NationStates Jolt Archive

Greetings.

We of Roathin, recognising the difficulty of maintaining the peaceful use of space and the inhibitory effect of this difficulty on physical transactions across that vast domain, submit the following draft proposal for critique before the merciless, kindly or otherwise perceptive examination of our peers, the august assembly of the NSUN.

The proposal below contains three main sections of action:
1) Determining the limits of sovereignty in space
2) Determining the extent of 'free space'
3) Encouraging the development of capability for making such determinations.

======

Draft Proposal: The NSUN 'Law of Space' Resolution
Proposer: Roathin
Effect: Significant

A resolution to promote free trade through enhancing its prerequisite freedom of peaceable physical travel.


RECOGNISING the difficulty of maintaining the peaceful use of space and the inhibitory effect of this difficulty on physical transactions across that vast domain;

CONCERNED THAT the free passage of peaceful craft might be forcibly terminated, or that the passage of peaceful sentient beings might be ended through the automatic exercise of sovereign territorial claims, application of deadly force or other means contrary to the principles of the NSUN;


We propose that


1. A limit to claims of sovereignty be established as follows:

1.1 Claims of sovereignty within three-dimensional space (hereafter referred to as '3DS') are to be endorsed by the NSUN within a specific region defined by relationship to the centre of mass of a body in space.

1.2 Each claim of territorial sovereignty made by an entity recognised by the NSUN must be linked explicitly to a specific body, with the physical extent of that body in 3DS to be verified to the satisfaction of the NSUN.

1.3 The extent of such a claim within 3DS must be confined to a maximum radius of 1/6 of a light-second from the centre of mass of that body,

1.3.1 With the special case that should a body exceed 1/6 of a light-second in radius, the maximum extent of claim should be 1.05 times the radius of such a body.

1.4 The existence of one or more such claims in no way infringes on the right of a claimant to have further claims subject to their legal title to a body for which such a claim be made.

1.5 The fact that the maximum extent of possible claim based on one body might overlap with another such claim be resolved as follows:

1.5.1 Since all such extents of claim are spherical, the physical overlap may be bisected by a plane;

1.5.2 The area of this bisecting plane which is in contact with both spheres of claim be the effective maximum extent of claim.

1.6 The fact that the actual absolute physical limits of such a claim might change in position with respect to 3DS be resolved as follows:

1.6.1 Subject to 1.5 above, the limit of claim is always considered relative to the body on which the claim is based;

1.6.2 In the case of a body which is able to change momentum and/or position under the influence of a controlling sentience claiming sovereignty based on it, the claim based on such a body shall be secondary to the claim of a body incapable at that instant of performing such changes.


2. A region of 3DS free to travel between two bodies be established as follows:

2.1 Where a region of 3DS exists such that it does not impinge on the above claims, it remains free to navigation, commerce and other peaceful enterprises and that no act of imposition of sovereignty be committed by an agent of one state against another.

2.2 Where, because of contiguous relationship or overlap, no such region exists between two or more bodies, and passage rights being in dispute, that a corridor of passage be defined between them, as follows:

2.2.1 Within the plane defined between bodies as in 1.5 above, all paths be treated as the regions of 3DS defined in 2.1, subject to an extension of a 100-km radius around each such path, provided that such a path and its extension do not infringe on the radius delimited by 1.05 times the radius of each body in the case under dispute.

2.3 Should a craft be too large to traverse such regions of space defined by the above as free regions, it is barred from such passage without the agreement of all bodies through whose extent of claim the craft requires passage.


3. Each member of the NSUN be encouraged to develop personnel and/or institutions trained in the arts and sciences which are:

3.1 Required to determine accurately the extent of such claims of sovereignty such that they be aware of the maximum extent of their sovereign claims and be prepared to accord free rights of passage as outlined above;

3.2 Required for defending such sovereignty as outlined by this most reasonable resolution;

3.3 Required for communication between member states such that they might elucidate and clarify related situations and make or fulfil reasonable requests pertaining to aid in the areas mentioned in 3.1 and 3.2 above.

Greetings.

We are sure that the use of space is not as important as the use of fertiliser, but we would dearly love to receive advice on the former. We therefore importune the august assembly once more to consider our draft proposal.

What category are you intended to put this under? You may need to ask for mod advice for that - on first reading it doesn't seem tp fit any of the categories.

Apart from that, I have no problems with this, but i would suggest asking the more technically minded, particularly those who utilise space, for their advice.

Greetings.

Category: Free Trade

We apologise for not being explicit in this matter. We hope to learn from our failings. Feudalist half-daemonic minds find it hard to think in a modern pluralist technocratic environment.

Our first question is.... Why?

Our first question is.... Why?
Greetings.

We note, from trawling through the public communications of NSUN member states in the various forums, that there are cases of embargo, warfare, territorial encroachment and suchlike occurring within the vastness of open three-dimensional space (3DS).

Just as such events are detrimental to free trade on the essentially two-dimensional surface of a world, so too are such territorial effects detrimental to free trade in 3DS.

We therefore seek to define clearly the extent to which, and mechanism by which, a territorial claim can be made in 3DS. We then define the effective complement, that is, what areas can be considered 'free' or 'extraterritorial' for the purposes of peaceful movement.

We do not seek to reduce the sovereignty a state has over its own domains; neither do we seek to promote disarmament. We merely seek to promote free trade by delimiting the exact boundaries of legally free and legally controlled space.

We thank the esteemed Vastness for the interest shown.

Good day, sir. While our nation is not one which claims sovereignty over any large body in 3DS, we do feel that we have important comments to make in this matter.

We feel that your proposal is well-written, carefully considered, and technically astute, but unduly restrictive of the individual nation's ability to determine the nature of their sovereignty over portions of 3DS on their own and in concert with their neighboring states. While we recognize that this proposal is within the international scope of the NSUN's proper legal jurisdiction, we would prefer that the NSUN address this matter by announcing its disapproval of interplanetary, interstellar, intergalactic, and interuniversal conflicts as well as promoting the free movement of peaceful vessels between bodies rather than by mandating a set of international laws that are based on a limited human understanding of the nature of 3DS and its components.

What is apparently a minor grammatical error is located in section 1.6.2 wherein the word "shall" should probably be placed after the word "body" and before the word "be" in the second line.

Thank you for bringing this important issue to the attention of the NSUN.

Deputy Minister of UN Affairs
Thomas Smith

Good day, sir. While our nation is not one which claims sovereignty over any large body in 3DS, we do feel that we have important comments to make in this matter.

We feel that your proposal is well-written, carefully considered, and technically astute, but unduly restrictive of the individual nation's ability to determine the nature of their sovereignty over portions of 3DS on their own and in concert with their neighboring states. While we recognize that this proposal is within the international scope of the NSUN's proper legal jurisdiction, we would prefer that the NSUN address this matter by announcing its disapproval of interplanetary, interstellar, intergalactic, and interuniversal conflicts as well as promoting the free movement of peaceful vessels between bodies rather than by mandating a set of international laws that are based on a limited human understanding of the nature of 3DS and its components.

What is apparently a minor grammatical error is located in section 1.6.2 wherein the word "shall" should probably be placed after the word "body" and before the word "be" in the second line.

Thank you for bringing this important issue to the attention of the NSUN.

Deputy Minister of UN Affairs
Thomas Smith
Greetings.

We thank you for your detailed and useful comment. We have amended the minor error. We would however like to note the following.

1. We do not believe this to be 'unduly restrictive'. We note that under section 1, a spacecraft on patrol in uncharted space has a territorial claim radius of about 50000 km around it. This is however subordinate (under section 1.6) to a planetary claim on which it might impinge.

2. We believe it will encourage the establishment of marker beacons. Each such beacon, should it be placed within a claim radius, will extent the radius of claim.

3. Such spacecraft, beacon, and exploratory claims will still, of course, be open to debate, but the debate will now have a framework for arbitration.

4. The effect on NSUN member states will overall be a significant improvement in free trade.

5. Our limited understanding of n-dimensional manifolds does not prevent us from discussing international borders; we note your concern but seek to allay it, where the nature of 3DS is mentioned. Nevertheless, your points about the form and focus of the proposal are most elegant and we will therefore redraft, while keeping the present draft here for discussion in the interim.

Many thanks.

I would suggest getting in touch with the UN Space Consortium (http://s3.invisionfree.com/UN_Organizations/index.php?c=5), they may have something to add to the technical side of this. Also, Tekania and DemonLordEnigma are two space-based nations that frequent the UN forum.

Greetings.

We thank you for your detailed and useful comment. We have amended the minor error. We would however like to note the following.

1. We do not believe this to be 'unduly restrictive'. We note that under section 1, a spacecraft on patrol in uncharted space has a territorial claim radius of about 50000 km around it. This is however subordinate (under section 1.6) to a planetary claim on which it might impinge.

2. We believe it will encourage the establishment of marker beacons. Each such beacon, should it be placed within a claim radius, will extent the radius of claim.

3. Such spacecraft, beacon, and exploratory claims will still, of course, be open to debate, but the debate will now have a framework for arbitration.

4. The effect on NSUN member states will overall be a significant improvement in free trade.

5. Our limited understanding of n-dimensional manifolds does not prevent us from discussing international borders; we note your concern but seek to allay it, where the nature of 3DS is mentioned. Nevertheless, your points about the form and focus of the proposal are most elegant and we will therefore redraft, while keeping the present draft here for discussion in the interim.

Many thanks.

We appreciate your thorough approach to addressing our concerns, but would note that while the benefits to trade are something we strongly approve of, placing such specific restrictions (even the well-reasoned ones that you have proposed) on the ability of member states to define their own territory is "unduly restrictive". Texan Hotrodders is an anarchist state in which any restriction on the ability of sovereign states or individuals to determine their own course of action is frowned upon, and that may be contributing to our difference of opinion with regard to what consitutes "unduly restrictive" law.

We have also noticed another aspect of your proposal which concerns us. While your restrictions of 1/6 light-second in general and the ratio of 1.05 in cases of larger bodies are reasonable, we wonder if you might consider defining "body" to include individual galaxies. In the case of a sovereign nation which defines its territory as the entirety of a galaxy (a galaxy which is inhabited by only those species which comprise the nation in question), it would seem equitable to allow that nation to claim full sovereignty over the galaxy in question without the territorial limitations imposed by a more localized restriction based on smaller items in 3DS such as planets or stars.

Thank you for your time, sir.

Deputy Minister of UN Affairs
Thomas Smith

*snip*We have also noticed another aspect of your proposal which concerns us. While your restrictions of 1/6 light-second in general and the ratio of 1.05 in cases of larger bodies are reasonable, we wonder if you might consider defining "body" to include individual galaxies. In the case of a sovereign nation which defines its territory as the entirety of a galaxy (a galaxy which is inhabited by only those species which comprise the nation in question), it would seem equitable to allow that nation to claim full sovereignty over the galaxy in question without the territorial limitations imposed by a more localized restriction based on smaller items in 3DS such as planets or stars.
Greetings.

We believe that should the aggregate body be accepted as such by the NSUN, the NSUN would therefore accept an extent of claim equivalent to 1.05 times the radius of the galaxy defined by connecting all the extended radii to form an irregular circumference (as not all galaxies are perfect circles).

It is an important point and one which can still be worked into the proposal. We are grateful.

I would suggest getting in touch with the UN Space Consortium (http://s3.invisionfree.com/UN_Organizations/index.php?c=5), they may have something to add to the technical side of this. Also, Tekania and DemonLordEnigma are two space-based nations that frequent the UN forum.
Greetings.

We have taken note of your advice and acted on it by seeking critical appraisal from the UN Space Consortium. We would also be glad to receive further advice from the esteemed Old Guard of this assembly, some of which have already responded.

*snip*
Greetings.

We believe that should the aggregate body be accepted as such by the NSUN, the NSUN would therefore accept an extent of claim equivalent to 1.05 times the radius of the galaxy defined by connecting all the extended radii to form an irregular circumference (as not all galaxies are perfect circles).

It is an important point and one which can still be worked into the proposal. We are grateful.

We thank you for your patience in addressing our concerns, and encourage you to continue to propose innovative and thoughtful legislation to this body, good sir.

Deputy Minister of UN Affairs
Thomas Smith

We are planning to enjoy this. As such, we lay claims to territories in the following items (parts listed in parenthesis):

1. Milky Way (enough of it that we are tempted to lay claim to the entire galaxy just to be assholes)

2. Andromeda (one planet no one notices).

3. The NGC 5326, 5301, 3691, and 4371 galaxies.

4. Multiple galaxies on the opposite side of the universe, which are currently unnamed.

5. The center of the Universe.

We are going for max claim on all items mentioned. Please note we only listed areas with major settlements.

We claim the universe. :D Dark matter and all.

We are planning to enjoy this. As such, we lay claims to territories in the following items (parts listed in parenthesis):

1. Milky Way (enough of it that we are tempted to lay claim to the entire galaxy just to be assholes)
2. Andromeda (one planet no one notices).
3. The NGC 5326, 5301, 3691, and 4371 galaxies.
4. Multiple galaxies on the opposite side of the universe, which are currently unnamed.
5. The center of the Universe.

We are going for max claim on all items mentioned. Please note we only listed areas with major settlements.
Greetings.

We appreciate your spirit of enterprise. It informs our amendments to the draft. We note that our proposal so far does not address the issue of the ownership of the body on which the claim is predicated, and we wonder if this issue is important to our colleagues in this august assembly.

We also wonder why you make so restricted a claim to these areas of three-dimensional space, which is the ambit of this proposal. Surely it is beneath you.

By our evidence, the dimensions of the center of the universe make it so that all of the galaxies mentioned, as well as millions of others, are included. We've effectively claimed close to a quarter of the universe. BTW- We would like everyone in Andromeda to move out. We're planning on making it into a theme park.

By our evidence, the dimensions of the center of the universe make it so that all of the galaxies mentioned, as well as millions of others, are included. We've effectively claimed close to a quarter of the universe. BTW- We would like everyone in Andromeda to move out. We're planning on making it into a theme park.

*puts in bids for the concession stands*

Greetings.

We appreciate your spirit of enterprise. It informs our amendments to the draft. We note that our proposal so far does not address the issue of the ownership of the body on which the claim is predicated, and we wonder if this issue is important to our colleagues in this august assembly.

To our knowledge, ownership of the territory is implicitly granted when a claimant is granted sovereignty over the territory in question. Is it not the very function of your proposal to establish ownership (whether individual or collective) of various regions of 3DS?

Deputy Minister of UN Affairs
Thomas Smith

To our knowledge, ownership of the territory is implicitly granted when a claimant is granted sovereignty over the territory in question. Is it not the very function of your proposal to establish ownership (whether individual or collective) of various regions of 3DS?
Greetings.

We have based the claim of sovereignty over space around single bodies. It was implicit in this first draft (with one exceptional mention of legal title) that the claiming entity also hold legal title to the body or bodies in question. We have made this explicit in the second draft.

We have no issue with DLE or anyone else claiming sovereignty of the space known as the centre of the Universe. Such will be subject to the NSUN's verification of legal title to the universal centre, and if there is nothing at that centre, such a claim would be invalid as the claim must be based around a physical body.

Thank you for allowing this clarification.

Greetings.

We have based the claim of sovereignty over space around single bodies. It was implicit in this first draft (with one exceptional mention of legal title) that the claiming entity also hold legal title to the body or bodies in question. We have made this explicit in the second draft.

We have no issue with DLE or anyone else claiming sovereignty of the space known as the centre of the Universe. Such will be subject to the NSUN's verification of legal title to the universal centre, and if there is nothing at that centre, such a claim would be invalid as the claim must be based around a physical body.

Thank you for allowing this clarification.

The universe is made of "stuff" and is therefore a physical body.
We claimed it.
So our claim goes for 1.05x the universe, per your resolution.

The universe is made of "stuff" and is therefore a physical body.
We claimed it.
So our claim goes for 1.05x the universe, per your resolution.
Greetings.

We are somewhat concerned as to your interpretation of the draft. Here are the main points:

1. The claim of sovereignty is one which applies to a region of space centred on a physical body, and never the physical body itself, although voids contained within the body are included (as in most precedents).

2. The physical body you claim is also claimed in part by many other claimants. The counterclaims must be established and verified by the NSUN before the effect of this resolution can be applied (should this ever become a resolution).

3. Claim of a region based on a body whose radius exceeds 1/6 of a light-second does not confer a volume 1.05 times the volume of the body, but since it is a sphere, it is 1.05 x 1.05 x 1.05 times that volume.

I was thinking that you could word it to, if you can fit with word limitations (leave out if you can't), only be limited to inside the universe.

Oh, and as you show signs of becomming a regular poster and most regular posters go through this, I'm going to get a certain UN right of passage out of the way. You're a troll. There, now that we're done with the accusation most of the regulars here have gone through, we can say you've already been accused of it and that anyone else is just copying me. The accusation is baseless, but it's still better to get it out of the way.