With different countries ascribing to different theories of air space and outer space law, Dr. Bittencourt Neto proposes in this Brief a reassessment of the international law related to the extension of state territories vertically. Taking into consideration the vast number of proposals offered by scholars and diplomatic delegations on this subject matter, as well as the principles of comparative law, a compromise to allow for peaceful development is the only way forward. The author argues for setting the delimitation of the frontier between air space and outer space at 100 km above mean sea level through an international treaty. This would also regulate passage rights for space objects during launchings and reentries, as long as those space activities are peaceful, conducted in accordance with international Law and respecting the sovereign interests of the territorial State. Continuing expansion of the commercial space industry and conflicting national laws require a stable and fair legal framework best adjudicated by the United Nations, instead of allowing a patchwork system to persist. The proper framework for developing such regulation is carefully discussed from all angles with a practical recommendation for policy-makers in the field.

With different countries ascribing to different theories of air space and outer space law, Dr. Bittencourt Neto proposes in this Brief a reassessment of the international law related to the extension of state territories vertically. Taking into consideration the vast number of proposals offered by scholars and diplomatic delegations on this subject matter, as well as the principles of comparative law, a compromise to allow for peaceful development is the only way forward. The author argues for setting the delimitation of the frontier between air space and outer space at 100 km above mean sea level through an international treaty. This would also regulate passage rights for space objects during launchings and reentries, as long as those space activities are peaceful, conducted in accordance with international law and respecting the sovereign interests of the territorial State. Continuing expansion of the commercial space industry and conflicting national laws require a stable and fair legal framework best adjudicated by the United Nations, instead of allowing a patchwork system to persist. The proper framework for developing such regulation is carefully discussed from all angles with a practical recommendation for policy-makers in the field.

With different countries ascribing to different theories of air space and outer space law, Dr. Bittencourt Neto proposes in this Brief a reassessment of the international law related to the extension of state territories vertically. Taking into consideration the vast number of proposals offered by scholars and diplomatic delegations on this subject matter, as well as the principles of comparative law, a compromise to allow for peaceful development is the only way forward. The author argues for setting the delimitation of the frontier between air space and outer space at 100 km above mean sea level through an international treaty. This would also regulate passage rights for space objects during launchings and reentries, as long as those space activities are peaceful, conducted in accordance with international law and respecting the sovereign interests of the territorial State. Continuing expansion of the commercial space industry and conflicting national laws require a stable and fair legal framework best adjudicated by the United Nations, instead of allowing a patchwork system to persist. The proper framework for developing such regulation is carefully discussed from all angles with a practical recommendation for policy-makers in the field.

In How High the Sky?, jurist Thomas Gangale explores the oldest and most important controversy in space law: how far up does national airspace go, and where does the international environment of outer space begin? Even though nations did not object to the first satellites flying over their sovereign territory, after more than six decades there is still no international agreement on how low the right of space object overflight extends, nor are there agreed legal definitions of “space object” and “space activity.” Dr. Gangale brings his background as an aerospace engineer to bear in exploding long-held beliefs of the legal community, and he offers a draft international convention to settle the oldest and most intractable problems in space law.

The legal regime of outer space, as enshrined in the Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space (General Assembly Resolution 1962 (XVIII), adopted in 1963, and in the 1967 Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, while prohibiting the appropriation of space by any means, envisages exploration for the bene?t and in the interest of all countries on a basis of equality and in accordance with international law. Freedom of scienti?c investigation is also contemplated. Elaborating on these instruments, the Assembly in 1996 adopted the Declaration on International Cooperation in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space (RES 51/122), in which it called for heightened international co-operation, with part- ular attention to be given to the bene?t for and the interests of developing countries and countries with nascent space programmes. Thus, it is self-evident that the outer space regime, including the 1972 Liability Convention, envisages the conduct of national activities “for the bene?t and in the interests of all countries, irrespective of their degree of economic or scienti?c dev- opment”. In this regard, Article 6 of the 1967 Treaty not only provides for national activities in outer space, but for international responsibility whether such activities are carried out by governmental agencies or non-governmental entities, and aims at ensuring that national activities are conducted in conformity with the Treaty.

This book is based on the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Global Space Governance study commissioned by the 2014 Montreal Declaration that called upon civil society, academics, governments, the private sector, and other stakeholders to undertake an international interdisciplinary study. The study took three years to complete. It examines the drivers of space regulations and standards, key regulatory problems, and especially addresses possible improvements in global space governance. The world's leading experts led the drafting of chapters, with input from academics and knowledgeable professionals in the public and private sectors, intergovernmental organizations, and nongovernmental organizations from all the regions of the world with over 80 total participants. This book and areas identified for priority action are to be presented to the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space and it is hoped will be considered directly or indirectly at the UNISPACE+50 event in Vienna, Austria, in 2018. The report, a collective work of all the contributors, includes objective analysis and frank statements expressed without pressure of political, national, and occupational concerns or interest. It is peer-reviewed and carefully edited to ensure its accuracy, preciseness, and readability. It is expected that the study and derivative recommendations will form the basis for deliberations and decisions at international conferences and meetings around the world on the theme of global space governance. This will hopefully include future discussion at the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space.

The impact of the US defense and space initiatives on bilateral and multilateral treaties and on international outer space law in general, a topic of much current discussion, is better understood by an analysis of the development of that body of law. Col Delbert “Chip” Terrill Jr. discusses its early evolution and the Air Force contribution to it. He describes the Air Force's ad hoc approach to international outer space law and its efforts to have this approach adopted by the United States and the international community. Further, the author details the profound impact that the surprise attack at Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941 had on President Dwight D. Eisenhower. He vowed never again to allow the US to be similarly vulnerable to a surprise attack, particularly in a nuclear environment. As part of his efforts to preclude a surprise attack on the United States, Eisenhower sought to establish the concept of free passage of intelligence gathering satellites as part of accepted international outer space law. The author traces how the Eisenhower administration demonstrated a lack of concern about being first in space so long as the concept of free passage in outer space was universally accepted. However, the administration apparently and clearly underestimated the propaganda value that being first would have. Colonel Terrill traces how the Eisenhower administration failed to fully communicate its policy goal of achieving such free passage to the uniformed services. Although civilian leaders in the Defense Department were aware of the administration's position, the Air Force and the other military services at times acted at cross purposes to the concept of free passage. Chip Terrill describes the Air Force's continued efforts to resist the passage of most international outer space law conventions, the restiveness of the Air Force judge advocate general (JAG) corps with a backseat role, and how the JAG generally failed in its early attempt to have the Air Force become proactive in the development of the law. Ironically, Terrill illustrates how the Air Force's ad hoc approach essentially dovetailed with Eisenhower's goal of free passage. Colonel Terrill relates how the Air Force's Project West Ford caused the passage of certain environmentally sensitive provisions of international outer space law. The author closes by examining the comment and coordination process leading to the passage of the Liability for Damages Convention. Such was typical of the Air Force's lukewarm, reactive posture regarding the passage of international conventions, except for the Agreement on Rescue and Return of Astronauts, which the Air Force strongly supported. In short, this superb work documents the interesting gestation period regarding the development of international outer space law. It will undoubtedly contribute to the development of Air Force doctrine by providing a better understanding of the Air Force's involvement in the development of international outer space law.