Today, the militarization and weaponization of outer space is difficult to avoid. However, some countries, represented by the United States, interpreted it as a non-aggressive purpose and advocated that, on the premise of complying with Article 2 (4) of the United Nations Charter, they could not only use reconnaissance satellites for intelligence collection, but also deploy offensive weapons for self-defence, conduct peacetime military exercises, weapons testing, establish military orbital laboratories and other “peaceful military activities” (Meyer, 1969). Although no armed conflict in outer space has actually broken out yet, it does not prevent us from conducting tentative research on the concept of “armed conflict” in combination with the characteristics of outer space activities.Īrticle III of the Outer Space Treaty stipulated that using of outer space should be based on peaceful purposes. Then, determining the definition of “armed conflict in outer space” and the possible types of “armed conflict in outer space” are the prerequisites for the application of international humanitarian law. According to the basic theory of international humanitarian law, it can be deduced that once an armed conflict in outer space breaks out, the existing international humanitarian law can be applied. The militarization or weaponization of space not only creates tension in international relations but also greatly increases the danger of armed conflicts in space. Countries should follow the principle of peaceful development when developing and utilizing outer space resources and rights, but the increasing militarization or weaponization of space is contrary to this basic principle.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |