now or that the principles of the law of the sea should be applied in space, until we ascertain many more facts with respect to conditions in space. Basically, it is the position of our Government that the law of space should be based upon the facts of space and that there is very much more that we have to learn about the conditions existing in space before we shall be in a position to say what shall be the legal principles applicable thereto.

THE SPACE AGENCY BILL

I have attempted to demonstrate to you that the Department of State has a great interest in the subject of space and particularly its relationship to problems of foreign policy, foreign relations, and international law in this new field. It is the expectation of the Department that its studies and activities with respect to space would continue as before, following the establishment of the space agency provided for in the administration's bill. The difference would be that we would have a central point within the Government to which we could turn for enlightenment on nonmilitary research and developments in space and with whom we could cooperate in the development and implementation of meaningful plans for international cooperation in the peaceful exploitation of space for the benefit of all mankind. We believe that this was contemplated by the bill, as introduced, since it would be inferred that international cooperation would be effectuated through the normal channel therefor, namely, the Department of State.

We understand that it has been proposed that the bill be amended to include as one of the activities that the proposed agency may engage upon a program of international cooperation. It is our understanding that the specific language proposed reads as follows:

The agency may under foreign policy guidance by the Department of State engage in a program of international cooperation in work done pursuant to this Act and in the peaceful application of the results thereof, pursuant to agree ments negotiated by the Department of State, or approved by that Department. We also understand that this proposed amendment has the approval of the administration. I should like to state that it is entirely satisfactory to the Department of State. I believe that what I have already said will have indicated that this Department is fully in accord with a program of international cooperation in the field of space, so long as that can be accomplished with due regard for the common defense and security of the United States.

CONCLUSION

Mr. Chairman, in commenting upon a space proposal made by the President in a letter to former Chairman Bulganin, you stated:

I agree with the President that outer space must be dedicated to the advancement rather than to the destruction of mankind. It is the obligation of responsible leadership to proceed to specific proposals that will convert a noble goal into a noble reality.

We in the Department of State fully concur with your statement. We regard the opening of the space age as a time of great opportunity for mankind. We shall make every effort to insure that the keynote of space internationally is peace and cooperation rather than strife. We hope that other nations will join us in that high effort.

THE CONTROL OF OUTER SPACE AND THE UNITED

NATIONS

By Sir Leslie K. Munro 1

1

As I suppose most of you know, I have taken an active interest during my term as President of the Assembly in the question of outer space and its future control.

Statesmen here and abroad have already spoken on this vital subject. Indeed, as recently as 19 May Mr. Dag Hammarskjöld, the SecretaryGeneral of the United Nations, expressed the hope

that the General Assembly, as a result of its consideration, would find the way to an agreement on a basic rule that outer space, and the celestial bodies therein, are not considered as capable of appropriation by any state, and that it would further affirm the overriding interest of the community of nations in the peaceful and beneficial use of outer space and initiate steps for an international machinery to further this end. Were the General Assembly to reach this point, the governments cooperating in the United Nations would have laid what seems to me to be a valid basis for the future development, in international cooperation, of the use of outer space for the benefit of all.

The President of this country, in his message of 12 January to Mr. Bulganin, has proposed that the United States and Russia should agree that outer space should be used only for peaceful purposes. Mr. Eisenhower said very forcefully that we face a decisive moment in history in relation to this matter and now is the time to stop using outer space for the testing of missiles designed for military purposes.

In the course of questions and answers following his address to the National Press Club at Washington, D. C., on 16 January, Mr. Dulles had this to say:

Now we are at the opening stage of a new, great development, a development which can now readily be controlled, but we cannot say with certainly, if it goes uncontrolled for 10 years, that perhaps by that time the mechanics of penetrating outer space will have been so refined and improved upon that we will not be up against the same kind of impossibility and of great difficulty that we are at the present time with regard to nuclear weapons. So the time to move is now, in the infancy of this art of penetrating the atmosphere and reaching outer space. And, as I say, it can be done now very readily because of the fact that the mechanics of this thing at the present time are so cumbersome, so obvious, that they can readily be detected and controlled. There would, I suppose, need to be some kind of an international commission presumably, and preferably, under the auspices of the United Nations, which would have the task, perhaps comparable to the task of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which has a task of assuring that the nuclear materials that it disposes of, at least, shall be used only for peaceful purposes.

Now, I see no political or material obstacles in the way of establishing an effective, all-inclusive, dependable system of supervision, and which would assure that, if anyone makes an instrument to use outer space, it can be detected, can be known, and it can be assured that the objects to be set up will be in the interests

1 Address by Sir Leslie K. Munro, President of the 12th session of the United Nations General Assembly and New Zealand Ambassador to the United States, at a joint luncheon of the Harvard Foundation for Advanced Study and Research and the Harvard Law School Alumni Association in Harkness Quadrangle, Harvard University, on Wednesday, June 11, 1958.

of science and humanity and not in the interests of war. I think there is an opportunity here which is almost staggering in its possible implications-its implications if we do it and its tragic implications if we do not do it.

And I certainly hope from the depth of my heart that the emphasis which President Eisenhower put upon this in his letter to Chairman Bulganin will find a response.

By a letter dated 15 March and released by the Secretariat on 17 March, the Soviet Permanent Representative to the United Nations asked that the following question be included in the provisional agenda of the Thirteenth Session of the United Nations General Assembly: The banning of the use of cosmic space for military purposes, the elimination of foreign bases on the territories of other countries, and international cooperation in the study of cosmic space.

I should tell you that I disagree with the conjunction of the proposed banning with the elimination of the bases urged by the Soviet representative. I shall enlarge upon this point later.

Yet at this point I should refer to the obvious connection which the Soviet item has with the longstanding problem of disarmament, in both its nuclear and conventional aspects.

You will observe the phrase, "The banning of the use of cosmic space," etc.

In our system of law we are acquainted with the phrase "in common form." This may be used for phrases or even a single word, like the word "crude," so beloved of my Soviet colleagues.

The phrase "banning of the use of cosmic space" is in common form with a similar phrase, "The banning of the use of nuclear weapons." This is the declaratory procedure. In one sweeping phrase you prohibit something. But how do you make the prohibition effective? In other words, what in the mind of the Soviet Government does banning mean in terms of control? How many inspectors? Where will they be placed? What freedom of movement will they have? Who will select and appoint them?

But I have no doubt that the Assembly will give serious consideration to the Soviet proposal for—

The establishment of a United Nations agency for international cooperation in the study of cosmic space which could have the following functions:

To work out an agreed international programme for launching intercontinental and space rockets with the aim of studying cosmic space, and supervise the implementation of this programme;

To continue on a permanent basis the cosmic-space research now being carried on within the framework of the International Geophysical Year;

To serve as a world centre for the collection, mutual exchange, and dissemination of information on cosmic research;

To coordinate national research programmes for the study of cosmic space and render assistance and help in every way towards their realization.

It is also most relevant to remember that the Assembly in its last session resolved on 14 November 1957 that the States concerned and particularly the members of the Sub-Committee of the Disarmament Commission should give priority to a disarmament agreement which would, upon its entry into force, provide (inter alia) for

the joint study of an inspection system designed to ensure that the sending of objects through outer space shall be exclusively for peaceful and scientific purposes.

Neither the enlarged Disarmament Commission nor the SubCommittee has met because the Soviet Union has announced its refusal to attend the deliberations of either body.

It would therefore seem that the question of the control of outer space will await discussions by the United Nations until the next Assembly. Then the Soviet item will almost certainly be considered. It may well be that some other government or governments will ask to be included on the agenda an item on outer space in another form or other forms. The whole subject is sure of considerable discussion. I have no reason to depart from what I said to the New Jersey State Bar Association on 22 November 1957:

As to the actual convening of states on problems raised by recent and imminent ventures into outer space, I believe that the United Nations is the proper forum for necessary discussion. First of all, it is peculiarly equipped to provide small powers with an opportunity to be heard. Although it is undeniable that primary responsibility for the settlement of such matters rests on the Great Powers, any steps taken by them would necessarily affect the smaller ones and I therefore believe, both personally and as representative of a small power, that they definitely should be heard. Public opinion throughout the world must not be overlooked, and citizens of a small country must be given an equal chance as citizens of a big country to make their feelings known on such important matters.

Choice of the United Nations as the forum for the consideration of problems relating to outer space is also supported by the identity between its purposes and principles and the purposes and principles which must govern any international consideration of such problems. If one or more nations have achieved something which can take us into outer space, the peaceful use of such a device must be assured, and this through some programme of international control. Further, the benefits derived from such devices must be shared by all nations, in keeping with the growing tendency of international sharing of advances in the scientific field, a tendency which has been accentuated in the field of atomic energy and in the arrangements adopted for the International Geophysical Year. You are, of course, aware that there has been considerable discussion as to the formulation of the principles of law which should be applicable to outer space. Some suggest the formulation of a code as soon as possible, others would favour dealing with the matter peacemeal, so to speak, on an ad hoc basis. Presumably, if this line of thought is followed, we shall wait for man to land on the moon before we settle questions of sovereignty affecting that celestial object.

Both the Soviet Union and the United States have sent satellites through outer space. No government has questioned their right to do so or claimed that its sovereignty is infringed when a satellite hurtles through outer space for a brief second far above its territory.

The sovereignty of each state appears to be limited to the air space over its territory. However, the question of the precise upward limit of sovereignty does not end there, as the term "air space" itself has yet to be precisely defined.

Since the term is used in aviation treaties, the proposal has been made that it be defined in the light of the purposes and intent of those treaties. Under this proposal, "airspace" would be understood as referring to that part of the atmosphere which contains enough air to "lift" aircraft, with state sovereignty extending to that height. Others have proposed that soveregnty should extend upward to 300 miles, the part lying above "airspace" to be designated "contiguous space." Still another proposal would have sovereignty extent to the limits of all flight, a proposal based on the danger asserted to subjacent states. However, most of those who have expressed views on this point have tended to the theory that outer space should be excluded from national sovereignty for such reasons as the difficulty of defining areas in outer space which would correspond to the territory of a state on the

33259-5925

earth. Those who hold this view usually suggest that outer space should be made subject to a legal order similar to that applying to the high seas.

Aside from outer space itself, questions will undoubtedly arise as to sovereignty over celestial bodies which may be reached by man in the foreseeable future. Consideration would need to be given to whether or not such celestial bodies should be regarded as subject to claims of sovereignty and if so as to whether the rules of international law regarding discovery and occupation, conquest and cession should be made applicable to such celestial bodies. Spaceships too would presumably need to be subjected to some legal order, and this raises the question of the applicability of present laws, both national and international, regarding aircraft and seagoing vessels.

My own view is that international law as we know it in respect of the acquisition of title by occupation and possession and settlement is not applicable to celestial bodies.

I would like now to leave aside the question of law we have been considering and discuss with you the implications of the Soviet item on the subject and the West's own disarmament plan.

I suggest to you that we should now consider: (a) the nonmilitary; (b) the military aspects of the problem.

The nonmilitary aspects will be concerned with the so-called satellites and the means of delivering them.

International agreement can and should be reached, one would hope, as soon as possible in respect of the satellites which now orbit and in future will orbit the globe. This should include the means of launching them. This may be the easier because the satellites do not appear to impinge on the disarmament problem and already there is some agreement respecting the data about them to be exchanged through the project known as the International Geophysical Year.

However, all these able scientists here are aware that there is the prospect of satellites being used for the purposes of reconnaissancefor taking photographs of places on our world. This could be a military use and is not to be ignored.

I now come, after this observation, to the military aspects of the problem.

This concerns the missiles, namely, the means of delivering objects into outer space. As these were developed first for military purposes, their connection with the problems of disarmament is obvious:

We are all aware of: (a) Intercontinental Ballistic MissilesICBM; (b) Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles-IRBM.

To me it is obvious why the Soviet Union has linked to the banning of the use of cosmic space for military purposes a proposal for "the elimination of foreign military bases on the territories of other states, primarily in Europe, the Near and Middle East and North Africa."

It is from such bases that the NATO Powers could launch IRBM's. If the Soviet were to secure the prohibition of this, then it would gain for itself a lopsided advantage. The six points of the West's disarmament scheme, which cover all the essential elements of a dependable first stage or partial disarmament agreement, are designed to prevent the conferment on either side of an undue advantage and to ensure a balanced system of disarmament. They are worth recalling:

1. A suspension of test explosions as soon as a partial disarmament treaty is concluded;