Proceedings of the Workshop - United Nations Office for Outer ...

EXPANDING GLOBAL REMOTE SENSING SERVICES 117activities.149 The UPS and the JPS invite similarmeeting European security needs" but "while respecting148 Crossroads, supra note 138, at 27.15 3 Outer Space Treaty, supra note 56, Article VI.the spirit of the Convention[.]"144analysis for the ESA Convention and related Europeanlaw. Earth orbit military space operations are legal,Among the inevitable situations that will catalyzequestions of what constitutes an appropriate legalmilitary and civil relationship are the different domesticmissions of United States agencies under convergenceand the different national philosophies of the States thatsupport international mergers. In the United States,DoD’s mission requirements are an assured capabilityto obtain timely, accurate environmental satellite dataon a global basis145 while NASA’s highest objective isto meet the requirements...of NASA’s Global ClimateChange Research Program.146 This means a 15 yeardata set...which may require instrument capabilitiesbeyond and at times distinct from those required bylimited by prohibitions against nuclear weapons andweapons of mass destruction150 and Earth observationsfrom space by the military have long been recognized asa "peaceful use" of space.151 However, the growingimportance of environmental data for "political" and"geopolitical purposes"152 within the dynamic post-ColdWar era means that the legal use of a merged militaryand civil space-based system can change to aquestionable one with the introduction of any number offactors. And the change can have serious ramificationsfor a wide variety of remote sensing services that willhave come to rely on the operational data fromconverged and merged systems.NOAA and DoD.147 The difference in missionrequirements goes to the very core of each agency’soverall mission and how they elect to fulfill it. Agreeingon system parameters means they do believe theIncreased restrictions from militarilyrequiredregulationsconverged system can meet all of their missions butmaking case-by-case determinations of systemutilization under specific fact patterns remains to be "Shutter control"seen.The Outer Space Treaty holds signatoriesAt the European level, a growing desire for "a internationally responsible for non-governmentalreduced dependence on the US space defencesystems"148 initially appears to be a force contrary tothe decision to join the IJPS and JPS. Reconciling theseactivities in space.153 This is the international legalauthority for nongovernmental entities, includingprivate remote sensing entities, to operate in space. Itcontradictory political impulses will require sharpeningthe legal parameters of national and internationaldefense laws and policies.149 Even the question of whether or not NPOESS ought to beconsidered a military system is an evolving one. Clearly it isintended to serve defense purposes and is, in part, beingThe United States converged system invites a implemented by defense personnel. However, the fact that itfundamental consideration of the United States will be operated on a day-to-day basis by a civil agency isstatutory separation of military and civil space critical and could, in the long term provide a much morepowerful influence on the overall system than the occasionalmilitary authority invoked in times of a crisis. The counterpossibility is that since it is the military that has acquisition144 Crossroads, supra note 138 at 27.145 Convergence Hearings, supra note 102, at 16.146 Convergence Hearings, supra note 102, at 21.authority for the converged system, a powerful influence can beexerted through the sheer force of the authority to spendallocated funds.150 Outer Space Treaty, supra note 56, Article IV.151 Christol - Modern, supra note 21, at 723.147 Convergence Hearings, supra note 102, at 24 (originalemphasis).152 Strategy, supra note 140.