Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1957-10-13

something Ike TINS:
. Nations today assume that
they have complete sovereignty
over the "airspace" above them.
In fact. most Of them have for
mally so agreed. But they have
not agreed on what airspaee Is nor
how far 1t extends.
. There are no international
agreements which specifically de-
fine. authorize. or otherwise treat
the conduct of nations In regard
to outer space devices-i.e.. any
fundamentally Of flight which
does not depend on the atmo-
sphere for its functioning.
. The question Of the nation
atty and ownership Of any device
propelled into free" space remains
open. The same holds true in re-
gard to the liability OF a nation
for the direct consequences arising
from its act Of putting such q de-
vice into motion.
Conflict Over Theories
Perhaps it is not possible to
settle all these matters with the
factual knowledge we now have.
Additional scientific information
concerning the nature Of atmo-
sphere. Of outer space. and Of the
behavior Of spacecraft which is
free Of the earth's influence, may
be needed.
At the same time. much conflict
has developed over theories as well
as facts.
The basic split lies between (a)
those who feel that a more or
less arbitrary limit should be
placed on national rights in space
and tbl those who feel that. until
some true world law crystallizes.
nations will always control what
they can control.
Those in the first category would
impose their rule at the upper
limits Of navigable airspace or
Whereabouts. This would be the
maximum distance at which con.
ventional aircraft. including ball
looms, can operate. Theoretically.
1t will be possible some day to
operate aircraft up to about 20
miles-and this. roughly, is the
sovereignty limit proposed by
most arbitrary Limitation protag-
oniSts.
Those in the second category
argue that sovereignty extends to
the limits Of effective control"
In other words. the territory Of
any given country. according to
this idea. extends as far as its
military forces are able to govern
events occurring over it.
If Nation Able can intercept
and destroy the missiles or craft
Of Nation Baker at a maximum
altitude Of 800 miles, then 300
miles up" is the limit Of Nation
Able's sovereignty.
Power Would Be Key
The effective control theory
seems to lead to the possibility
that spacecraft. satellites. mis-
siles. platforms. observation posts.
waystations to interplanetary
travel or any other device eventu-
ally developed by Earth nations.
might be operating in a realm OF
anarchy where the stronger
agents would have the sanction
Of their principals to annihilate
the weaker ones.
The trouble with the arbitrary
limitation idea seems to be that
ii lacks realism. Sovereigns to-
day still control TO the extent of
their ability, II 1t is in their in
terests to do so. In short. arbi-
trary limitation seems to over
look the fact that space law. like
international law. may well de-
velop in accordance with the rela-
tive power Of nations rather than
through master planning
The trouble with effective-con-
troll is that it springs from poor
theory 1t limits sovereignty only
according to power. Nations with
the capability to do so could blast
from the skies any object passing
overhead, regardless Of its pur-
pose. Conversely. other nations
could do nothing at all about
spacecraft or objects crossing over
them. In addition, when we re-
fleet that the earth is a sphere.
1t becomes obvious that stretching
the legal borders of any nation
indefinitely into space produces
weird results. Such extended bor-
ders would not be parallel; they
would diverge in space as a "hy-
pothetically infinite funnel Of
dominion" --something like an up
side-down cone projected outward
from the earth.
II is widely agreed by interna-
tional lawyers that the United
States, by assuming It's present
prominent role in the satellite
program of the international Geo.
physical Year. has put the world
on notice of its understanding
that ell space at and beyond the
altitude Of satellite operation is
free" space. The fact that the
United States has not attempted
TO secure rights Of passage for its
satellite from other nations is
taken as proof that this country
does not believe such permission
is legally needed.
on the other hand. this does
aot mean that the United States