Geopolitical Implications of a Successful SETI Program

We discuss the recent "realpolitik" analysis of Wisian & Traphagan (2020, W&T) of the potential geopolitical fallout of the success of SETI. They conclude that "passive" SETI involves an underexplored yet significant risk that, in the event of a successful, passive detection of extraterrestrial technology, state-level actors could seek to gain an information monopoly on communications with an ETI. These attempts could lead to international conflict and potentially disastrous consequences. In response to this possibility, they argue that scientists and facilities engaged in SETI should preemptively engage in significant security protocols to forestall this risk. We find several flaws in their analysis. While we do not dispute that a realpolitik response is possible, we uncover concerns with W&T's presentation of the realpolitik paradigm, and we argue that sufficient reason is not given to justify treating this potential scenario as action-guiding over other candidate geopolitical responses. Furthermore, even if one assumes that a realpolitik response is the most relevant geopolitical response, we show that it is highly unlikely that a nation could successfully monopolize communication with ETI. Instead, the real threat that the authors identify is based on the perception by state actors that an information monopoly is likely. However, as we show, this perception is based on an overly narrow contact scenario. Overall, we critique W&T's argument and resulting recommendations on technical, political, and ethical grounds. Ultimately, we find that not only are W&T's recommendations unlikely to work, they may also precipitate the very ills that they foresee. As an alternative, we recommend transparency and data sharing (which are consistent with currently accepted best practices), further development of post-detection protocols, and better education of policymakers in this space.Comment: 28pp PDF. Accepted to Space Polic

Public Protection, Proportionality, and the Search for Balance

This report examines how courts in the UK and Europe respond when human rights and security appear to conflict. It compares cases from the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Spain, and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). It examines how rights are applied and how courts use the concept of proportionality to mediate conflicts between rights and security. The report concludes that British courts are less consistent in their application of proportionality than countries with constitutional rights protections which tend to be more rigorous in their protections of rights than are countries, like the UK, that rely instead on the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

Public Protection, Proportionality, and the Search for Balance

This report examines how courts in the UK and Europe respond when human rights and security appear to conflict. It compares cases from the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Spain, and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). It examines how rights are applied and how courts use the concept of proportionality to mediate conflicts between rights and security. The report concludes that British courts are less consistent in their application of proportionality than countries with constitutional rights protections which tend to be more rigorous in their protections of rights than are countries, like the UK, that rely instead on the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

How Will We Govern a Moon Village? Jurisdiction, Enforcement, Standard Setting, and International Cooperation

This panel takes up what is perhaps the most profound legal question of the symposium: How will we govern a village of foreign and domestic entities, both public and public in nature? Do we use a variation of the treaty that governs the international space station? Can we rely on existing space law – or do we need to make some changes or additions to existing domestic and international law? Should we expect a lunar equivalent to the Mayflower Compact? Steven Mirmina is the NASA lawyer who oversees the international legal issues involving the International Space Station – and who is now involved in crafting the legal instruments that will govern the construction and operation of the Lunar Gateway, a new international space station that will orbit the Moon and allow for easy transfer of people and material to the lunar surface. The panel will be rounded out by the lead international space lawyer at the Department of State, Gabriel Swiney, the founder of the Global Space Law Center, Mark J. Sundahl, and the founder and president of the Moon Village Association, Giuseppe Reibaldi. Dennis O’Brien of the Moon Village Association will also join the discussion. Scott Parry, a graduate of space law programs at both Cleveland-Marshall and the University of Nebraska, will moderate this final panel

How Will We Govern a Moon Village? Jurisdiction, Enforcement, Standard Setting, and International Cooperation

This panel takes up what is perhaps the most profound legal question of the symposium: How will we govern a village of foreign and domestic entities, both public and public in nature? Do we use a variation of the treaty that governs the international space station? Can we rely on existing space law – or do we need to make some changes or additions to existing domestic and international law? Should we expect a lunar equivalent to the Mayflower Compact? Steven Mirmina is the NASA lawyer who oversees the international legal issues involving the International Space Station – and who is now involved in crafting the legal instruments that will govern the construction and operation of the Lunar Gateway, a new international space station that will orbit the Moon and allow for easy transfer of people and material to the lunar surface. The panel will be rounded out by the lead international space lawyer at the Department of State, Gabriel Swiney, the founder of the Global Space Law Center, Mark J. Sundahl, and the founder and president of the Moon Village Association, Giuseppe Reibaldi. Dennis O’Brien of the Moon Village Association will also join the discussion. Scott Parry, a graduate of space law programs at both Cleveland-Marshall and the University of Nebraska, will moderate this final panel