The only countries even capable of enforcing launch bans stand to gain nothing from them because it just makes launching their own payloads more difficult. There's like ~10 or so countries who are readily launch capable and even less with the military capability to put any pressure to stop foreign launches.
Who's going to regulate? Regulation only works when someone has the power to enforce them. Right now the people with that power aren't the most agreeable. And flexing it is either antagonizing western allies or a declaration of war.
I will; when I am elected God-Emperor, I will set up a global defense network that will shoot down any unauthorised launches. I will also build a space palace, because I can.
Only half-joking; space will be regulated when one force becomes dominant and individual countries' rights are taken away, OR when the majority of countries, but specifically the biggest and most powerful ones, get to an agreement - but given the significant differences between e.g. the US, China, India and Russia, that's unlikely to happen anytime soon. So at the moment, a globally dominant world power setting the rules will be the likely candidate.
But first, there needs to be a tipping point of sorts, a line that is crossed. That'll either be space-based weapons or missile defense systems, or simply being out-competed. It'll be at least another decade plus billions of investments before any other nation or company can start to compete with SpaceX's launch capacity, and they haven't stopped yet; if Spaceship becomes viable they and the US will have a huge lead, and the launch capability to set up a global missile detection / defense / space offense network.
wrong.
NK as an example has the capacity to design and deliver and deploy load after load after load of small rusty ball bearings into random low earth orbits, leaving existing geo syncronous
satelites as the only platforms operating in earths orbit, SK, Japan, France, etc ,etc, etc,....russia, china,.......many large industrial companies(mitsu, hiundi, various name shify US companies)..... can just shut the whole thing down long before any emperor starts issueing edicts from orbit.
this is the classic example of where the "defence" is orders of magnitude easier and cheaper than the "offence"
> NK as an example has the capacity to design and deliver and deploy load after load after load of small rusty ball bearings into random low earth orbits
Funny that the only country that actually did that was the US...
International cooperation can still work even though there is very rarely a realistic prospect of enforcement. No one is going to war to enforce WTO rulings or nuclear non-proliferation treaties, for example.
It's true that when things get really hairy international law tends to fall by the wayside, eg countries leaving the Land Mine Ban Treaty now that it seems possible they may actually have to deal with a foreign invader on their soil. But they can still be effective at regulating states' behaviour in more peaceful times, which is still useful.
But it does require the major powers to be willing (i) to talk to each other, and (ii) to think about the world beyond their own borders, which means it's unlikely to happen given the current leadership in certain of the big space-going nations.
A country was last bombed in an attempt to enforce the NPT less than two months ago.
And of the conditions you listed, you missed the big one. The big, powerful countries must directly benefit, they have never signed up to a treaty where they don't.
Unfortunately, there's no real way to regulate this. I used to worry about space junk and companies polluting space, but now I'm more concerned about what's inside those satellites. With no regulations in place, they can put pretty much anything up there.
I wouldn't be surprised if a few of those satellites had nuclear weapons inside (or maybe that's just me being paranoid.) Still, having satellites that can take out other satellites during a conflict is definitely a possibility. Which brings me back to my original concern: space junk. The last thing we need is a graveyard of satellites floating above our heads.
The UN is fundamentally and terminally flawed and always has been from the very beginning as ruse for what has always been a facade of “America’s” control of the world.
It is why the UN lair is right on the East River, a proverbial stone’s throw away from Wall Street, Madison Ave, and Broad Street in the heart of the American Empire of world domination.
The only countries even capable of enforcing launch bans stand to gain nothing from them because it just makes launching their own payloads more difficult. There's like ~10 or so countries who are readily launch capable and even less with the military capability to put any pressure to stop foreign launches.
Who's going to regulate? Regulation only works when someone has the power to enforce them. Right now the people with that power aren't the most agreeable. And flexing it is either antagonizing western allies or a declaration of war.
> Who's going to regulate?
I will; when I am elected God-Emperor, I will set up a global defense network that will shoot down any unauthorised launches. I will also build a space palace, because I can.
Only half-joking; space will be regulated when one force becomes dominant and individual countries' rights are taken away, OR when the majority of countries, but specifically the biggest and most powerful ones, get to an agreement - but given the significant differences between e.g. the US, China, India and Russia, that's unlikely to happen anytime soon. So at the moment, a globally dominant world power setting the rules will be the likely candidate.
But first, there needs to be a tipping point of sorts, a line that is crossed. That'll either be space-based weapons or missile defense systems, or simply being out-competed. It'll be at least another decade plus billions of investments before any other nation or company can start to compete with SpaceX's launch capacity, and they haven't stopped yet; if Spaceship becomes viable they and the US will have a huge lead, and the launch capability to set up a global missile detection / defense / space offense network.
wrong. NK as an example has the capacity to design and deliver and deploy load after load after load of small rusty ball bearings into random low earth orbits, leaving existing geo syncronous satelites as the only platforms operating in earths orbit, SK, Japan, France, etc ,etc, etc,....russia, china,.......many large industrial companies(mitsu, hiundi, various name shify US companies)..... can just shut the whole thing down long before any emperor starts issueing edicts from orbit. this is the classic example of where the "defence" is orders of magnitude easier and cheaper than the "offence"
> NK as an example has the capacity to design and deliver and deploy load after load after load of small rusty ball bearings into random low earth orbits
Funny that the only country that actually did that was the US...
International cooperation can still work even though there is very rarely a realistic prospect of enforcement. No one is going to war to enforce WTO rulings or nuclear non-proliferation treaties, for example.
It's true that when things get really hairy international law tends to fall by the wayside, eg countries leaving the Land Mine Ban Treaty now that it seems possible they may actually have to deal with a foreign invader on their soil. But they can still be effective at regulating states' behaviour in more peaceful times, which is still useful.
But it does require the major powers to be willing (i) to talk to each other, and (ii) to think about the world beyond their own borders, which means it's unlikely to happen given the current leadership in certain of the big space-going nations.
A country was last bombed in an attempt to enforce the NPT less than two months ago.
And of the conditions you listed, you missed the big one. The big, powerful countries must directly benefit, they have never signed up to a treaty where they don't.
> Regulation only works when someone has the power to enforce them.
And this is why we cannot have nice things
Unfortunately, there's no real way to regulate this. I used to worry about space junk and companies polluting space, but now I'm more concerned about what's inside those satellites. With no regulations in place, they can put pretty much anything up there.
I wouldn't be surprised if a few of those satellites had nuclear weapons inside (or maybe that's just me being paranoid.) Still, having satellites that can take out other satellites during a conflict is definitely a possibility. Which brings me back to my original concern: space junk. The last thing we need is a graveyard of satellites floating above our heads.
The UN is fundamentally and terminally flawed and always has been from the very beginning as ruse for what has always been a facade of “America’s” control of the world.
It is why the UN lair is right on the East River, a proverbial stone’s throw away from Wall Street, Madison Ave, and Broad Street in the heart of the American Empire of world domination.