17 thoughts on “International Law”

  1. Let him who has boots on the ground make the laws. Bureaucratic hand-wavers can and should be ignored.

  3. “Let him who has boots on the ground make the laws. Bureaucratic hand-wavers can and should be ignored”

    Permanent colonist(s) would simply renounce their national citizenship before they left earth. Then legally they would not be bound by any Earth law, treaty etc. As long as they didn’t do anything stupid like try to seize some earth nation’s property on Mars like a probe, base setup by them, etc. don’t see what they could do about it. Part of the point of taking on the enormous personal risks of trying to live on Mars for the rest of your life would be that sovereign independence from earth law, regulations & likely especially taxes. Imagine a bank of mars accepting donations/investments from earth and paying returns backward tax-free. Since your not bound by earth laws you don’t have to report to the IRS back on earth what you paid them interest/dividends.

    1. As long as they didn’t do anything stupid like try to seize some earth nation’s property on Mars like a probe, base setup by them, etc.

      Or the Earth nation doesn’t false flag that. I think it’s educational to consider how little pretext it’s taken for Earth nations to declare war on each other. For example, Nazi Germany staged a fake attack on one of its radio stations, killing hapless concentration camp prisoners in Polish military uniforms, just to have a flimsy pretext to invade Poland in 1939.

      1. “Or the Earth nation doesn’t false flag that. I think it’s educational to consider how little pretext it’s taken for Earth nations to declare war on each other. For example, Nazi Germany staged a fake attack on one of its radio stations, killing hapless concentration camp prisoners in Polish military uniforms, just to have a flimsy pretext to invade Poland in 1939.”

        Good points all. Of course Germany was bordering Poland (I think) Mars is 100 million miles away give or take. By the time Earth decides to move against Mars it might be dealing with 100’s of thousands or even millions of colonist in multiple different settlements. Difficult to have logistical support if your supplier Earth is that far away. The Mars colonists would have plenty of warning you were coming too; time/distance involved would preempt any kind of sneak attack. But you never know.

  4. As long as the launch vehicle manufacturing facilities and launch pads are located on earth I suspect those using such will find themselves subject to the laws of the nation of origin.

    1. “As long as the launch vehicle manufacturing facilities and launch pads are located on earth I suspect those using such will find themselves subject to the laws of the nation of origin.”

      Yes. And I believe that the 1967 Treaty makes the host nation of the launch facilities ultimately responsible for what the payload provider does or fails to do. So a foreign country launcher could theoretically find itself being sued by the US (IRS) for the payment of believed tax evasion by its citizens facilitated by said Mars’ colonist (& launcher nation) indirectly. Would be an interesting case. Guess Mars would have to find a friendly/cooperative nation to handle launches as well as financial transactions and communication between itself an earth. A country that say never ratified the 1967 Treaty.

      1. “Guess Mars would have to find a friendly/cooperative nation to handle launches as well as financial transactions and communication between itself an earth. A country that say never ratified the 1967 Treaty.”

        Maybe a small island nation somewhere near the equator that never signed/ratified the Treaty. Even if the bank of mars had to foot the bill to build launch facilities there.

  5. The key thing here is that Musk is floating the idea of a self-governing colony. This is practical and ultimately necessary. The legitimate concerns are mainly focused on the suspicion that a self-governing SpaceX colony will be a Company town Autocracy populated by a handful of manager and a sea of indentured servants with no inputs, freedoms, etc.

    Historically the sort of arrangement, even if it were to come in to place, is unsustainable, if only because it will become increasingly difficult to obtain new settlers.

    The British Empire learned an important lesson from the failure of the North American colonies. Thereafter settler colonies were obliged to take up self-government early and the Imperial center tried very hard to free itself of substantive responsibilities as early as possible.

    1. “The key thing here is that Musk is floating the idea of a self-governing colony. This is practical and ultimately necessary. The legitimate concerns are mainly focused on the suspicion that a self-governing SpaceX colony will be a Company town Autocracy populated by a handful of manager and a sea of indentured servants with no inputs, freedoms, etc.”

      A “company town” can exist because they usually have the law/government backing them up…how do you maintain control when the likely armed colonists declare their independence from Musk’s company town? To whom would he appeal to for help? What if Musk threatens to “fire” an armed disobedient “employee” if he/she refused to knuckle under or leave the environs of the colony? And they are backed up by their also armed friends? Assuming there is somewhere else to go on Mars of course. Otherwise exile would essentially be a death sentence. Suppose maybe if he made sure that only his “security personnel” were the only ones armed, for the “safety” of the colony that might work for awhile.

      “Historically the sort of arrangement, even if it were to come in to place, is unsustainable, if only because it will become increasingly difficult to obtain new settlers.”

      Yes or you do get more settlers and finally reach a critical mass of difficult to manage people who force concessions from “management”.

      1. Of course even if Musk’s thugs succeeded in disarming said colonist(s)…given the likely presence of 3-D printers and such how long before they could make their own at least small arms? Firearms aren’t really that complex for the most part at least rifles/pistols even rocket-propelled grenades or IED’s

        1. I am somewhat puzzled about the need for colonists to be armed. Traditionally settlers are armed in order to defend themselves against the native inhabitants that they are dispossessing, or to provide some level of defense against rival colonizers.

          Neither of these situations appear to apply in this instance. To the best of our current knowledge.

          I would anticipate new models or self-government to arise, whether that be some variety of techno-autocracy (which many pearl-clutchers seem to to be worried about) necessary because of the highly centralized nature of supply, technical requirements of sustaining the facility, or alternatively a much more collaborative arrangement.

          In either case the obvious answer to the basic question is that Muskville establishes foundational laws and rules prior to allowing anyone to be resident using whatever legal templates drawn from existing law is preferred.

          This does not require approval, etc from some other external body (unless you ask a dozen lawyers for their opinions). At root, ALL national systems of law arise out of a leader in the past saying this is mine, I have the power to enforce and dispense, and I shall do so. Everything else is built upon that whether it be democracy or autocracy. After all, how many countries submit their constitutions to others for approval.

          There are many countries that have derived their laws and existence from other states (e.g.: British Commonwealth countries) while others have simply declared themselves the legitimate authority on a given chunk of the earth’s surface.

          The key point, ultimately, is whether or not others accept your claims to independence.

          I am actually surprised that no space-faring country has yet taken the obvious step to getting around the OST in terms of claiming sovereign territory on non-terrestrial bodies.
          Sponsor a bunch of colonists to go there and declare independence. “Oh dear, what can we do? Well we aren’t militarizing space (cos that would be bad, right UN??) so I suppose we will just have to accept the claims of this body of off-world people and make the best deals we can with them in terms of permission to access their territory, trade with them, etc.”

          1. “Traditionally settlers are armed in order to defend themselves against the native inhabitants that they are dispossessing, or to provide some level of defense against rival colonizers.”
            Well they wouldn’t “need” to be armed unless some kind of conflict occurs. Which of course it might; who says there only be one colony and they all get along?

            “In either case the obvious answer to the basic question is that Muskville establishes foundational laws and rules prior to allowing anyone to be resident using whatever legal templates drawn from existing law is preferred.”

            And how do you enforce rules when/if reason and gentle persuasion fails? Ultimately it unfortunately often defaults to force (or implied force).

            “Sponsor a bunch of colonists to go there and declare independence. “Oh dear, what can we do? Well we aren’t militarizing space (cos that would be bad, right UN??) so I suppose we will just have to accept the claims of this body of off-world people and make the best deals we can with them in terms of permission to access their territory, trade with them, etc.”

            Don’t know…what happens when 100’s of billions or even trillions of dollars are transferred to the sovereign independent colonies “bank of mars” to avoid taxes back on earth? Earth guv decide they don’t like that decide eventually steps have to be taken? And maybe “peaceful diplomacy” fails? What tends to happen then when the stakes are perceived as being too high to let it go?

  6. “International Law” means What, exactly? Who votes on this “International Law”? A collection of Third World kleptocrats? Faceless bureaucrats appointed by the EU or the UN? Answer that first.

    1. Wiki:
      “International law, also known as public international law and law of nations, is the set of rules, norms, and standards generally accepted in relations between nations. It establishes normative guidelines and a common conceptual framework to guide states across a broad range of domains, including war, diplomacy, trade, and human rights. International law aims at the practice of stable, consistent, and organized international relations.”

      It seems to me, Mars should follow international laws- which means Mars gets to pick and choose what treaties it signs and doesn’t sign.
      And should get seat on UN.
      Get favored nation status- and it’s an undeveloped nation
      And welcome any Earth ambassadors.
      Though probably want to limit the expense of having to put Mars ambassadors in every country of the world.
      It seems Mars should be considered a nuclear power- and should not have any limitation on Nuclear technology- other the selling nuclear weapons to Earth nations. And can agree never to nuke any earth nation {or drop space rocks on them}. As no other nation can make such unqualified promises, Mars can/should get something for such “generous agreements”. And Mars should get/make a treaty to allow some “rights” to ocean use on Earth. There are endless things of value of having seat at the international table.
      To me it’s a major reason to go to Mars. Mars certainly can afford to be more impartial, due to lack of threat from Earthlings.

      Of course, ambassadors are essentially spies from other countries- and they will meddle in Mars domestic politics.
      As long as you allow for such eventuality {as every nation on Earth can somehow manage to do} there shouldn’t be too much mischief resulting from it.

Comments are closed.