.650]But certainly no reason not to endorse
[00:53:15.200]these practical principles.
[00:53:16.520]And that's where it'd be wonderful to have, say,
[00:53:18.920]a China or a Russia that aren't necessarily
[00:53:20.620]participating in Artemis, but can sign those Accords.
[00:53:23.610]You know, often you hear complaints about Chinese espionage
[00:53:26.650]and stealing IP.
[00:53:27.820]What we hope the Accords is something that they steal.
[00:53:30.010]I would love to see a copy and paste job
[00:53:33.410]where all of a sudden we see the Accords
[00:53:35.440]committed to by China and Russia
[00:53:37.310]as their policies for moving forward.
[00:53:39.826]And I don't say that completely in jest
[00:53:42.040]that I would actually expect whatever Russia and China,
[00:53:44.420]if they do put forward an analog to the Accords
[00:53:46.270]at some point, to look very similar.
[00:53:48.290]Because again, the Accords are common sense,
[00:53:50.730]universal, intuitive.
[00:53:51.680]I just don't think that you can stray too far from it
[00:53:54.410]and still maintain your obligations
[00:53:55.870]under the Outer Space Treaty and others.
[00:53:58.080]So what were the other two questions that I didn't hit?
[00:54:04.220]You hit on most of it, I guess the other elements of it.
[00:54:07.170]I think you hit one, two and four,
[00:54:09.430]the only one maybe unaddressed is the capacity building.
[00:54:12.240]So, but I should say this is interesting
[00:54:14.858]for a couple of reasons.
[00:54:16.060]First, the commercial panel on Monday
[00:54:21.850]indicated that's exactly right.
[00:54:23.800]Commercial companies very supportive of Artemis
[00:54:25.970]for the reasons Mike laid out.
[00:54:27.660]The Tuesday session, we had the
[00:54:29.220]ASIL World Speaks Space Africa session.
[00:54:31.410]We did ask a question, you know,
[00:54:33.100]when might we anticipate a country from Africa
[00:54:35.990]joining the Artemis Accords.
[00:54:37.390]And I think there is interest there, but again,
[00:54:41.870]they are launching the African Space Agency
[00:54:45.140]trying to operationalize that.
[00:54:46.740]But I think it's interesting, Mike,
[00:54:48.640]that you point out that cooperation can start
[00:54:51.420]at a minimal level and then grow from there.
[00:54:53.740]So it's not necessarily about having to wait
[00:54:55.440]until, you know, everything's in place.
[00:54:58.440]So I think that's an interesting connection
[00:55:00.700]between the panel on Tuesday and what you said,
[00:55:03.460]but again, that's, I think the only remaining question
[00:55:05.920]was what steps are maybe being made for capacity building
[00:55:09.810]or technical cooperation and things like that
[00:55:12.950]to make it even easier for a country to contribute.
[00:55:16.870]Yeah, because another part of the whole equation
[00:55:19.940]is of course, that you must realize
[00:55:23.680]that this is something great going on,
[00:55:26.180]to put it in, you know, sort of popular terms.
[00:55:29.790]If, and many of those countries have sometimes
[00:55:33.190]even more pressing issues than thinking about space,
[00:55:36.020]they haven't done so.
[00:55:37.920]So they may simply not be aware of any rationale.
[00:55:41.130]And that's why probably those countries with, which at least
[00:55:44.610]have a space agency or something like that, are maybe by now
[00:55:49.670]getting acquainted with what space can bring to them.
[00:55:52.840]And both the African Apace Agency could be.
[00:55:56.290]And the Artemis Accords and capacity building in general
[00:56:01.130]can bring something to the table there.
[00:56:03.010]And of course the UN COPOUS has been doing,
[00:56:06.090]OOSA has been doing some capacity building for many years
[00:56:10.550]all across the developing countries.
[00:56:13.380]But the focus has not been on something as far away
[00:56:16.950]as the moon, let me put it like that.
[00:56:18.920]That may change.
[00:56:27.620]Well, let's go to another audience question.
[00:56:31.090]We have just a few moments remaining here.
[00:56:35.830]But another question that's come up is,
[00:56:43.690]and it's really been addressed, I guess by you,
[00:56:46.610]but maybe to harken back to it, how, and to tie it in,
[00:56:50.020]maybe with a question we were gonna ask too,
[00:56:52.380]how do you overcome?
[00:56:55.750]So if a lot of these principles are really just
[00:56:57.670]putting flesh on the bones of the OST and should be
[00:57:01.270]properly considered relatively non-controversial.
[00:57:04.720]How do you go about then expanding it
[00:57:09.360]in multi-lateral forms?
[00:57:12.060]And I, again, you've mentioned this a little bit,
[00:57:14.320]but what strategies, techniques, methods can there be
[00:57:17.520]to overcome some of the geopolitics on the one hand
[00:57:21.913]or the misperceptions on the other,
[00:57:25.553]within COPOUS and within other forms.
[00:57:30.540]But my baseline answer would be talk, talk, talk
[00:57:33.540]on the one hand as Mike is doing a great job on this,
[00:57:36.820]and on the other hand, international cooperation.
[00:57:38.570]Because of course, once you start cooperating
[00:57:41.430]and people find out, you know, what's in there.
[00:57:44.120]And, you know, I was always strucken by the effect
[00:57:48.574]of a tiny country like Luxembourg, which is, you know,
[00:57:51.716]smaller than Omaha, signing up to basically
[00:57:57.210]do also a national act, allowing for space mining.
[00:58:00.210]What this did for the acceptability
[00:58:03.980]of what was prior to that basically seen as, you know,
[00:58:07.940]in kind of the classical Cold War vein
[00:58:10.890]as a unilateral U.S. move to obtain control of outer space.
[00:58:15.202]And now you have this tiny county, which said,
[00:58:17.660]we think this is a sensible thing to do,
[00:58:19.060]and we want to be part of it.
[00:58:21.244]Now we have 12 countries signing up to the Artemis Accords.
[00:58:25.230]We have, I think, nine or 10 who cooperate with Luxembourg
[00:58:30.260]on space mining discussions.
[00:58:31.650]We have the Hague Resource Group
[00:58:33.042]where things have been moving from,
[00:58:34.933]I guess, and correct me if I'm wrong, Mike,
[00:58:37.987]but from an original perspective of no, no, no, no, no
[00:58:41.370]commercial exploitation of the moon?
[00:58:43.450]Ooh, that's very tricky.
[00:58:45.100]We don't want that because we wanted to preserve for,
[00:58:47.450]you know, proceed and science.
[00:58:49.140]Now that is of course completely changed.
[00:58:51.190]So I think, you know, just getting into these
[00:58:55.030]international discussions and having a more diverse,
[00:58:58.880]more inclusive group of countries already now signed up
[00:59:02.475]through the Artemis Accords than ever were part of the ISS
[00:59:07.950]is a good sign in a good direction,
[00:59:09.480]but there's more work to be done.
[00:59:10.827]And I'm sure Mike will have his hands full
[00:59:13.330]for the next couple of years,
[00:59:14.440]talking to everyone in the field.
[00:59:17.320]Almost sick of hearing my own voice at this point.
[00:59:20.160]I have been talking so much. (Frans laughing)
[00:59:22.467]But I agree with everything Frans said, and echo that
[00:59:25.300]again, I'm trying, right.
[00:59:26.630]That the more we talk about what the Accords are,
[00:59:28.830]and the Accords are the very pinnacle
[00:59:31.590]of multi-lateralism already, that by definition,
[00:59:35.320]the Accords were negotiated with eight countries.
[00:59:38.821]And that means that at that table,
[00:59:41.362]there aren't just eight space agencies,
[00:59:44.060]but eight foreign ministries also there.
[00:59:46.970]So you're talking 16 entities
[00:59:50.500]from some very diverse countries.
[00:59:53.590]This went far beyond the traditional U.S. partners.
[00:59:57.410]So, you know, I'm actually 24,
[00:59:59.990]like this is what those negotiations do to you.
[01:00:02.940]And not only was it multilateral in nature, the discussions,
[01:00:05.960]but there were discussions about how to implement
[01:00:08.280]existing multilateral agreements.
[01:00:11.230]So I think the more that we talk about that narrative,
[01:00:15.520]the more hopefully it will sink in.
[01:00:18.000]But perhaps even more important, is if you look
[01:00:21.390]at the text of the Accords and again,
[01:00:23.060]for those who are skeptics, I highly recommend reading it.
[01:00:26.640]Again, it's a fast read, it's a page turner.
[01:00:28.480]You don't have to commit a lot of time.
[01:00:30.230]Hopefully the movie comes out soon
[01:00:31.720]and you can just see that. (Frans laughing)
[01:00:33.800]But (laughs) it references on numerous occasions
[01:00:39.400]taking the experiences that we gain through Artemis
[01:00:42.670]to the United Nations, to the COPOUS,
[01:00:44.930]and sharing our experiences that
[01:00:47.530]this is how we dealt with preserving heritage.
[01:00:49.870]This is how we avoided harmful interference.
[01:00:52.711]And I think the more that the U.S. has those conversations
[01:00:57.170]at the UN and other international forums,
[01:01:00.670]the more that people will begin to recognize
[01:01:03.860]what the Accords are, that it's a vehicle
[01:01:07.560]to ensure that we're abiding by these obligations
[01:01:09.820]and to help inform future treaties,
[01:01:12.190]future agreements, and future regulations.
[01:01:15.300]And also to understand what the Accords are not,
[01:01:17.800]which is it didn't, you know,
[01:01:19.400]get to the end of the debate on resources,
[01:01:21.910]or it's not dealing with national security.
[01:01:24.310]So there's plenty left to deal with, but my hope is,
[01:01:29.040]the not only the number of countries increase,
[01:01:32.300]but our experience increases with actually
[01:01:35.040]going to the moon, conducting lunar operations,
[01:01:38.230]and per the Accords abiding by our obligations
[01:01:41.110]and telling the UN and other multilateral forums
[01:01:43.283]how we did so that finally any misperceptions
[01:01:48.310]will be diluted or eliminated.
[01:01:51.090]And we can all be on the same page
[01:01:53.102]for a peaceful and prosperous future together.
[01:01:56.720]Right, well, I think that's a great note
[01:01:58.920]to end this session on.
[01:02:00.130]So thank you so much, Mike and Frans and Leana
[01:02:04.690]for co-moderating.
[01:02:06.810]This is a really great discussion.
[01:02:08.520]It really tied in nicely with the other sessions
[01:02:10.720]earlier this week.
[01:02:12.450]We are gonna, Mike sort of create the segue there.
[01:02:15.340]We're gonna have a national security focus session tomorrow,
[01:02:17.870]the last session of the week.
[01:02:19.680]The law of armed conflict and neutrality
[01:02:22.100]and proportionality in outer space,
[01:02:24.494]turn over the baton to my colleague, Jack Beard,
[01:02:29.120]one of the co-directors of the program and also
[01:02:31.250]the editor-in-chief of the Woomera Manual.
[01:02:35.650]And so we will have that final session tomorrow,
[01:02:39.540]but thanks again to Josh Redwine,
[01:02:42.000]our new program coordinator, for all his help this week
[01:02:45.390]and going on tomorrow as well
[01:02:47.470]and Elsbeth Magilton, our executive director,
[01:02:49.690]as well as executive director
[01:02:51.060]of the new Governance and Technology Center.
[01:02:53.790]And thanks to our co-sponsors,
[01:02:55.320]American Society of International Law,
[01:02:56.710]especially the Space Law Interest Group
[01:02:58.600]and the American branch of International Law Associations,
[01:03:00.740]especially the Space Law Committee.
[01:03:02.633]And we look forward to future discussions.
[01:03:04.910]So thanks again Mike and Frans, terrific discussion,
[01:03:08.080]appreciate it.
[01:03:09.060]And tune in tomorrow, everybody
[01:03:11.000]for our final session of the week, thank you.
[01:03:13.130]Okay.
[01:03:14.036]Thank you, Matt, thanks for.
[01:03:14.869]Thank you very much.
[01:03:15.842]Thank you.
[01:03:16.742]Bye.

The screen size you are trying to search captions on is too small!

You can always jump over to MediaHub and check it out there.

Comments

0 Comments

Nebraska Virtual Space Law Week - Artemis Accords: Expanding and Implementing the Accords and Their Impact on Space Law

Description

Searchable Transcript

Comments icon comment

Related Channels

Comments