Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday May 16 2020, @07:03PM   Printer-friendly [Skip to comment(s)]
from the things-were-not-already-challenging-enough dept.

NASA's 'Artemis Accords' set forth new and old rules for outer space cooperation

NASA's plan to return to the Moon is ambitious enough on its own, but the agency is aiming to modernize international cooperation in space in the process. Today it published a summary of the "Artemis Accords," a new set of voluntary guidelines that partner nations and organizations are invited to join to advance the cause of exploration and industry globally.

Having no national affiliation or sovereignty of its own, space is by definition lawless. So these are not so much space laws as shared priorities given reasonably solid form. Many nations already take part in a variety of agreements and treaties, but the progress of space exploration (and soon, colonization and mining, among other things) has outpaced much of that structure. A fresh coat of paint is overdue and NASA has decided to take up the brush.

[...] First, the rules that could be considered new. NASA and partner nations agree to:

  • Publicly describe policies and plans in a transparent manner.
  • Publicly provide location and general nature of operations to create "Safety Zones" and avoid conflicts.
  • Use international open standards, develop new such standards if necessary and support interoperability as far as is practical.
  • Release scientific data publicly in a full and timely manner.
  • Protect sites and artifacts with historic value. (For example, Apollo program landing sites, which have no real lawful protection.)
  • Plan for the mitigation of orbital debris, including safe and timely disposal of end-of-life spacecraft.

Also at The Verge, Ars Technica, and Reuters.


Original Submission

Related Stories

Could Corporations Control Territory in Space? Under New US Rules, It Might Be Possible 58 comments

Could corporations control territory in space? Under new US rules, it might be possible:

First, the Artemis Accords go beyond simply rejecting the unpopular 1979 Moon Agreement, which declared lunar resources to be the "common heritage of mankind" and committed parties to establish an international regime to oversee space mining. Only 18 countries have signed the treaty.

In its place, the accords envisage a US-centric framework of bilateral agreements in which "partner nations" agree to follow US-drafted rules.

Second, the accords introduce the concept of "safety zones" around lunar operations.

Although territorial claims in space are prohibited under international law, these safety zones would seek to protect commercial and scientific sites from inadvertent collisions and other forms of "harmful interference". What kinds of conduct could count as harmful interference remains to be determined.

Previously:
(2020-06-02) Third European Service Module for Artemis Mission to Land Astronauts on the Moon
(2020-05-16) NASA Wants Partner Nations to Agree to "Artemis Accords" for Lunar Exploration
(2020-03-12) CoronaVirus (SARS-CoV-2) Roundup 2020-03-12
(2018-07-22) Who Owns The Moon? A Space Lawyer Answers
(2018-03-07) China to Recruit Civilian Astronauts, Partner With Russia on Upcoming Missions
(2018-01-09) Russia Assembles Engineering Group for Lunar Activities and the Deep Space Gateway
(2017-10-18) Bigelow and ULA to Put Inflatable Module in Orbit Around the Moon by 2022
(2015-11-26) Who Owns Space? USA's Asteroid-Mining Act is Dangerous and Potentially Illegal

Robert Heinlein explored the notion in a novel. Does the future of space exploration lie with governments or corporations?


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 16 2020, @07:20PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 16 2020, @07:20PM (#995106)

    How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

  • (Score: 2) by captain normal on Saturday May 16 2020, @07:30PM (2 children)

    by captain normal (2205) on Saturday May 16 2020, @07:30PM (#995108)

    Does this come from the current Duffus in Chief or did they actually run this by him yet?

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 16 2020, @07:45PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 16 2020, @07:45PM (#995111)

      He's too busy watching Fox and posturing like a giant orange-back to worry about what the peons are doing.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by driverless on Sunday May 17 2020, @04:17AM

      by driverless (4770) on Sunday May 17 2020, @04:17AM (#995244)

      Since the US has already withdrawn from binding international treaties, why would anyone sign up to a non-binding agreement coming from the US? If they won't honour binding treaties they sure as heck won't honour some voluntary feel-good agreement.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 16 2020, @08:06PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 16 2020, @08:06PM (#995116)

    From adastra
    https://youtu.be/EH9NvOVil-k?t=55 [youtu.be]

  • (Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Saturday May 16 2020, @08:07PM (4 children)

    by linkdude64 (5482) Subscriber Badge on Saturday May 16 2020, @08:07PM (#995117)

    I hope this is the rumblings of the new space race kicking off!

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Saturday May 16 2020, @09:32PM (2 children)

      by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Saturday May 16 2020, @09:32PM (#995144) Journal

      The Artemis crew vs. China and India?

      By the way, Australia [nasa.gov] is one of the Artemis participants, something that is probably overlooked. The others are Japan, Canada, and the EU, which were ISS partners. Russia may or may not join in.

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    • (Score: 2) by Magic Oddball on Sunday May 17 2020, @03:08AM

      by Magic Oddball (3847) on Sunday May 17 2020, @03:08AM (#995235) Journal

      NASA's running on the budget money allocated to them well before COVID-19 plunged the economy into a deep recession, eliminated a lot of businesses, ran unemployment to levels not seen since the Great Depression, and pushed a lot of people onto public benefits. If politicians are going to be investing tax money in major projects in the next budget year, chances are that it will be on things that will at least pacify voters, not things that their rivals can claim is frivolous spending.

  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by fustakrakich on Saturday May 16 2020, @08:11PM (11 children)

    by fustakrakich (6150) on Saturday May 16 2020, @08:11PM (#995120) Journal

    Oh, you mean like how they run things now? Transparent manner. That's a good one. Just don't ask any questions

    --
    Ok, we paid the ransom. Do I get my dog back? REDЯUM
    • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Sunday May 17 2020, @12:12AM (9 children)

      by PartTimeZombie (4827) Subscriber Badge on Sunday May 17 2020, @12:12AM (#995187)

      Just like that yes. I have read the article about the secret X-37B spaceplane too.

      Do as we say, not as we do.

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday May 17 2020, @01:55AM (8 children)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday May 17 2020, @01:55AM (#995207) Journal
        How does the X-37B violate the Artemis Accords? It's not a policy or plan, much less a nontransparent description of same. I find Fusty and your insinuation bizarre - "transparency" is mentioned. Some red herring is secret (and of course, not transparent). Therefore?

        The Artemis Accord doesn't imply that every ones' secret toys must be outed.
        • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Sunday May 17 2020, @08:47PM (7 children)

          by PartTimeZombie (4827) Subscriber Badge on Sunday May 17 2020, @08:47PM (#995454)

          It's on the NASA site:

          Transparency is a key principle for responsible civil space exploration and NASA has always taken care to publicly describe its policies and plans.

          Artemis Accords partner nations will be required to uphold this principle by publicly describing their own policies and plans in a transparent manner.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 18 2020, @04:25AM (6 children)

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 18 2020, @04:25AM (#995607) Journal
            I'll ask in a slightly different way. How does a secret military project violate the principle of "publicly describing their own policies and plans in a transparent manner"? For starters, it's not a policy or plan, much less a description of such. And I'm glossing over the military versus civilian thing.
            • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Monday May 18 2020, @11:19PM (5 children)

              by PartTimeZombie (4827) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 18 2020, @11:19PM (#996075)

              ...it's not a policy or plan...

              It's a project? Oh well, it doesn't count then.

              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday May 19 2020, @04:23AM (4 children)

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday May 19 2020, @04:23AM (#996171) Journal
                That's pretty much my point. It could be indicative of some secret government policy. But what would that be? And as I've noted with such things before, the capacity to do something is a far cry from actually doing it.
                • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday May 19 2020, @07:06AM (3 children)

                  by PartTimeZombie (4827) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday May 19 2020, @07:06AM (#996213)

                  ...a far cry from actually doing it.

                  Like launching a secret spaceplane?

                  Because they just did that.

                  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday May 19 2020, @08:05AM (2 children)

                    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday May 19 2020, @08:05AM (#996225) Journal

                    Like launching a secret spaceplane?

                    What's the policy or plan implications of that which don't meet the standards of the Artemis Accord?

                    • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday May 19 2020, @09:39PM (1 child)

                      by PartTimeZombie (4827) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday May 19 2020, @09:39PM (#996560)

                      The secret bit.

                      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday May 20 2020, @02:30AM

                        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday May 20 2020, @02:30AM (#996680) Journal
                        Again, it doesn't qualify. There's no way the US thinks that the Artemis Accords mean that participants should fully reveal their military projects (for example, there's a fair number of countries with spy satellites up there and private companies with their own projects). The whole idea would be a nonstarter, if it got pushed that far by some adventuresome sort.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 17 2020, @12:36AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 17 2020, @12:36AM (#995190)

      It Trump! There is only a view of open. He break it once there money for his pockets.

  • (Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 16 2020, @08:40PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 16 2020, @08:40PM (#995129)

    THIS ONE IS MINE! Doesn't it make my posts look GLORIOUS?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 16 2020, @08:44PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 16 2020, @08:44PM (#995130)

      Did YOU see the size of that ... CHICKEN?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 16 2020, @09:59PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 16 2020, @09:59PM (#995153)

    Is it officially called the "Artemis Accord" that they want everyone to sign on? I know it is meaningless and more symbolic than anything, but I hope that the official name of whatever it is isn't named after their program.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 16 2020, @10:38PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 16 2020, @10:38PM (#995164)
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 17 2020, @01:26AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 17 2020, @01:26AM (#995201)

      Again it’s Trump! He does not have a unique thought just the stupid name Space Force! It’s about space and a force. Surprised he did not rename the Army to Land Force and navy to water force. The marines will be a really hard one for him thought.

      We need the sphylis brained trirsnt out of office before the civil war breaks out after he trying to thousands with empires Covid-19 response. Yeah ask your politianctions how many people must die before they act? Ask the protesters who they are willing to kill for their freedoms? Their mothers? Their kids? One they do that, then come and complain.

(1)