“The Future of Space Governance” conference will convene experts on October 28

17-098-Kepler-90_MultiExoplanetSystem-20171214On Monday, October 28, 2019, the Dean Rusk International Law Center and the Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law at the University of Georgia School of Law will host a daylong conference to explore “The Future of Space Governance.” The conference will feature a keynote speech by Professor Emerita Joanne Irene Gabrynowicz, University of Mississippi School of Law, as well as panel discussions by academics and practitioners.

Participants will consider the following concept note:

International legal frameworks governing outer space developed under the conditions of a bi-polar, Cold War world, where the two great powers were the only spacefaring nations, and were engaged in a feverish race to space. The international agreements reflect the concerns of the time, primarily to prevent militarization and colonization of outer space. It seemed essential to keep the cold war out of space, and to keep it from going hot. Then, the U.S. made it to the moon, winning the race and effectively freezing space governance in Cold War terms.

Exactly half a century later, the world has changed, and so has space. A bi-polar world has gone multipolar, and an optimistic period of multilateralism has given way to a decline in robust international cooperation. Meanwhile, developments in outer space have exploded in complexity, ambition, and commercial promise. The number of entrants and potential entrants has proliferated: seventy-two nations now claim they have space agencies, and at least fourteen have orbital launch capabilities. One of the key new entrants is China, which is busy exploring the dark side of the moon and plans a permanent Chinese lunar colony as early as 2030. India, too, is broadening its ambitions, launching a moon lander trip this year, and planning for manned spaceflight and a space station launch soon thereafter. The SpaceX program is making rocket launches available for bargain basement prices, bringing space activities within the reach of a gaggle of startups keen to grab their piece of the commercial pie. Other commercial actors imagine space tourism, colonies, and missions to Mars. At the same time, the United States, still the dominant player in space, has announced plans to launch a “Space Force,” aimed at defense of U.S. military interests from space.

Fifty years after the first moonwalk, the prospect for a new set of multilateral agreements governing outer space is remote, yet the legal questions raised by new space activity are mounting. With little prospect of new multilateral treaties, outer space governance will need to make do with existing law, generate customary rules to govern new applications, and develop forms of sublegal understanding and cooperation.

This conference takes a stakeholder approach to emerging questions of outer space governance. It seeks to understand the perspective and concerns of classic space powers, new entrants, non-space faring nations, and international organizations like the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, as well as civilian space agencies, national militaries, and commercial actors. It asks for views on the sufficiency of existing law and governance structures and probes the legal needs of new and existing stakeholders. It will explore the agendas of the growing collection of actors, and attempt to find new prospects for governance.

Here’s the schedule:

RutledgeFull_cropped

 

8:45-9:00  Welcome

Peter B. “Bo” Rutledge, University of Georgia School of Law

 

9:00-10:30  New Entrants: Nations

What are the emerging governance challenges as new nations emerge as space-farers?

Slide1

Steven Mirmina, NASA

Saadia Pekkanen, University of Washington, Henry M. Jackson School of International Studies

Cassandra Steer, Women in International Security Canada

Charles Stotler, University of Mississippi School of Law

cohen2017crop

 

 

 

Moderator ǀ Harlan G. Cohen, University of Georgia School of Law

 

10:45-12:15  New Norms? Commercial Actors

What norms govern, or should govern, potential commercial uses such as extraction, tourism, and settlement?Panel 2

Julia Selman Ayetey, McGill University

Frans von der Dunk, Nebraska College of Law

Brian Israel, ConsenSys

Mark J. Sundahl, Cleveland-Marshall College of Law

UW Headshot

 

 

 

Moderator ǀ Melissa J. Durkee, University of Georgia School of Law

 

Gabrynowicz_hi_res_small1:15-2:00  Keynote

Professor Emerita Joanne Irene Gabrynowicz, University of Mississippi School of Law

 

 

2:15-3:45  New Uses: Security in Space

What are the appropriate responses to the new U.S. “Space Force” and other threats of space militarization?

Panel 3.jpg

Mariel Borowitz, Georgia Tech, Sam Nunn School of International Affairs

David Kuan-Wei Chen, Center for Research in Air and Space Law, McGill University

James Gutzman, United States Air Force

Andrea Harrington, Air Command and Staff College, Air University

img_2013crop

 

 

 

Moderator ǀ Diane Marie Amann, University of Georgia School of Law

GJICL EIC3:45-4:00  Closing Remarks

Lauren Elizabeth Lisauskas, Editor-in-Chief, Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law

 

 

Registration, CLE credit, and other details here. Additional cosponsors include the International Law Society, Georgia Law’s chapter of the the International Law Students Association.

National security expert, former judge James Baker to speak at Georgia Law

James_E._Baker_Photo_135_2pxWe at the University of Georgia School of Law Dean Rusk International Law Center will welcome Professor James E. Baker to campus this Thursday, September 13. He will speak on “National Security Decision-Making” from 3-4 p.m. in the Larry Walker Room, located on the 4th Floor of the law school’s Dean Rusk Hall. A reception will follow.

Professor Baker is the Director of the Syracuse University Institute for National Security & Counterterrorism. He is the former Chief Judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.

Sponsoring his talk with the Dean Rusk International Law Center is the university’s School of Public and International Affairs. Also co-sponsoring is the International Law Society, Georgia Law’s chapter of the International Law Students Association.

Details here.

Belgium week of our Global Governance Summer School concludes on a (World Cup) celebratory note

LEUVEN – Final sessions of our 2018 Global Governance Summer School‘s Belgium leg came to an end yesterday, even as the country’s national team vaulted into the final four of the World Cup.

Day 5 of the summer school, devoted to Global Security Governance,  began with a lecture by Dr. Nicolas Hachez. He is a Fellow at the Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies, University of Leuven, with which we at the Dean Rusk International Law Center, University of Georgia School of Law, partner to present the Global Governance Summer School. Hachez’ lecture began with an historical account dating to Aristotle, and ended with a survey of contemporary challenges to rule of law and democracy. (Just below, he listens to a response from Georgia Law student Brooke Carrington.) The presentation provided a valuable recap of many issues raised at the high-level RECONNECT conference our students attended earlier in the week.

Next, yours truly, Georgia Law Professor Diane Marie Amann, Emily & Ernest Woodruff Chair in International Law, one of our Center’s Faculty Co-Directors, and a founding Co-Director of the Global Governance Summer School. I introduced the concept of Global Security Governance, which incorporates within its analysis of human, national, and collective security insights from traditional international law subfields like human rights, the laws of war, and development law.

Our Center’s Director, Kathleen A. Doty, offered an overview of legal regimes related to disarmament and weapons control, including the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Chemical Weapons Convention. Then, as pictured at top, she led our summer school students – variously educated at Georgia Law, Leuven, and several other European institutions – in a spirited, simulated, multilateral negotiation for a new treaty to curb an imagined new development in weapons technology.

The week’s classroom component concluded with a lecture on “Global Governance, International Law and Informal Lawmaking in Times of Antiglobalism and Populism” by Leuven Professor Jan Wouters (right), Jean Monnet Chair ad personam EU and Global Governance, Full Professor of International Law and International Organizations, Director of the Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies, and founding Co-Director of our summer school. Touching on concepts and issues introduced throughout the week, Wouters exposed shortcomings of classic international law. He further urged greater acceptance of the significance of informal lawmaking actors, norms, and processes, which form the core of global governance studies.

Leuven and Georgia Law students, faculty, staff, and friends then enjoyed a conference dinner, plus a live, and lively, screening of the Belgium Red Devils’ 2-1 World Cup victory over Brazil – then headed to Oude Markt to celebrate with other denizens of this lovely city.

Georgia Law alum co-authors commentary on US surveillance law

Gary Ashcroft, who earned his J.D. degree cum laude from the University of Georgia School of Law just last year, has co-authored “Why Electronic Surveillance Reform is Necessary,” a commentary at Lawfare, a leading national security blog.

The post, which is drawn from a longer version here, argues for reform of the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) Amendments Act of 2008, commonly known as Section 702, and relied upon by the country’s intelligence community, or “IC.” It concludes:

“Section 702 is a valuable intelligence tool that exhibits some significant deficiencies in its protections for U.S. persons in a law enforcement context and for U.S. competitive interests abroad. Policymakers should craft reforms that guard against the misuse of Section 702 by law enforcement and redefine the relationship between the IC and tech companies. As they do so, policymakers can ensure that Section 702 continues to fulfill its vital national security functions while also respecting the civil liberties and corporate interests of U.S. persons and companies. “

Ashcroft (above left) is a Fellow for National Security at Third Way, a centrist thinktank in Washington, D.C. While a law student, he served as Research Assistant to Professor Harlan G. Cohen, served as Director of Legislative Research for State Rep. Spencer Frye, interned at the ACLU of Georgia, and was a Google Policy Fellow, working on cyber issues, at D.C.’s American Enterprise Institute. Ashcroft wrote the Lawfare commentary with Mieke Eoyang, Vice President for Third Way’s National Security Program.