Introduction
The international collaborative and separate activities related to outer space exploration and resource exploitation have been a matter of continuous negotiations for clarification of the legislative issues. The newly adopted international agreement initiated by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) entitled the Artemis Accords was signed by eight countries in 2020. It is aimed at integrating the countries with developed space infrastructure into a unified legislative field that would regulate their developmental efforts for the sustainable advancement of space policies. In particular, the United States of America and the United Arab Emirates have entered the agreement with readiness to comply with the provisions that expand their national space laws.
This paper is aimed at comparing the Artemis Accords Provisions on space resources with national laws of the USA and the UAE and the deconfliction implications of the Outer Space Treaty (OST).
Comparison of Section 10 on Space Resources to the Provisions on Space Resources in the US and UAE National Space Legislations
The Artemis Accords, as an international agreement that has recently been signed by the worlds’ dominant countries contributing to space research, exploration, and exploitation, is a strategically important document. It is designed “to establish a common vision via a practical set of principles, guidelines, and best practices to enhance the governance of the city exploration and use of outer space” (National Aeronautics and Space Administration [NASA], 2020, p. 2). One of the most important sections in the document is Section 10 related to space resources, which is aimed at regulating the internationally acknowledged rules for sustainable and responsible utilization of space resources. This section has several differences and similarities with the space laws of the USA and the UAE.
When compared to the national space law of the USA, the Artemis Accords appear to be particularly similar to the provisions of resource utilization. Both the Artemis Accords and the national law of the USA affirm the necessity of complying with the provisions of OST when utilizing outer space resources. The US national legislative document recognizes the encouragement and support of advances as “exploration and development of space resources in cases in which national objectives can be better fulfilled” (US Government Publishing Office, 2011, para. 85). The same approach is evident in the agreement where the exploitation of space resources must be validated by sustainable outcomes and benefits for humankind. Similarly, the prioritization of the articles of OST is commonly observed in both documents.
However, there are some distinctions between the US national policy and the provisions outlined in the Artemis Accords. In particular, they relate to the articulation of the procedures related to the extraction of outer space or lunar resources. Indeed, in the agreement, it is stated that “the Signatories affirm that the extraction of space resources does not inherently constitute national appropriation under Article II of the Outer Space Treaty” (NASA, 2020, p. 4).
There is no such explicit articulation in the national space law, which is why the signing of the agreement is particularly important for the USA and the global community. An important feature of the second point of Section 10 is the statement that separates peaceful outer space resource exploitation from the categorization of national appropriation. It is aimed at clarifying the issues related to the regulation of resource extraction and recovery based on reaching a commonly acknowledged understanding of the international rules of resource usage.
As for the comparison of the provisions of the Artemis Accords with the UAE national space law, one ling identifies significant differences. The Federal Law acknowledges that “space resources exploration or extraction activities” are regulated by the law and the authorized bodies (“Federal Law No. 12 of 2019 on the Regulation of the Space Sector,” 2019, p. 3). Unlike the Artemis Accords, the UAE Federal Law clarifies all the manipulations and activities that are related to outer space and lunar resources by enlisting them. They include “acquisition, purchase, sale, trade, transportation, storage and any Space Activities aimed at providing logistical services” (“Federal Law No. 12 of 2019 on the Regulation of the Space Sector,” 2019, p. 7).
The national law does not refer to the provision of any international guidelines or agreements but only necessitates all activities to be implemented with the permission of the Council of Ministers.
Importantly, the national legislation documents of both analyzed countries do not address the necessity of transparency related to the activities in outer space before the international community and regulating bodies. However, entering the Artemis Accords agreement, they confirm their willingness to do so. It is stated that “the Signatories commit to informing the Secretary-General of the United Nations as well as the public and the international scientific community of their space resource extraction activities” (NASA, 2020, p. 4). In essence, this provision is consistent with the articles of OST and merely reiterates the statement for clarification and updating purposes.
Overall, without clear addressing of resource extractions in outer space in the national law, the Artemis Accords provide a legal basis for partnering countries to expand their activities related to space resource usage. Thus, joining the eight countries and signing the agreement is the solution for other countries seeking to exploit outer space and lunar resources according to international guidelines and standards. The new agreement is consistent with the general provisions of the partnering countries and provides a legal basis for both the USA and the UAE for legal and sustainable usage of space resources for national and international purposes.
Comparison of Section 11 on Deconfliction of Space Activities to Article IX OST on Harmful Interference
Section 11 of the Artemis Accords focuses on the outlining of the deconfliction measures associated with the partnering countries’ activities in outer space. Deconfliction, as a concept and or principle is not mentioned in the OST articles but is implied through the addressing of peaceful and transparent space operations. Article IX necessitates parties to be “guided by the principle of co-operation and mutual assistance and shall conduct all their activities in outer space … with due regard to the corresponding interests” of other countries (Bureau of Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance, 1967, para. 40). When compared to Section 11 of the Artemis Accords, the concept of due consideration is restated and reaffirmed as a pivotal element of the international agreement.
In addition, both parts of the compared documents provide directly articulated guidelines for avoiding harmful effects resulting from the activities in outer space. In particular, if the party assumes that its activity might be harmful, “it shall undertake appropriate international consultations before proceeding with any such activity or experiment” (Bureau of Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance, 1967, para. 40).
The same message is repeated in the Artemis Accords without the emphasis on the immediate necessity of the consultation. This feature of the encouraged but not obligatory consultations is consistent in both documents demonstrating that the two international laws do not demand the avoidance of harmful interference. Thus, since the Artemis Accords Agreement is aimed at reiterating and reinforcing the provisions of eliminating the threats of conflicts based on space activities, the two documents share the same standards.
However, the concept of deconfliction is not the only distinctive feature of the agreement. Indeed, the Artemis Accords directly establish that any activity is undertaken by the parties in outer space “should be conducted with due consideration of the United Nations Guidelines for the Long-term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities” (NASA, 2020, p. 7). Since these guidelines had been adopted in 2019, there is no such mention in the OST article. Therefore, the scope of regulations related to the deconfliction of activities in outer space has expanded since 1967.
Moreover, a distinctive difference between Article IX of OST and Section 11 of the Artemis Accords is the introduction of the concept of safety zones in the latter. Indeed, several paragraphs with subsections are devoted to the articulation of the necessity and the role of the safety zones. In particular, the Artemis Accords define safety zones as areas “in which nominal operations of a relevant activity or an anomalous event could reasonably cause harmful interference” (NASA, 2020, p. 7). In essence, the implementation of the safety zones policy is based on the principles of the mitigation of harmful interferences addressed in Article IX of OST.
However, the new agreement provides a detailed articulation of the principles, according to which the parties will apply the concept of safety zones. These areas should be designed and maintained by “the national rules and regulations applicable to each Signatory” (NASA, 2020, p. 8). They are expected to function within each operation as temporary initiatives and are aimed at eliminating the risks of harmful interference. The parties are obligated to inform each other about the changes in establishing safety zones (NASA, 2020). Therefore, the principles of cooperation that have been outlined in the OST article are maintained in the Artemis Accords. Nonetheless, despite the overall cooperative and mutual assistance narrative, each party involved in the international agreement and subject to the provisions of the document is responsible for aligning the construction and utilization of the safety zones according to their respective national laws and authoritative bodies.
Conclusion
In summation, the Artemis Accords that have been signed by eight countries are aimed at regulating the outer space activities of the international community. Despite the differences between the national space laws enacted by the USA and the UAE and the provision of the new agreement, the Artemis Accords provide an explicit and detailed articulation concerning the regulations of outer space resources exploration and exploitation. In terms of the principles of deconfliction of outer space activities, the Artemis Accords reinforce the provisions of OST and add new provisions related to the United Nations Guidelines and safety zones initiative. These measures are aimed at ensuring the safe and peaceful exploration of space.
References
Bureau of Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance. (1967). Treaty on principles governing the activities of states in the exploration and use of outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies [Data set]. Web.
Federal Law No. 12 of 2019 on the Regulation of the Space Sector. (2019). Web.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (2020). The Artemis Accords principles for co-operation in the civil exploration and use of the Moon, Mars, comets, and asteroids for peaceful purposes. Web.
US Government Publishing Office. (2011). Title 51 – National and Commercial Space Programs. Web.