In conclusion, the above basic outer space legal truths and economic principles, which apply to all governments, lay the groundwork for the proposed “international regime” in the future, when full exploitation of outer space natural resources is feasible and fully operational. From a policy point of view for the next two or three years, it would seem wise to let further scientific progress in outer space, and an SPS project, further define the legal perimeters for an “international regime” for other global natural resources. Thus, several years in the future, as is noted in the new 1979 Moon Treaty, would seem to be an appropriate time to meet and consider the actual substantive and procedural structure of an “international regime” for outer space natural resources other than SPS. At this time, the Intelsat-type model, which has proved so successful for some 121 nations, seems the best. The United States Department of Energy white paper on “Satellite Power System (SPS) International Agreements” (MCP/R-4204-08 & 12) of October, 1978, should now be updated by DOE or the newly responsible agency of the U.S., all as originally recommended therein. With the Space Shuttle regularly operating and the cost of photovoltaic cells much reduced, the writer estimates that the cost economies reflect in 1982 a reduction of the cost of 22%! Further, the DOE study in 1981 of the “Military Implications of SPS” shows that a bilateral-type SPS executive agreement might well be possible for an initial approach to an SPS project; with later SPS projects on a multinational basis. This would strongly promote world peace and security, particularly with on-site and visiting inspection teams to the SPS. Professor Carl Christol, of the University of California, has addressed the basics of an “international regime" from the sociolegal and political science point of view in his excellent recent paper entitled “The Common Heritage of Mankind Provision in the 1979 Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies” (13 Int'l. Lawyer 429— See also “9 Journal of Space Law 77” of the same author). Professor Stephen Gorove, Editor of the University of Mississippi, has well addressed the specifics of an SPS “international regime” from an international lawyer's viewpoint in “Energy from Space: An Imperative for International Cooperation” in a 9 Journal of Space Law 41 (1981) with particular reference to the 1979 Moon Treaty now signed by 12 nations. He notes therein a number of advantages of SPS internationalization, both from an economic and international legal point of view. None of these important papers indicates any reason why an SPS executive agreement is not now fully possible within existing law and science of today. Starting now on an SPS executive agreement to be signed later could well improve present poor U.S.-U.S.S.R. international relations at the right time! The international legal implications of an SPS project now are well spelled out in the four existing UN-COPUOS outer space treaties, and there is wide agreement among international lawyers that nothing therein would prohibit an SPS executive agreement now. The economic implications of an SPS executive agreement, especially the sale of electric power therefrom, would for several years be the responsibility of the launching government or governments, or an international organization, until such time as full commercial exploitation became feasible and practical. It is clearly scientific exploration. Perhaps by the above proposal for a joint U.S.-U.S.S.R. Shuttle-Salyut project, on an executive agreement basis, a new substantive-procedural model will thereafter become very evident, with such an SPS project pioneering the way. At that time, international outer space law, economics and scientific progress can advance together again in outer space with a new “international regime,” for all other space natural resources.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==