JPRS ID: 8304 INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN SPACE LEGAL QUESTIONS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: JPRS
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
• Release Decision: RIF
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 229
• Document Creation Date: November 1, 2016
• Sequence Number: 7
• Content Type: REPORTS

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
5
, 6Y
2 MARCH 1979 V.S. VERESHCHETIN
.i OF 3
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
JPRS L/8304
- 2 March 1979
~ INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN SPACE
LEGAL QUESTIONS
BY
V.S. VERESHCHETIN
.
U. S. JOINT PUBLICATIONS RESEARCH SERVICE
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/48: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
NOTE
- JPRS publicaCione contain information primarily from foraign
newspapere, periodicale and booke, but alao fram naws agancy
tranemiseione and broadcaets. Materiale from foreign-langwSe
eourcea are translated; those from Englieh�language eourcas
are transcribed or reprinCed, with the original phraeing and
other characCerietice retained.
Headlinea, editorial reporte, and watarial anclosad in bracket�
(J are supplied by JPRS. Proceaeing indicatore euch a� (Text] -
or [Excerpt] in the firet line of each itiam, or followins the
laet line of a brief, indicate hota the original iefoYmation vas
proceeaed. Where no proceesing indicator i� given, the infoY-
mation wae aummariced or extractad.
Unfamiliar namee rendered phoneticaliy or Cranslitarated ara
encloeed in parentheeas. Word� or nama� preceded by a quas- '
tion mark and encloead in parenthaset ware not clatar in the
original but have been suppliikd as appropriate in contsxt.
Other unattributed paranthatical noea� aithin the body of An
- item ori$inate with the eourca. Times within items-vra a�
given by eourca.
The contente of thie publication in no way reprasent the poli-
ciae, viewe or attitudae of the U.B. Oovernment.

COPYRI(iHT IAWS AND ASOULATIOpB OCVEANINO OWNR1tdHIP 0F -
MATERIALS REPRODUCBD HERSIN REQUM THAT DId1=MINATIOr -
- OF THI3 PUBLICATION $E RBBTRICTED !OA 0"ICIAL UtE ONi.Y.
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
~
4112 71 .inI
REPOl2T DOCUMENTATION
.1,11EruRr No,
. ~lplent's Atasslon No.
PAGE
JPR5 L/8304
T
i. Titlo and SuDtrtle
s. R.oon o,�
2 March 1979
INTEItNATIONAL COOPERATION IN SPACE
LECAL
UEST
N
,
Q
IO
S
~
7. AutAO(s)
S. orforming Or{anltallon Hept. No,
V. S. Vereshchetin
0. aiormins OrganltNion Name and Addr4te
10. Projittt/TasM/WorM Unlt Ne.
JoinC Publications Research Service
1000 North Glebe P,oad
ii. Centnet(C) or prenl(a) Nu.
ArlingCon, Virginia 22201
(C)
(c)
1!. iponsoring Orpnltatton Hame and Addnss
1!. T
Ype oP Report i Nlod CovenJ
As above

Is. suoa.m�,t.y noa.
MEZHDUNARODNOYE SOTRUDNICHESTVO V KOSMOSE, PRAVOVYYE VOPROSY, Moscow, 1977
~
1& Aestnet (Llmlt: 200 words)
This repork contair� an examinatinn of the hraad range of neW international
legal problems which have arisen in inCernational cooperation among states in
the area of the research and use of space. A detailed analyais ia provided of
the legal bases in the international space programs of tiie Soviet union, Che
United States, the Western European nations as well as other states, in
additi.on to the legal conditione regulati.ng the use of space !or practical
purposes.
i
17. DocurwM Mayrsls oHeApton
USSR Interc;osmos Navigation
Spac2 United States CEMA
Legal problems Western Europe United Nations
e. IdaitlMn/Open�"ed T"me Television
e. C03ATI f1N4/GrouO 5D
1L Avs1laMlfry itatement
If. foeuft Class (This t1epeK)
21. Na ef apo
Fr,r Ufficial Use Only. Limited
UNCLASSIFIED
223
lumbQr of Copies Available From JPRS.
m. s�u.+h cl..+ Rnl. ,r
u. Pric.
UNCLASSIFIED
-
, SM MshucNOns en Rowne O/TIONAI ORM 272 0-711
(/anhy NTIS-]S)
po"etnwrK ef Cen+n+a"
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FQR OFF'ICIAL USE ONLY
JPR5 L/8304
2 Maroh 1979
- INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN SPACE
LEGAL QUES7IONS
Moscow MEZHDUNA1tODN0YE 50TRUDNICHESTVQ V KOSMGSE, PRAVOVYYE VOPROSY in
Rusaian 1977 aigned to press 22 Jul 71 pp 1-264
[Book by V. S. Vereahchetin, undEr the editorship of A. P. Movchan, Institute
of State and Law of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Izdatel'stvo Nauka, 3600
copies, 264 pagea]
CONTENTS "
Page
Lr
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2
PART I :
The Legal Mechanism of International Space Programs
-
Chapter 1: The Treaty as the Basic L'egal Instrument of International
~
Cooperation in Space Development . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7 -
1. The Legal Nature of International Scientific and
_ Technical Space Agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8 _
- 2. Scientific and Technical Space Agreements as
Sources of International Space Law . . . . . . . . . .
13
3. The Principle of Cooperation in International
Space Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
18 _
Chapter 2: Multilateral Collaboration of the Socislist Nations.
The Intercosmos Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
25
1. The International Legal Mechanism of the Intercosmos
Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
25
2. The Joint Activities of States Under the Intercosmos
_
Program in Light of Certain Common Principles of
International Space LaW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
33
[II - USSR FOUO]
[III - USSR-35 FOUO]
- a -
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
~
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Page
Chapter 3: Bilateral Cooperative Programs of the USSR with _
Other Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Chapter 4: "Space Integration" in Western Europe . . . . . . . . . . 56
Chapter 5: Tnternational upace Programs of the United 5tates
(Political and Legal Aspects) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 '
Chapter 6: The Ro1e of the United Nations and International ' -
Nongovernmental Organ3zQtions in Working Out and _
Implementing 3pace Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
4 1. The United Nations and Its Specialized Agencies, . 89
2. Internationa]. Nongovernmental Qrganizations 95
PART II: �
Legal Problems of International Application
Space Systems
Chapter 1: The Use of Space for Earth-Oriented Purposes and ~
State Sovereignty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Chapter
2:
International Space Cc,mmunicatians Systems: Legal
Principles of Their Creation e.nd Operation
117
1. The International Intersputnik Space Communications
System and Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
117
-
2. The Intelsat International Space Communicat�ions
,
System and Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
122
Chapter
3:
Direct Television Broadcasting by 1~-~,tellite
133
Chapter
4:
Space Navigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
146
Chapter
5:
Space Meteorolagy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
158
Chapter
6:
Investigation of Earth Resources from Space
167
~ Chapter
7:
The Legal Status of International Orbital Stations
182
- Bibliograpt~y of Soviet Literature on Internation-il Space La.w
199
- .b -
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
.
Eng].ish title
Ruesian title
Author (s)
Editor (s)
- Publiahing House
Place of Publication
Datp of Publication
Signed to press
Copiea
- COPYRIGHT
Fox orFxciAL usE oNLY
PUBLICATION bATA
: INTERNIATIONAL COOPERATION IN SPACE,
LEGAL QUESTIONS
: MEZRDUNARODNOYE .50TRUDNICHESTV0 Y
KOSMOSE, PRAVOSYYE VOPAOSY
: J. S. Vexeahchetin
. A. P. Movchan
. Izdatel"stov "Nauka"
. Moacov
1977
; 22 .Tul 77
; 3,600
. Izdatellstvo "Naukfs", 1977
- c -
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
[Brief Annotation)
[Text] The book examines a broad range of new international legal problems -
which have arisen in international cooperation ameng states in the area of
the research and use of space. A detailed analysis is provided of the lPgal _
bases in the international space programs of the Soviet Union, the United
States, the Western European nations as well as other states, in addition
to the legal conditions regutating the use oi' space for practical purposes.
- 1
.FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
- `i
_ FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
INTRODUCTION
- Cooneration among states in the research and use of space for peaceful pur-
poses has become an important and permanent factor in international life.
The 24th and 25th CPSU congresses affirmed the intent3on of the USSR to
further develop mutually advantageous cooperation with other atates in the
development of outer space.l Our state has firmly adhered to this policy
- since the beginning of the space age.
The first earth satellitP was launched by the USSR during the period of the
International GeopY~ysical Year [IGY] which was an extensive and diversified
program involving simultaneous scientific observations throughout the world.
On the occasion of the first manned flight in space in 1961, the Appeal of
- the CPSU Central Committee, the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Soviet and
_ the USSR Council of Ministers emphasized that "we consider the victories in
the conquering of' space to be aehievements not only of our people but also
of all mankind. We are pleased to put them in the service of all peoples,
in the name of pr-ogress, happiness and well-being Por all people of the
world."2
At present the US)SR is involved in international cooperation programs for
the study and development of space with a large number of states belonging
to diffexent social systems. The nationn of the socialist comnonwealth,
the United State::, France, India and Sweden--tY:ese are the range of states
with which the USSR has the largest space cooperation programs.
- However the scale and forms uf Soviet cooperation with the foreign countries
- in space reseaxch go far beyond the limits of these programs. Joint satel-
lite tracking stations axe located on the territory of 18 nations, and
samples of lunar soil brought back to earth by Soviet automatic stations
are being investigated in the laboratories of a score of countries. The
USSR is making a major contribution to the activities of numerous inter-
_ governmental and nongovernmental organizations involved in space problems.
Although the basic portion of space research is being carried out by the
USSR and the United States, space development is beaoming an international
matter more and more. Scientific-technical, economic and political factors
are behind this.
2
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
Astudy of tM processes which tire devel.oping on a worldwide acale snd in
_ interplsnetar;r spo,ce, in being made possible by new technical devices, has
necessj.tated roordinated actions by various countriea. The necessity of
international cooperation has become all the more apparent after the ways
of the practical use of space were determined for the intereots of ineteor-
olog,y, long d:tstance corr�nunications, navigation and for studying earth re-
aources. The high cost of space and missile equipment, the economic advis-
ability of the joint use of the scientific and production potent3als of the
nations have also 1ed to the necessity of cooperation in space activities.
For various reasons both the scientifically and technically advanced nations
as well as those states for which participation in space research aerves
as one of the means for eliminating economic backwardness are interested in
- int,ernational cooperati'on 3n the development of space.
Truly e qual cooperation by states in space researcYi, regardless of certain
difficulties, is developing.more and more. Specially established inter-
state and public organizations are working actively in the international
area, hundreds of international agreements have been concluded, inter-
national sate113tes and research missiles are being launched regularly,
and international special-project satellite systems have been developed.
Along with the development of spac:e research and its practical application
and t;le involving of an ever larger number of states in these activities,
there has been an evolution in the forms and nature of collaboration.
At the outset of the space age, the joint discussion of the results of
_ scientific research and a comparison of procedures rlayed the dominant
role. At that time there was onl,y a certain coordinating of scientific
plans. Tnternational cooperation in tracking earth satellites also de-
veloped rather early on.
In the middle of the 1960's, joint work in space in the direct sense of this -
word becfune foremost, including the development of missile and space tech-
- nolopr and various space devices by Lhe ,joint efforts of the states and _
their use for solving scientific and nationa,l economic problems. For these
- purposes, in 1,;i64, two Western European space organizations were organized,
and in 1967, the Intercosmo4 program was approved for multilateral collabors
- ation among the nine so::ialist states. The Soviet Union signed an agree- '
ment on space cooperation with France. The Unittd States, along with con- _
cluding a number of bilateral agreements on joint space experiments, began
to organize the international Intelsat Consortium for the use of comrunica-
tions s atellites L'or commercial pi:xposes.
The picture of international space conperation in the form that it developed
_ by the end of the first decade of the space age continues to exist at pres-
ent, and it can be represented in the following way: three world centers
. of coope:ation--the USSR, the United States and Western Europe--with defin- -
ite relationships betwsen them.
3
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR 0YFICIAL USE ONLY
ir
At tle atart of the 1970's, important international agreementa were signed
in the area of the practical applications of space research. These were
the agreement on the setting up of the international Intersputnik apace
communications oyatem and organization, and the permnnent Intelsat agree-
ments. The tendency toward the practical use of spe,ce technol.ogy was also _
ref7.ected in a number of other projects of internat3onal woxking systems
which are now in the stage of implementation. _
The recent years have been characterized by the start of a new atage in the
pooling of efforts by states to study and develop space. In accord with
the program of socialist economic integration among the CEMA countries,
there has been further development of cooperation among the socialist
nations. This Y:as been expressed in the si;ning of the Agreement on Cooper-
ation in the Research and Use of Outer Space for Peaceful Purposes of
13 July 1976 as we11 as in the proposal of the USSR for the citizens of
the socialist countries to participate in manned flights on Soviet space-
craft and stations, The USSR has concluded new agreements on cooperation
- with a number of the capitalist states. International cooperation in this
area has also been greatly influenced by the conclusion of agreements in
1972 and 1977 on cooperation in the research and use of apace for peaceful
purposes between the USSR and the United States.
Along with the tendency for a development and deepening of ties between
- states in the study and developments of space and for the influence of
space activities in vc )us areas of international life, in the capitalist
world one can clearly note another tendency, one toward separateness and
competition. For a number of years "space Europe" has been :Ln a state of
- permanent crisis as it has been unable to reconcile the contradictory in- -
terests of its paxtners. The United States has not abandoned its attempts
to use cooperation for the purposes of maintaining its monopolistic or
predominant position in the capitalist worlds in the various areas of space
technology which may involve a direct economic gain. _
The present picture of international cooperation in space as a whole is
complex and contradictory; it has been shaped by coinciding and opposing
forces and trends, and represents a synthesis of various approaches and
aspirations of the states.
International cooperation in the development of space is most directly tied
to the foreign policy of states. The degree of international cooperation
- in this area cannot help but depend upon the state of political relations
between the corresponding states. The feedback with politics is expressed
- in the fact that international cooperation in space development has a posi-
tive impact on strengthening confidence between states, and makes a con-
tribution in adding a material content to the process of a lessening of
international tension.
However, in the United States there are influencial circles which are en-
deavoritig to use scientific and technical cooperation for purposes which
4
FOR OFFICIAL i1SE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
have nothing in common with detente. This can be seen, in particular, from _
the book published in 1974 in the United States entit7.ed "Soviet Cooperation
in Space" with a foreword w.ritten by the former U.S. Ambassador to the USSR, -
F. Kohler.3 In essence itn authors urge that cooperation between the UniLed
5tates and the USSR in the space area be used for interfering in the inter-
na1 affairs of the USSR. This book is a new reminder that detente as before
remains an object of acute political and ideological struggle.
The carrying out of a broad program of international cooperat3.on in space
development by the USSR and the growing influence of scientific and techni-
cal ties on the system of international relat3ons necessitate a theoretical
analysis and generalization of the international 1ega1 questions which arise
- in the process of cooperation, the elucidation of the relationships of the
scientific-technical and leaal aspects of this process, as well as a dis-
closure of the'international legal mechanism of cooperation and a tracing
out of the ways to improve this.
Because of the greater national economic use of space devices, greater at-
- tention has been assumed by the questions of elaborating the legal condi-
- tions for the international applied or working space systems based on the
use of communications, navigation and weather satellites as well as satel-
lites for studying earth resources. Related to this group of questions
are the international legal problems which arise in the process of coopera-
= tion in setting up international orbital stations, the prototype of which
was the system of Soyuz and Apollo spacecraft during their joint flight in
1975�
All these questions which as yet have not been sufficiently elaborated in =
- Soviet and foreign legal literature are not only of theoreti.cal signifi-
cance, but directly invalve the practical activities of a number of the -
Soviet ministries -and departments.
International space la-a which was born out of scientific and technical
progress, in turn, operates as an important means in developing coopera-
tion among states in the area of the study and use of space. The effect of
law on scientific ancl technical cooperation is expressed, in the first
place, in the creation of general space law conditions which ensure the
best circumstances for the development of cooperation among the states, and
secondly, in the regulation of speeific relationships between states which
arise when they carry out ,joint scientific and technical activities.
Correspondingly, cooperation between st-ates in the legal sphere is carried
out in two basic areas. On the one hand, there has been a process of the
progressive development and codification of international space law by the
elaboration of multilaterai general-purpose agreements wYiich regulate the
national and international activities in space. This direction can con-
ditionally be termed cooperation on the question of space activities.
5
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
= FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
On the other hand, joint scientific and technical activities between statPs _
presuppose the creation of the appropriate international mechanism of co-
operation, as well as a legal formalization of the relationships between
the participants in the internat3ona1 projects and programs. Th3.s also is
a legislative process, but is directly linkedwith the joint scientific and
technical activities of the states. -
In the book offered to the readers, basic attent3on has been given to exam-
ining the questions related to the second area of legislative activitiea,
sincP they have been least exrunined by the Soviet and foreign specialists ;
in the area of space 1aw. _
FOOTNOTES l. "Materialy XXIV S"yezda,KPSS" [Materials of the 24th CPSU Congress], ~
Moscow, Politizdat, 1971, p 30; "Materialy XXV S"yezda KPSS" [Materisls
of the 25th CPSU Congress], Moscaw., Politizdat, 1976, p 56.
- 2. PRAVDA, 13 April 1961.
~ 3. D. L. Harvey and L. C. Ciccoritti, "U.S.--Soviet Coope:.^ation in Space"
(with a foreword by Ambassador F. D. Kohler), Center for Advanced
- International Studies, University of Miami, 1974, p408.
6
. FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
~
FOR OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
PART T: TFiE LEGAL MECHANISM OF INTEFiNATIONAL
SF'ACE PROGRAMS
Cf{l1PTER 1: THE TREATY AS THE BASIC LEGAL INSTRUMENT UF INTERNATIONAL
COOPERATION IN SPACE DEVELOPMENT
I
Among the internatianal treaties relating to space activities, a particular
place is held by the general-purpose multilateral agreements which have
been worked under the United Nations, including: the TreatY on the Princi-
ples Governing the Acti�rities of States in the Research and Use of Space .
Including the Moon and Other Heavenly Bodies (1967), the Agreement on the
Rescuinr, of Coamonauts, the Return of Cosmonauts and the Return of Objecta
Launched into 5pace (1968), the Convention GoverninE International Reaponsi-
bility for Damage Caused by Space Objects (1972) and the Convention Govern-
inp, the Registration of Objects Le.unched into Space (1975).
The enormous significance of these documents which comprise the bases of
lax and order in space is indisputable. They contain the most general
standards for the activities of states in the given area, and these stand- -
ards are designed for an indeterminately long time and are recognized as
compulsor,r by a majority of states. A thorough analysis of the hiatory of
the elaboration, the content and significance of these agreements has been
made in the uorks of Soviet and foreign legal scientist3. These queations
have been taken up in the works of V. V. Aldoshin, E. G. Vasilevskaya,
r,, 11. Zhukov, C. P. Zadorozhnyy, F. N. Kovalev, Yu. M. Kolosov, Ye. A.
Y.orovin, M. I. I,azarev, P. Z. Lukin, B. C. Mayorskiy, G. A. Osnitskqya,
A. S. Piradov, A. A. Rubanov, Yu. M. Rybakov, 0. ti. Khlestov, I. I. Cheprov,
V. I. Shilin and others.1 -
Along with the designated agreements, there exists another, significantly
more numerous group of international agreements which regulate the joint _
activities of states in space. This is the question of the international
scientific and technical agreements which represent a legal form for es-
LablishinF relations betWeen states as related to their joint activities
of stud,yinp, and developing space. For a long period o: time these agree-
ments remained outside the viesr of the science of space lea, although they
encorrrpass u large number of states belonging to different sociopolitical
_ 7
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOEt OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
systems, und their role has been congtantly growing. 7'he international
npace pr.ograma of the USSR, the United States and Western Europe are based
on auch agreemente.2 At present their total number alread}r runs into the
hundredn.
' In line With the great scope of international space activities, the ques-
tion of the 1ega1 nature of the agreements governing cooperation in the
research and use of space and their place in the syetem of international
upace law is assuming an indisputable theoretical and practical interest.
� 1. 7'he Legal Nature of International Scientific and Technical Space
~ Agreements
International scientific and technical space agreements establish, a].ter or
abrogate reciprocal right3 and duties of states relating to their joint ac-
tivities in the area of the research and use of space for peaceNl purposes.
Agreement on joint activities in the acfentific and technical areas of apace
development comprises the basic content and subject of all these agreements.
Depending upon the selected criterion, such csgreements can be dividecl into:
general and special; international, intergovernmental and interdepartmental;
bilateral and multilateral (including regfonal); those concluded in a sim-
plified form and rrith the observing of all the known stages of drawing up a
treaty. They are also extremely diverse in terms of names. Do nll these
factors influence the legal force of the agreements and thefr classifica-
tion in the sphe:e of regulation by internationul law or civil lar+?
Soviet legal science proceeds from the necessity of a clear delimitatioci
of the public international legal relations Where the basic principals are
states acting on the internetional scene through their representative
bodies, and the civil law *elationships Where the basic principals arP the
citizens and organfzatior.s acting as legal entities. The first area of
legal relationships is included in the sphere of fnternational public law,
and the second is pgrt of the sphere of international private and nationgl .
lav.3
Here it is essential to bear in mind that the public law treaties betveen
states or between ststes and intergovernmentril organizations can create
provisions Which regulate civil law relationships. At the same time such
treaties also operate as sources of international public lav and sources
of International private law. For example, Article VIII of the Inter-
governmental dlgreement on the Intelsat International Communications Satel-
lite Organization establishes the general conditions for the concluding
of civil law contracts for the delivery of equipment and for the providing
of services.
AlthouPh the civil lav relation:, undoubtedly rue part of the overall legal
mechanism of international caoperation in the area of the research and use
of space, they comprise a relatively small portion of the legal relationships
8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
Fox orFictAL usE orn.Y
- which arise in the course of cooperatinn. The public 1aw sphere of cc+oper-
ation is of determining significance, and this includes a predominant major-
- ity of the international agreements in the scientific gnd technical area.
Tiie concern o� these agreements is the actions of stttteg as principals of -
nuthority nnd the sovereign carriers of international rights and obligations.
The object of such agreements, as a rule, is the important and fundamental
questions Which directly inYolve the interests of the states. `
The international legal nature of the intergovernmental and international
- agreements is indisputable. The question of interdepartmental agreements
- is more complicated, and they comprtse the majority among the scientific
and technical space agreements.
The state can act only through its bodies (of authority and state admin-
istration) which in international affairs act as its representatives. $e-
cnuse of the complicating and specializing of international relations and
- in particular, because of the growth of international economic and scientific-
technical ties, recently a general trend can be observed toward a broadening
of the range of state bodies engaged in carrying out international ties, and
bodies which within the limits of their competence are granted �ull power
to conclude international treaties. 7'his circumstance has been repeatedly
noted in the legal literature.4
The question o� what state bodies are granted full powers to conclude inter- -
national treaties has been left by international law completely to the dis-
cretion of the internal state legislution. Although the constitutions of
� a ma,jority of nations reserve these powers to the superior bodies of state '
authority and administration, there are constitutions Where it is directly
~ stated that certain categories of international treaties can be concluded
by individual governmental bodies.5 The right of state bodies to conclude
international treaties can be determined not only in constitutional enact-
ments but also by other sources of domestic state laW, by existing practice
or by previously concluded international treaties. This has provided jus-
' ti�ication to carry out in theory a separation of the state bodies involved
in external relations into constitutional, conventional and special.6
- In accord with the Soviet theory of international law, the bodies of foreign
relations include not only the departments of foreign affairs, but also
ocher domestic state bodies concerned With special questions of foreign re-
- lations, Within the limits of their competence as defined by the enforceable
enactments.7 In the USSR, among such�bodies in the area of international
cooperation in the research and use of space one obviausly vrould have to
put the USSR Acadeuy of Sc iences .
According to the Acaderry Charter, it is the supr,rior scientific institution
cf the USSR directly subordinate to the USSR Council of Ministers, and each
year the Acadecr4r submits a report on its activities to the council. The
Charter defines the right of the Academy to engage in international ties
(Articles 8, 11, 43"n" and 72).8
9
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OF'FICIAL USE ONLY
PrQCtice ahows that in the questions of international cooperation in the
area of the reaearch and use of epace, the USSR Academy of Sciencea acts as
abtate bocly of foreign relations with special competence, and the 3nter-
netional agreements concluded by it in this area should be v3eued as inter-
departmental.
In individual instances the right to conclude international agreements is
delegated by governmental decrees or by international treaties to the
Council on Internationa]. Cooperation in the Area of Space Research and Use
Under the USSR Acadedy of Sciences (the Intercosmoa Council), and this is
a domegtic state interdepaxtmental body which was set up upon government al
decision. In auch instancea the agreements concluded by the Intercoamos
Council shoula also be viewed as interdepaxtmental nr interinstitutional.9
In the United States the National Aeronautics and 3pace Adm3nistration
[NASA] is the state body of foreign relations with special competence in
the area examined by us; in France it is the National Space Research Center,
in Tndia, the Indian Space Research Organization of the Indian Government,
in Sweden, the Swedinh Administration for Space Activities, and so forth.
Certainly the superior bodies of state authority and state administration
in each specific instance or under general procedures can limit the special
competence of the bodies subordinate to them in terms of ttie range and
nature of agreements which can be concluded by them.
The question of the leagl nature of the interdepartmental agreements and
their relative force, in comparison With other international legsl enact-
ments, belongs among the insufficiently elaborated questions of treaty
law. Recently this has casumed great aignificance not only in such a
special area of international relations as collaboration in the develop-
ment of space, but also in other areas of international economic and
scientific-technical ties. In particular, it is important for developing
direct ties betWeen the ministries and departments of the CEKA countries.
In discussing the legal problems of socialist economic integration at an
international scientific conference organized by the Institute of State
and LaW of the USSR AcadeaLy of Sciences in 1971, the question of the legal
nature of interdepartmental ties was discussed among others. In the book
puhlished on the results of this conference, it Was pointed out that the
participants of the latter xere unanimous in describing interdepartmental
ties as interstate ones.10
This conclusion agrees fl.illy with the provisions of international laW that
in international relations a state can act only as a single entity, pro-
visions stetmaing from the principal of state sovereignty and the unity of
state pouer. On the international scene, state bodies can only be repre-
sentatives of the state, and the agreements concluded by them obligate not
only these bodies but also the corresponding states.
10
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
I'OIt UFFICIt1L USE ONLY
'Phe principals oP any international 1ega1 trenty (including also depart-
mental) nnd its partieg are the states and not the governmental bodiea which
hu ve concluded them.ll In other words, the rightg and dutie3 stemming from
intcrdepartmerital agreements are extended to the corresponding atates as o
wholc, and not just to thF ministries and departments which have signed the
ugreement.
This important theoretical and practicnl conclusion should not, however,
le$d to an underestimating of the role of the interstate and intergovern-
mental agreements. Although any international 1ega1 treaty, in placing ob-
1igations on the atates, is in this sensp intergovernmental, the partici-
pants in international intercourse resort to the concluding of treaties in
' the name of states and governments in those instances when they wish to
give them particular significance and authority. F'or example, thta is the
role of the intergovernmental agreement by the nine socialist atates to co-
operate in the research and use of space for peaceful purposes of 13 July
1976, and the intergovernmental space agreements between the USSR and United
_ States of 24 May 1972 and 18 May 1977 signed on the basis of the existing
interdepartmental agreements between the USSR Acadeupr of Sciences and NASA,
or the intergovernmental agreement on the system and organization of the
Intersputnik space communication3.
In Soviet practices, the intergovernmental space agreements are of great .
significance also because a number of ministr.ies and departments are en- _
gaged in space acti;�ities in the nation, and ensuring the fulfillment of
' international agreements within the nQtion is facilitated in concluding
agreements on the governmental level.
Due to the fact that interdepartmental ties develop actively in international
scientific and ter,hnical cooperation and space development, a clear defini-
tion of the intraytate right of the powers of the corresponding bodies to
conclude international treaties assumes great significance, as does the
preventing of contradictions between treaties concluded among bodies of
the same states which possess a different range of competence.
- Agreements on scientific and technice.l questions of space research coneluded
directly betWeen scientific research institutes and the acientific eallec-
tives of different nations must be differentiated from interdepartmental _
agreements. As an example one might give the bilateral and multilateral
~ agreements between the astronomicel institutions of the academies of -
sciences iii the sociQlist nations for cooperQting on satellite tracking
and conducting scientific research on the basis of theae observations.
Obviously this same category would include certain agreements on analogous
questions concluded by the foreign scientific institutions of the U.S.
_ Smithsonian Observatory. If such agreements are not reiniorced by inter- .
governmental or interdepartmPntal agreements, they cannot have an inter- -
national legal nature and do nc,': impose obligations on the corresponding
states. -
11
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FoR orFtcinI, vsr orrT,v
Now let us examine the question of whether or not the form of scientific
and technical agreement;s {nfl.ttenr.e;: theic� 1ef_,,nl. forcc ns acts of inter-
nationnl law. `1'hi., cltiestior, i:; of intec�c:;t clue to the Cf1Ct that a mujority
of the scientific nnd Lechttical_ ::price atfl�eenetit,s been eoneluded in a
simplified form, that is, Uy jln exchanp,e ot' note , or letters, ur by the
signing of agreed upon protocols or mcmoraridum:;.
. A simplifie(i fortn of international trefltie:s i:; ,il::n characteristic for
modern treaty practices of stntes. 41ith thr. develupment and specialization
of international relat:toiis, the riutnher of af.;reem: nt^ concluded between
states in a simplified form has been cont.inuously growing. Authors who
have studied this que stion have pointed out,, for exa.mple, that of the l 4,834 agreements publistied by the J.,ezLvue t,)I' Idations, 1,078 were concluded
by an exchznge of notes.12 01' the 1,000 inLernationzil treaties which were
- first registered with t}ie UP1 ~eci�et.ai�iat, ?IIO were in the form of an ex-
chanqe of notes.13 At F,resent the percetrt.rsf?e of such ngreements is growing '
even more. f{owever it is ohvi.our thflt not an,y e:cchatige of notes forms an
agreement, but only that whic}i t�eiriforces ful richieved international under-
- standing.
Modern international law dc?es not recowni a cor!pui:,or,v form of inter-
national t;�eaty. Jn ttii:, que:>t.iou the &,cr,rinc awi pc�tictices of inter-
national lrLw havc been uniirii.MOu:;. T}ie fIrI Int'Irnfitional. L,aw Commission has
pointed out in one of i':s drafts t.iiat r,fie simplified form does not reduce
the leFal f'orce of thc trefity.l''
The 1969 Vienna Conven`ion c;i I�*,ernatior:a]. 'I'reaty Law considers inter- r..ational arreements a.trong tre~Lties regnrdless of whether or not slich agree-
ments are contained in one or several interrelated documents, and in addi-
tion regardless of their cer.crete name (Article 2, Point 1"a"). Although
the Vienna Convention regulatea only the law of treaties concluded in a written form, it specially notes that this circumstance does not involve
the legal force and effectiveness of the international n.greements concluded
not in a written fcrM (tlrticle 3).
Thus, the form and the name of the international sc~-ntific and technieal
spmce agreements depe:id tott.lly upon the will. uL" ttle agreeing part;ies and
are of no significance :'or qualifyinFr, Lhnm as ciociunents of international
_ 1
law. A
The same can be said on the number of nnrtiripqn�.~~ ~n international agree-
ments. Without creatinF, a:. n rule, ric;hts acid o!~lif;rltions for third
states xithout their aprcer.!nnt, a treaty hns comr.ulsnry force for all its
pr3.rticipants regardless of wtie�tiei� the +,re:ity is bi.la{.eral or multiIateral.
An anulysi_- made makes it rossi:,l, to .;ta�,? tn, i'o:l,:.winrt� A majority of +documents ^overed by the uvernl ; c^nc~pt of "in?:~,rna+,ionnl scientific and
technical agreements in the arers of sprsre resenrch and use" can be con- ,
sidered among the international laW trenties nnd is uithin the sphere of
1G
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
legal relationships regul.ated by international public 1aw. The obligatory
legal force of these documents for the corresponding states does not depend
either on the level of the state bodies which have signed them, upon.the
number of purticipants or upon the form and name. The rights and duties
deriving from these agreements axe extended not only to the bodies which have directly concluded them, but also -to the states which the given bodies -
represent.
As space is turned more and more into an area of economic activity and as
the international oreanizations concerned with the questions of its com-
mercial use continuously grow, the significance of the agreements which
are civil law contracts and a.re regulated by the procedures of inter-
nntional private and national law wfll increase. However, here in the
future international 1ega1 enactments wi11 be of determining significance
in orp;auizing international space collaboration.
= Of course, there is an entire area of international cooperation in the
study of space among individual scientists, scientific collectives and in-
stitutions of various states, as well as along the lines of internatfonal
public organizations; this area is not with3n the sphere of 1ega1 relations,
although it cioes play an important role in the overall mechanism of inter-
national cooperation.
2. Scientific and Technical Space Agreements as Sources of International
Space Law
Scientific and technical space agreements which are part of the sphere of
international public law are considered in a definite area of it, inter-
national space law. The question arises of what is the role of these agree-
ments in shaping the procedures of international space law?
c^or answering this question, it is essential briefly to take up a notion
which was widely found, particularly in the past, and according to which
only a certain portion of international treaties can play a law-making
role.
The dividing of all international treaties into law-making treatiesl5
(traitds-loi, Vereinbarungen) and contractual treaties16 (trait6s-contracts,
VertrKge) spread in the doctrine of international law beginning at the end
of the previous century.17 As is known, this theory states that the law-
, making treaties include only those which contain general, abstract standards
- of law which are new or existed previously in the form of customs. As for
the contractual treaties, they create or abrogate specific rights and obli-
gations of states, snd they regulate interstate relations as applied to a
specific case. Only the law-forming treaties, in the opinion of the sup-
porters of this theory, can be viewed as the sources of international law.
Certuin authors have gone even farther and have stated that only a multi-
lateral treaty can be law-making, while bilateral treaties generally cannot
be the sources of international law, regardless of the nature of the stand-
ards contained in them.18
13
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
It must be pointed out, however, that the designated dividing of treatiea has not gained universa'L recognition in the theory of international 1aw, _
' and in practice it makes no sense since the legal force of an international
treaty does not depend upon the category it is in. Both in the past and at
present, along, with the supporters of this theory, there has also been a
- large number of opponents. At the end of the 19th century, the prominent
Russian international 1.ega1 expert N. M. Korkunov, while 3n principle ac-
cepting this division, noted the law-making nature of any international
treaty.19 In the Soviet doctrine of international law the predominant viewpoint 's
the one according to which "any current internntional treaty has a 1e~ .~ly
binding force for its participants, and in this sense is law-making." ~
The Soviet international legal expertg D. B. Levin and A. N. Talalayev
held somewhat different positions on these questions.
D. B. Levin in his book "Osnovnyye Probleny Sovremennogo Mezhdunarodnogo
Prava" [Basic Problems of Modern International Law], recognized the defin-
ite significance of dividinp treaties into law-making and contractual.
}iawever here he did not deny the role of the latter as sources of inter-
national law, but merely said that "law-making treaties are of greater
significance as sources of international law."21 A. N. Talalayev i.n his
work "Yuridicheskaya Priroda Mezhdunarodnogo Dogovora [The Legal Nature of
an International Treaty] assumed a dividing of treaties into legislative
and nonlegislative, and the latter are not to be considered sources of in-
ternational law. Here the author himself emphasi2Pd that it would be very
difficult in practical terms to isolate the treaties which would not con- -
tain the provisions of international law, and that treaties which are not
legislative "can almost not be encountered in the official collections of
the international treaties of states.1122
The widely known international lawyer L. Oppenheim, without denying the
"convenience" of dividing treaties into the designated categories, has
noted that in principle all international treaties are lar-making, as they
are binding for their participants.23 A similar viewpoint has been ad-
vanced also by H. Kelsen, S. Visher, S. Rousseau, P. Guggenheim and other
prominent bourgeois scholars.
With good reason the UN International Law Commission, in taking up the
questions of treaty law, found it impossible to recognize the dividing of -
international treaties intA the mentioned two categories, and no such
division exists in the 1969 Vienna Convention on International Treaty Lart.
This does not mean, of course, that in this manner any differences are
obliterated between the treaties which establish general principles rrhich
are widely recognized by the states and the rules of relationships betWeen
states and the treaties which contain more specific special procedures
which are valid only in terms of a restricted range of states or just tWo
states. Undoubtedly, the former hold a more important and determining
14
FOR OFFICIA:. USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR 0FFSCIAI. USE ONLY
_ nliLce i.n the syatern of iriternational law, and consequently also among its -
sOUCCC9.
- However in practical terms it is extreme7,y difficult to make a strict de-
limitation between these categories of treatieg, in particular by using a
criterion of agreater or lesser commonness of the proviaions contained in
_ them. Without saying tha,t both general and concrete provisions are to be
found frequently in the same treaty, the very concept of the commonness o�
~ an inL-er:,utional 1ega1 standard is extremely imprecise and elastic. A
- standard can be general in terms of its content, it may have an abstract
nat ure, but be in force only in relations between t�ao atates, that is, it
may not be generally recognized.
At the same time a provision whtch is conerete in its content but is not
designed for repeated application may be binding on a large number of
3tates participating in the treaty, and for this reason it can be consid.ered
general frow the viewpoint of the group of states for which it has binding
force. Thus, if the provisions of international law are examined from the
viewpoint of their action in time and space, we would be forced to state
that the provisions, including those which are found in the sfune treaty,
huve the most divergent degree of commonness.
Let us illustrate this from the example of one of the scientific and tech-
nical space agreements be-tween two capitalist countries.
On 27 February 1965, by the exchange of diplomatic notes, an intergovern-
mental agreemen't was concluded between the United States and Mexico for
establishing a satellite tracking station on Mexican territiory.24 In con-
cluding the agreement, the government of Mexico, in defending its independ-
ent �oreign poltcy course, demanded that along with the provisions defining
the procedure for establishing, operating and financing this station, the
text of the agreement would include references to certain general principles
which should guide the states in the research and use of space. Previously
these principles had been proclaimed in the resolutions of the UN General
Assembly (the Space Treaty at that time did not yet exist). Thus the agree-
ment mentioned space research and use for the good of man and in the in-
tcrests of all states rep,ardless of the degree of their economic and scien-
ti�ic development, as well as the fact that the activities of states in
space should be carried out in accord With international laK, including the
UN Charter (Article VI).
w
As n result, the strictly special agreement contained both concrete provi-
_ sions as r+ell as provisions of a most general nature which, in being formu-
lnted by that time only in the resolutions of the UN General Assembly, ac-
quired binding legal force for the states participating in this agreement.
From the example of this agreement, one can see how difficult it is to cnn-
sistently make a division of treaties into laW-making and contractual (here
- there are elements of both), even if the fundamental possibility of such a -
division is assumeci.
15
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
- FOit OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
_ Provisiong which are nf ageneral nature are encountered as a whole in a
seriea of scientific and technical space agreements. Thus of great signifi-
cunce for the progressive development nf international space law has been _
the obligation of the USSR and United States to cooperete cunong themselves
and with other nations in the area of settlittg the interttational legal prob-
lems of space research and use, as stated in Article 4 of the U.S. und USSR
Agreement of 18 May 1977� The particular role of the two leading space -
powers in strengthening law und order in space is indisputable.
, The rulen of u technical nature which are cnntained in the scientific and
technical agreements are often designed for repeated use in the relat3ons
between the treaty-making states. For example, the Intergovernmental Soviet-
French Agreement of 30 June 1966 mentions not specific obligations of the
parties to carry out one or several experiments, but rather it is concerned
with the basic directions of cooperation by the two countries in develnping
space over the long run, the mechanism o� implementing such cooperation and
the obligations of the parties to provide help and support to the interested
orpanizations of both countries. '
E'inull,y, those aqreements which consist predominantly of conrete, technical
obliE;ations of the parties involved in conducting joint experiments also
play an important role in shaping the new provisions o� space law. It is
essential to bear in mind that some of the provisions contained in them
znd which are repPated in unalogous agreements in the future ma}r assume
, the nature of agenerally recognized provision of state law. The Well
Y.nowri Polish international legal expert M. Lachs has noted that "often the
use of certain principles of even a purely technical nature in treaties of
the sfune type can be the basis for a broader practice of the states and
thereby become incorporated among the generally recognized principles oi"
international law.1125
_ For example, the uniform special agreements on creating stations for opti-
cal observations of satellites concluded by the USSR With many nations have
given rise to principles for the establishing and functioning of such sta-
tions and these principles are Widely recognized and observed in gractice.
In particular there is the principle in accord With Which the scientific
result- obtained by these stations are to be used by the collaborating
staten on equal bases and upon agreement among them are to be made avail-
- Rble to the world scientific community. In this manner there arose the
principle in accord With xhich the states, as a rule, do not make recipro-
cal payments for ,joint scientifie experiments in space When the results
are the general property of the corresponding states.
The circumstance that nccording to the Statute of the World Court in set-
tlinr ciisputes turned over to it it should accept "both p,eneral and special"
internaluionnl conventions Which establish rules de�initel,y recoPni2ed by
*.he dt :piitinp states (Article 38, Point 1"a" of the Statute) is affirma-
tion thnt special agreements, along with generrsl ones, should be vieWed
as laW-makinE sources of internationa.l space laW which create obligatory
rules of conduct for the participants of the corresponding agreements.
16
FOR OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
An for the relative role of the variouo ecientific and technicul agreements r
in t}ie law-making process, in the sense nf creating new standards of conduct,
as was pointed out ir, the individual exampl.es, in bilateral and multilateral
agreements, there are encountered standarda of a general character which -
ctre 3ubsequently rein�orced ag principles of space lnw, standards Which de-
vplop and Concretixe general principlea in terms of definite types of joint -
nctivities by atates in space, ar.d, finally, gtandards which merely apply
already exigting principles and standards to certain situations Which arise
in the process of cooperation. And all the deaignated types of standards
cun be found in the same agreement.
- Only by analyzing a specific international agreement is it possibie to an-
swer the question of whether or not it introduces new essential elements ~
into the development of international space 1aw. On this level of great N
interest is an analysis of the multilateral agreements of a general neture :
which regulate entire areas of relationships involved in space cooperation ~
and which in termg of their aime come close to univexsal ones (for example, ~
the constituent acts of the international applications satellite systems).
Undoubtedly, the standards which develop in the form of cooperation between '
~ states with different social syatems have the greatest oprortunity for
recognition by a Uroad group of states.
The provisions of scientific and technical agreements Which run contrary
: to the mar.datory standards of general international law cannot be viewed
as valid or even more as creating nex standards of conduct.26 In terms of
international space law, many ,jus eogens provisions are containe4 in raulti-
lateral agreements on space law Worked out Within the United Nations. For
example, any understanding Will be invalid between .,*Cates should it involve
the appropriation of a portion of space or the refusal of solidary liability
in carrying out joint activities in space, since such an underatanding
would run contrary to the mandatory provisions of the 1967 Space Treaty
and the 1972 Convention on Liability for Lasses.
On the basis of What has been stated, the �o1loWing conclusions can be
draWn.
1 In the scientific tud technical space agreements, the provisions of space
- law are to be found wi_th the most divergent degree of commonness both in
terms of content and in terms of the range of states covered by them, in-
cluding provisions which are subsequentl} gener3llyr recognized.
~ The interstate, intergovernmental and interdepartmental agreements on co-
operation in space development, in comprising the sphere of international
legal reFUlation, are sources o� international space law �or the states
concluding them even in those inst ances when the rslative role of such
agreements in the shaping of neti+ general principles of the law is insig-
nificrint.
17
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
Modern international space law cannot be viewed in iaolation frori thc treaty
provigiong which regulate acientific and technical coo7eration among atates
in research and use of apace for peaceful purpnees. Although many of these
prov3gions gre not of a generul nature but rather a concrete nnd special
one, they are an important component element in international space law,
and they are organically part of it gnd serve an the basis for the further
elaboration of its general principles.
3. The principle of Cooperation in International 5pace Law
In line with the particular role of international cooperation in the area
of space development, it is of interest to bring out the 1ega1 content of
the principle of cooperation from the viewpoint nf international space 1aw.
In the Western literature on this question, opposing viewpoints are en-
countered running from the proclamation of cooperation in gpace as an un-
conditional duty of al1 stateg to the complete negation of the legel force
' of this prfnciple.
At a seminar on the teaching of space law held in Buenos Aires in 1972, the
Latin American legal experts approved a declaration which stated that in
line aith the coming into force of the Treaty on the Principles for the
Activities of States in the Research and Use of Space, Including the Maon
and Other Celeatial Bodies (1967), international cooperation "is a legal
obligation establishing the legality of the activities carried out in space
and on celestial bodiea."27 Analogous statements were made in the speeches
by representatives frdm certain nations in the United Nations and at inter-
national scientific conferences.28 The legal adviser of the Indian Ministry
of Civil Aviation, in an article :.ablished in 1973, also declared that29co1-
laboration in space affairL is a recognized obligation of all states.
HoWever the Dutch professor D. Goedhuis has proposed that the 196~ treaty
"refrained Prom prescribing a definite obligation in tris area."3 A similar
viertpoint Was stated by the Well known Fngliah specialist for air and space
laW, Bing Cheng.31
Obviously the given question requires an approach fron: broader positions.
With vL11 the significance of r.ooperation for the development of spuce re-
serirch, it cannot be viewed as g monopaly on just this area of interstate
relations. Equally important is the role of cooperation in political,
economic and other spheres of international life. In this regard thP legal
content of the principle of cooperation in space law should not be inter-
preted in isolation from the sense which is invested in the concept of the
principle of cooperation in modern international law generall,y.
- The principle of cooperation among states is among the seven basic princi-
ples in internationnl law unanimously affirmed by all the tJtt members in
the Declaration on the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly
Relations and Cooperation BetWeen States in Accord with the UN Charter.32
_ According to this declaration, cooperation betWeen states, regardless of
18
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAI. USE ONLY
the differences in the3.r political, economic and gocial systems, in the
vnriouq areas of international relationg is an international 1ega1 obliga-
tion.
At the ncune time not any cooperation ia proclaimed gs such nn oblip;ation in
the declaration, but only that wh3ch corresponds to the UN Charter, that is,
cooperation carried out in observing the other generally recognized princi-
ples of international law. mhis is refleeted in the very name of the prin-
ciple: "the obligation of statea to cooperate with one another in accord
with the UN Charter." In elucidating the sense of this principle in the
declaration, ita binding nature is particularly emphasized in relation to
the tasks of maintaining international peace and secur3ty. Sn enumerating
the specific types of collaborat3on, the declaration states that cooperation
should be carried out in accord with the principlea of sovereign equality
and nonintervention. The principle of cooperation between states 3s in- -
terpretefl analogously in the Final Statement of the European Conference on
Security and Cooperation,33
The principle of cooperation in accord with the UN Charter, as has been _
pointefl out in Soviet literature, reflecta the basic idea of peaceful co-
existence, and presupposes active relationships among states in different
areas.34 This principle and the conditions of its implementation are fully
applicable to relations involved in the research and use of Q~,ace, as one of the areas of interstate relations.
At the same time, as applied to space activities by states, this general
principle of international 1aw should be examined in light of the principles
set down in the 1967 Peace Treaty which is one of the basic sources of in-
ternational space law.
The desire of the states to provide maximum aid to the all-round develop- `
ment of international cooperation in space has been stated in the preamble
and in many articles of this treaty. This has provided solid grounds for
- a number of authors to put cooperation among states in the peaceful use
and research oi space among the basic principles of international space
law.35 -
The Preamble of the Treaty states the desire to aid in broad international `
cooperation both in the scientific and legal aspects of the research and
use of space for peacefui purpoaes. Article I states that the states are
to assist and encourage international cooperation in scientific research;
Article III also mentions the development of international eooperation and
mutual understanding. Article IX establishes that the member states of the
treaty "should be guided by the prtnciple of cooperation And mutual aid."
Thus the Space Treaty has reinforced the principle of cooperation among
states as one of the general principles and basic provisions of inter-
national space laW. However, in the treaty this principle is elso not
vieWed in isolation from the other generally recognized principles or as
19
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOtt OFFYCIAL U5E ONLY
an unconditional legal duty. Tt is closely linked to all the general
princ3ples o� international law and international space laW. The latter,
- as is known, in accepting the basic principlea of 3nternational public law,
of which it is a part, alsd has 3ts own elaborated system of geizeral prin-
ciples.
~ For this reason the legality of one or another type of activity in space
is determined not only by the principle of cooperation, as is atated in
- the above-mentioned declaration of the Latin Amer3can legal experts, but
rather by the entirE aggregate of the principles of international law (in-
clud3ng space law). Only 3n observing all these principles can national
and international activities 3n space be viewed as conforming to the law.
A number of provisions of the Space Treaty derives from the pr3nciple of .
cooperat3on and makes it more specific. Among such provisions one could
put, for example, the duty to consider the corresponding intereats of all
other states in carrying out space activities (Article IX); not to c,reate
potentially dangerous interference in the activities of other states
(Article IX); to provide all possible help to the cosmonautcs of othEr
states (Article V); on equal bases to view requests from states to provide
an opportunfty for thQm to observe the flight of space objects (Article X);
to inform all nations of the nature, course, place and results of their
activities in space (Article XI), and certain other provisions,
As in other areas of international relations, the principle of cooperation
- in space law should be interpreted primarily as the duty of states to col-
laborate with one another in the area of maintaining international peace
and security in developing space. As for the rest, this principle pre- -
supposes only the obligation to maximally abet and assist in the develop-
ment of broad contacts and in carrying out joint work related to the study
and use of space for peaceful purposes.36 `
ps for the specific rights and duties in -the arecL oP scieiitific and techni-
cal space cooperation, these can derive only .�rom treaties specifically
concluded for this purpase by states and intergovernmental orRanizations.
~ Proceeding from their needs, interests and possibilities, the states, by reciprocal coordination and understandings reinforced in international
treaties, determine the nature and degree of their involvement in the
various international space development projects and programs. In these
treaties the principle of cooperation is concretized and g1lven a real con- -
_ tent, and is manifested in definite legal relationships. .
The formal consideration of ar~y cooperation as an unconditional inter-
national legal obligation, in isolation from the other general principles
of space law; would be tantamount to forcing the states to participate in
any ,joint activity in space, even against their national interests. This
undoiibtedly runs contrary to sovereignty and the sovereign equality of
states.
20
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
V
FOR OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
F'OOmNOTES
_ 1. 7'he biblioaraphy of Soviet literature on intcitnationgl gpace 1aw cnn
be found in the Appendix td this book. A Worldwide bibliography of
' literature dn Eipace law from 1964 through 1972 has been publiahed in
th#~, tll711UEiig of the International Institute of Space Lciw. Seec "Inter-
n.ational rngtitute of Space Law of the Internationgl Agtronautical
Federation. WorldWide $ibliogrgphy," IISL, $ibl., 1964-1972, nog 1-9.
2. The ter.ts of the bgsic agreements concluded by the USSR can be found
in the Appendix to the book: V. S. I/creghchetin, "Kesmos.
Sotrudnicheato. f'ravo" [8pace. Cooneration. LuW], Moscoa, Nauka,
1974, pp 145-166. The U.S. agreementg signed before 1965 can be found
in the book: "United St$tea International Space F'rdgramg. Steff iteport
Prepared for the Committee on AeronautiCC1 and Space 5ci�ncea," United
States Sengte, 30 cTuiy 1965. F'or the geries of agreemrnts signed by
the Western European nations, see: "Bagic Texts, Rules and Regulations,
Agreement3," in: "boc. ESRO SP-4," 1969.
3. F'or this see: L. A. Lunts, "Mezhdunarodnoye Chgstnoye Pravo" [Inter-
national Private Law], Moscow, 1959, p 9; Ye� T. Ugenko, "Forrty
- Regulirovaniya Sotsialisticheskogo Mezhdunarodnogo Razdeleniya Truda"
(Forms of Regulating the International Socialist Division of Labor),
Moscow, 1965, pp 124 et seq.; "Mezhvedomstvennyye Svyazi v Usloviyakh
Sotsialisticheskoy Ekonomicheako,y Integratsii" (Interdepartmental Ties
Under the Conditions of Socialist Economic Integration], eiited by
Ye. T. Usenko, Moscow, Yuridicheskaya Literatura, 1973, pp 10 and 107.
4. "Kurs Mezhdunarodnogo Prava v Shesti Tomakh" [Course of International
Law in Six Volumes], Vol IV, Moscow, Nauka, 1968, p 239; I. P.
Blishchenko, "Vneshniye Funktsii Sotsialisticheskogo Gosudarstva"
[The External Functions of a Socialist State], Moscow, Yuridicheskaya
Literstura, 1970, pp 139-140; N. V. Mironov, "The Nierarchy of Stand-
ards of Ir.*ernational Treaties in Their Application itih Interstate LaW
of the USSR," UCHENYYE ZAPISKI VNIISZ, No 22, Moscow, 1.970, pp 123
et seq.
5. See, for example, Article 66 (Paragraph 2) of the Uniot: Constitutional
I,aw of Austria of 1 October 1920 ("Konstitutsii $urzhuazraykh Gosudarstv
Yevropy" (Constitutions of European Bourgeois 3tates), Moscow, Inoatran-
naya Literatura, 1957, P 39)�
6. "Kurs Mezhdunarodnoqo Prava...," Vol IV, pp 17-18; Ye.
the Lepal Nature of Indirect Ties Through the Ministries
ments of the CEMA Countries," "Mezhvedomstvennyye 3vyazi
Sotsialisticheskoy Ekonomicheskoy Integratsii," Moscoa,
I,iteratura, 1973, p 14.
21
FOR OPPICIAL USE ONLY
T. Usenko, "On
and Depart-
v Usloviye.kh
Yuridicheakeya
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOtt dFFICIAL USL ONLY
'j. "Kurs Mezhdunarodnogo Prava...," Vol IV, p 26.
8. Thp numbering o� the articleg is given from the text of the Charter of
the USSR Acaden~y of 5cienees Approved by the 6eneral. Asnembly hf the
- tJ55R Acgdemy of Scienceg of 1 July 1963 rtith emendmentg acce-j.,,ed up to
4 March 1975. "Ugtary Akademi i Nauk BSSTi" ( Charterg of the U89R Acacletqy _
o� Sciencesj, Moscow, Nauka, 1975, pP 155-183.
9. For the cottcept of interingtitutional tregties as n variety of tregtieg -
betaeen states, see: N. V. Mironnv, The Legal Nature of International
" "Mezhvedomstvennyye Svyazi v Ugloviyakh
Intergovernmental Agreements,
Sotgir,listicheskoy Ekonomicheskoy Integratsii," p 36.
10. "Mezhvedomstvennyye Svyaxi v Usloviygkh Sotsialisticheskoy Ekonomichegkoy
Integrataii," p 5�
11. A. N. Talalayev, "Mezhdunarodnyye Dogovory v Sovremennom Mire" (Inter-
notional pelations in the Modern World], MoscoW, Mezhdunarodnyye
Otnosheniya, 1973, p 12; I. I. Lukashuk, "Storony v Mezhdunarodnykh
Dogovorakh" (Parties in International TreatiesJ, Moscow, 1966, p 8;
"Mezhvedomstvennyye Svyazi v Usloviyakh Sotsialisticheskoy Elconomicheskoy
Integratsii," pp 12, 15, 29, 66, 171; and so forth. See also: L. Oppen-
heim, "Mezhdunarodnoye Pravo" [Interntitional LaW], Vol I, Semivolume 2,
tdoscoa, Inostrannaye Literatura, 1949, pP 426-427; A. Ferdroas,
"Mezhdunarodnoye Pravo," tdoacow, Inostrannaya Literatura, 1959, PP 172-
175; H. $lix, "Treaty-Making Power," London, 1960, p 20.
12. "British Year $ook of International Law," 1952, Vol 29, p 205� See also:
M. Frankovskaya, "The Exchange of Notes ss a Form of International
Agreement," GOSUDARSTVO I PRAVO, Warsaa, No 1, 1965, PP 5-6�
13. L. N. Mataradze, "Forma Mezhdunarodnogo Dogovora" [The Form of an Inter-
national Treaty], Tbiliai, 1c71, p 20.
lk. "Report of the International Law Commission," XVI Session, 1962, P 12.
15. 'I'heY are also called law-forming, lgw-setting, or legislative treaties,
laW treaties, and so forth.
16. 7'hey are also termed contract treaties.
17. This division Was proposed for the first time by the German international
legal experts C. Bergbohm and H. Triepel (C. Bergbohm, "Stsatsvertrage
und Gesetze als Quellen des VtSlkerrechts," Dorpat, 1876, p79 et seq. ;
}i. Triepel, "Vdlkerrecht und Landesrecht," Leipzig, 3899, p 27 et seq.).
18. H. $riggs, "The Lav of Nations," NeW York, 1952, P46�
19� N. M. Korkunov, "Mezhdunarodnoye Pravo," St Petersburg, 1886, pp 111-112. `
22
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
20. G. M. munkin, "Teoriya Mexhdunarodnogo prava" [The 7'hedry of Inter-
nationul Lnw], Moncow, Mexhdunaradnyye Otnosheniya, 1970, p 108.
21. D. B. Levin, "Osnovnyye prob].eir~y 5ovremennogo Mezhdunarodnogo Prnva"
[Bnsic problemg of Modern International Lgw], Moscow, Gosyurizdat,
1958, p260. In a book publiahed in 1974, D. B. Levin recognizen the
1aW-making nature of gny internatiangl treaty ("Alcrual'nyye Problem}r"
Teorii Mezhdunsrddndgo prave CUrgent Problemg di the 7'heory o� Inter-
national Law], Moscow, Nauka, 1974, p 75).
22. A. N. Talalayev, "Yuridicheskayg priroda Mezhdunarodnogo Dogovora"
(The Legal Nature of an International Treety), Moscow, IMO, 1963,
pp 14o-i64.
23. L. Clppenheim, "Mexhdurarodnoye pravo," Vol I, Semivolume 1, Moscow,
Indstrannaya Literatura, 1948, p 409�
24. "United States Interngtional Spuce Programs," pp 122-132.
25. M. Lachs, "Mnogoatoronniye Dogovory" [Multilateral Treaties], Moscow,
Inoatrannaya Literatura, 1960, pp 263-264. ,
,
26. See Article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on Ititernational Treaty
- I,aW.
27. "EnseHanza del Derecho Internacional," UNESCO-CNIE, Buenos Aires, 1972,
p 81.
28. UN boc. A/AC.105/C. 2LSR. 197, 5 April 1973, p 3; M. A. Ferrer, "Earth
Orbital Station3," "Proc. XVIth Colloq. Law Outer Space," Davis, 1974,
pp 210-211; A. A. Cocca, "Remote Sensing of Natural Resources by Means
of Space Technology: A Latin American Point of VieW," in: "Legal Im�- plications of Remote Sensing from Outer Space," Leyden, A. W. Sijthoff,
1976, pp 63-64.
29. S.' Bhatt, "International Problems Concerning Use of Space," "Intern. �
Studies," Jawaharlal IQehru Univ., 1973, Vol 12, No 2, p 269. -
30. "Report of the 54th Conference of the International LaW Aasociation,"
The Hague, 1970, p 434.
31. B. Cheng, "Le Trait6 de 1967 sur 1'escape," JOURNAL DU DROIT IIQM-
NATIONAL, No 39 1968, p 616.
32. "Resolution of the UN General Assembly 2625 (XXV) of 24 October 1970.
- 33. PRAVDA, 2 August 1975.
34. A. P. Movchan, "Kodifikatsiya i Progressivnoye Razvitiye Mezhdunarod-
nogo Prava" [Codification and the Progressive Development of Inter-
_ national Law], Moscow, Yuridicheskaye Literatura, 1972, p 171.
23 .
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOx oFrtCrnt. usE ocLY
35. Among the Soviet works on the baeic principles of internntianal space
lau, see: 0. P. ZhUkov, "Kogmichegkoya pravo" [BpnCe LaW], Moscoa,
Mezhdunarodryye Otnosheniya, 1966, pp 23-55; A. S. Pirgdov, "Koamos f
Mezhdunnroclnoye Prgvo" [Space and Internntionnl Laa], Moacow, Znaniye,
1970, pp 6-17; "Mezhdunaroclnoye Kogmicheskoye pravo" (Tnternational _
8pace Law], MogCOW, Mezhdunarodnyye Otnosheniya, 1974, pp 69-94; G. P.
zgflorozhnyy, "7'he Internatione,l IAW Conditiong of Space," in "Kure
Mezhdunarodnoga Prava" (Course of International Law], Mogcoa,
Mezhdunarodnyye Otnosheniyg, 1972, pp 154-161.
36. An analogoua viewpoint has been gtated by Ye. P. Kamer.etskaya (Ye. P.
Kamenetgkqys, "Sotrudnichestvo Gosudarstv v Osvoyenii Kosmosa v Ramkakh
Mezhdunarodnykh Organizataiy" [Cooperation Among Statee in Space ne-
velopment Within Internatidnal Organizutions], Condidate bisgertetion
_ Resume, Moscovr, 1976, PP 10-11) .
24
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOtt dFFICIAL USE ONLY
CNApTER 2: MULTILAmENAL COLLA$ORATION OF THE SOCIALIST NAmION5.
THE IN'rERCOSMOS PROdRAM
1. 7'he Internatioral Lega1 Mechanism of the Intercogmog Program
Yntercosmog is a multilateral program of cooperation among the socialist
~ countries in the research and use of a ace for
p peaceful purposes. Tt is
A one of the manifestations of economic integration among the aocialist
nationg. 7'he collective elaboration of the most important scientific and
technical problems which are of interest to a number of states, as aell as
specialization and cooperation in solving these problems have made it pos-
sible for the socialist countries to more fully utilize the achievementa
- of the ncientific and technical revolution in the intereata oP the national
economy.
The Intercosmos P:ogram ia one of the moat succeasfully developing and ef-
fective programs of international cooperation in the study and development
of space. The joint development and creation of scientific equipment for
earth satellites, spacecraft, geophysical and meteorological rockets, a
nwnber of completed theoretical and experimental works in the area of space
physics, meteorology, cormnunications, space biology and medicine--these are
just some of the results of the joint activities of the acientific and pro-
duction collectives in the socialist nations under the Intercoanas Program.l
The birth of this program goes back to 1965, when upon the initiative of
the USSR an exchange of letters Wes made between the heads of government
of the socialist nations on a pooling of efforts i.n t'he reseerch and use of
space for peaceful purposes.
On 14 April 1965, A. N. Kosygin, chairman of the USSR Council of Ministers,
turned to the heads of government of the socialist nations in a letter in
Which he proposed that a study be made of opportunities for collsboration
by the socialist countries in such areas as organizing long distaace radio
communications and television, studying the upper layers of the atmos-
phere and space using meteorological and geophysical rockets and earth
satellites, space ptysics, biology and medicine. The proposal of the
Soviet government rras met aith great interest in the socialist countries.
25
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USB ONLY
In accord with the basic understanding regched by the heads of government
in November 1965 and in April 1966, conferences were held in Moscow for the
representatives nf Bulgaria, Hungary, the GDR, Cuba, Mongolin, poland,
- Romnnia, the USSIi and the CSSR at which they discussed the content, forms
- and directiong of gpace coopei�ation considering the scientific and techni-
cal poasibilitieg and the extant scientific gchools in the individual
countries.2
On the basis of the Soviet proposal to make "oviet rocketry, available for
Joint work, particular attention was given to the poesibilitics of develop-
ing scientific equipment in the socialist countries for the satellites and
research.
The conferences ended With the passage of coordinated documents Which were
apprnved by the governmentg oP the participating nations. The firat of
them was termed: The Report of the Conference of the Representatives of
the Socialist Countries on the Research and Use of Space for Peaceftil. Pur-
poses of 20 November 1965, and the second: The Report of the Meeting of
Experts from the Socialist Countries on the Study and Use of Space for
Peaceful Purposes of 13 Apri1 1967.3
In essence these reports were an unique form oP international legal agree-
ments by the nine socialist countries and concluded on a level of the rep-
resentatives of the ministries and departments. These documents expresaed
the coordinated will of the nations on the basic principles, forms and
methods of their collaboration in the development of space. Here the rep-
resentatives of the nations acted xithin the limits of the powers granted
them by their governmental bodies. Subsequent practice in the development
of cooperation on the basis of these documents have also shoan that the
states recognize them as acts of international legal significance, and
fo11oW them in thefr Joint activit3es.
The second of the reports included a general coordinated program Which had
been elaborated and approved at the conference for research on the physical
properties of space, on space coaIInunicationa, space meteorolog}r and space
biology and medicine. Subsequently this program (at a conference of the
leaders of the national coordination bodiea of the collaborating nationa
- in 1970 at Wroclaa) Was given the official name of the "Intercosmos Program."
The mentioned reports also defined the organizational forms of cooperation.
In each of the nine nations a decision Was made to set up an interdepart-
mental scientific coordinating body responaible for carrying out the coordi-
nated program, as Well as the bilateral and multilateral agreements on in-
dividual pro,jects and subjects which Were concluded Within this program.
In a majority of the nations, the coordinating bodies xere set up under
the academies of sciences or the ministries (coffinnittees) for science and
technolopy. In the USSR, these functions were entrusted to the Council for
International Cooperation in the Area of Space I3esearch and Use Under the
26
FOR OFPICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOtt OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
USSTi Acadeny of 8ciences (the Intercosmos Council) set up in 1966 ng thQ
interdepartmental body for coordinating joint work in the area of coopera-
tion in npace with foreign coutttries, as carried out by the various minis-
tries, departmenta, sciPntific institutions and industrial nrganizations
oi' the USSI2.
mhe attnually held conferences of the lenders of the national Cdordination
bodies npprove recomnendations and decigions to c1.rMify and develop the
jnint program, as we11 as an nrganizational and oi;her practical quegtiong
of cooperation. The conference is chaired by the repregentative of the
- nation in which the canference is being he1d, anci he algo perfnrms the
- functions of the chairman until the next annual conference.
'I'he routine activities of implementing the program and the elaboration of -
new recommendations are made within the permanent combined work groupu for
the five basic areas of cooperation.
'I'he work groups are directed in their activities by a regulation approved
at a conference of leaders of the national coordinating bodies held in
Moscow on 14 June 1968.4 The conferences of the work groups are held vrhen
necessary, but at least once a year, and they rotatA among the member
nations. The group chairman is selected, as a rule, from among the rep-
resentatives of the host nation, and performs these duties until the next
meeting of the work group. The host nation also assumes the funct,ions of
the conference secretariat and bears the organizational expenses related
to holding the conference (53 of the Regulati4n).
The leadership of the activities of the national units of the Work groupa
and the organizational support for their functioning are entrusted to the
national coordinating bodies of the nations.
The basic tasks of the work groups consists in ensuring the fulfillment
and further development of the cooperation program in *he correaponding
areas, as Well as in achieving a high scientific and technical level of the
joint Work. For this purpose the Work groups examine and solve scientific
and technical questions arising in the course of cooperation. In particu--
lar, they regularly examine hoa the existing protocols (agreements) are
being carried out on the specific subjects of cooperation, proposals on
- carrying out ner+ Work are studied, draft agreements are korked out for in-
dividual subjects and experiments, plans for the launching of satellites
and resesrch missiles are prepared, and so forth.
The re3ults of the conferences of the Work groups are drawn up in t;7e form
. of ageneral protocol as Well as in the form of individusl decisions and
recommendations. Those Which are of a scientific and Lechnical nature
become effective immediately, for the nations xhich have voted for their
approval. Decisions and reconIInendations on organizational and financial
questions require approval by the n3tional coordinating bodies in accord
- with the procedure instituted in each nation.
r
27
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
Nd[t nFFICIAL USE dNLY
Accdrding to the fiegulation (54, point 3), ench natidn hag the right to
state itg interegtg in any quegtion which in exanined by the aork group.
At their cdnferenceg, the Work grnupg ghduld endeavor that their decigidnn
and recommendationg be upproved by a11 the involved nationn. In the eb-
sence df unanimity, the decisions and recommendationg are effective drLly
fbr the nationg ahich hnve voted for them.
A nntion'g Ltatement of its dinintereat in one nr nnother quegtion at the
_ moment nf approving dpcigiong and recommendntiong doeg not deprive it nf
the right gubgequentj,y to ascribe to thege decisions and recommendationg.
An anmlogous procedure Was adopted subgequently fnr the decigions and recom-
mendations brought up at conferenceg of the leaderg of the national coordi-
ttnting bodien. In the last instgnce, hoaever, for the adoption o� the de-
ciginng and recomnendationg u majority of votee by the leaders of the
nntidnnl bodies was required and only questiong involving coaperntion of
- just gome of the nationg would be decided by the approval of the legdera
of the national grdups from these nations.
One should note certain differences in the procedure for upprdving deci-
sions an d recomendations in carrying out caoperation under the Intercosmos
Program in contrast tn the procedure existing in CEMA and u number of re-
lated organizations.
In nccord with Point 3, Article 4 oP the CFMA Charter, e11 the recomenda-
tions and decisions in CDRA are approved only with the agreement of the
involved member nations, and each couatry has the right to state its in-
terest on aay quegtion examined xithin CEMA. The recommendations and 8e-
cisions do not extend to the nations which hsve declared their disinterest
in the given question. Hoxever, egch of these nations can adhere to the
recommendations and decisiona approved by the remaining member countries.
Ye. T. Usenko has defined the principle operating in CFMA of unanimity _
among the intereated countries as the principle of "qualiPied" unanimity, !
in cnrrectly noting that it provides an opportunity to harmoniously recon-
cile nntional and international interests of the CF?MA countries.5
Under the Intercosmas Program, the deeisions and recommendations are also
adopted only by the interested ngtions. Comron to both procedures is the
fgct that they are extended only to the nationa which have expreased the
agreement to accept theqn. In either instance the nations which have
stated their disinterest at the moment of the approval of the decision or
recommendation can subsequently adhere to them.
}ioWever, there is a certain difference in the fact that while the CflRA
decisions and recoamendations cannot be approved with the disagreement of
even one interested party, under the Intercosmos program, the approval of
the decisions and recommendations is feasible in such situations.
28
FOR OFPICIAI. U5B ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOit UFFICIAL USE dNLY
FI'hus, in carryinp, out cooperation under the Intercosmog prdgram, the prin-
r.ipic oi' unanimity of the concerned partieg ig not in effect, althdugh the
Hegulatfdn atipulaten pgrtieul.arly thnt at their con�erenceg the rrork grdupg
ghould endeavdr that their decigions ancl recommendations be apprdved by a11
interegted partieg, Such a proCedure, Withaut encroaching on the rightg
and interentg di the member natiottg oi' the program, mnkeg it pongible to
carry but effective work under the Intpraogmog Pragram bdth dn n bilatersl
and u multilatera1 basig.
7'he Regulgtion t}overning the Wnrk (3rdupg provides an dpportunity for the
establighing of direCt tieg betueen the neacl organizatiang of the eduntrieg
respongible �or carrying out the jdint Wdrk, in the gim of codrdinating the
specific duties of the parties and the times for executing the individugl
stages d� the Work (42, point 2 of the tieguletfon). In practice suCh ties
are extremely broad and diverge. They ere formalixed ag protocolg Which
in certnin tnstances can be tranafdrmed intd civil lnW transactions between
thene arganizations (fdr example, for the sgle or lesging of individual
types of equipment).
Prior ta 1974, contacts did not exist betWoen the CFMA bodieg and the work-
ing bodies i'ormed under the Intercoamos program. The golving of the prob-
1ems raised in the Comprehengive Progrgm for the Further Deepening and Im-
provement of Cooperation and fbr the Develnpment of Socialigt Econamic In-
tegration Among the CERA Gountries demanded a strengthening and coordinat-
ing of cooperationby the socialist countries in e11 areas. Congidering
that the Work being done under the Intercosmos Program aas close]y tied to
the scientific gnd technical pragrams being carried out Within the Cfl4A
!:ommittee for Scientific and Technical Cooperation,6 in 1974 g decision Was
made to establish the approprigte contgcts betWeen the mer.tioned ComreitLee
und the Confcrence of Leadera of the Notional Coordinating Bodies from the
Socialist Member Nationg af the Intercosmos Program.
Here the basic aim Was the concentrating of efforts by the scientists and
specialists in the CFMA countries on Working out the most urgent problems
of modern science, the eliminating of unjustified duplication and parallelism
in the carrying out of scientific researeh under both ehannels of collabora-
tion, end ensuring the use of the resee.rch results in the national econonpr
of the CIIHA countries. -
'Phe decisidns approved at the Eighth 5ession of the CEMA Camnittee for
3cientific and Technict1 Cooperation (Sofia, June 1974) and the Conference -
of Leaders of the qational Coordinating Bodies of the Member Netions of the
Intercosmos Program (Prague, December 1974) established ties betxeen these
bodies in the form of reciprocal information and the holding of consulta-
tions on the basic questions o� sciantific and technical collgboration, as
well gs in the form of mutual participation in the vork of the Committee
and Conference.
29
FOR OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FO[t UNFICIAt, U5E tlNtY
Wheu necenggry, provision aag made for the pongibility of getting up jdint '
work groupo. .
'I'hug, in the firnt gtage of the exigtence of multilateral codperntion among
the goCialiat nationg under the Tnterengmog I'ragram, itg 1ega1 bdgig wnn '
comprised of the fundamental understanding achieved by an exchange of ~
- lett+ern betxeen the headn of government and three internatidnal 1egal ddcu-
mentg di the type of mu].tilaterel interdepartmental agreementg (the two re-
pdrtg gnd the ftegulation). ~
Uncler these doCUmentg, a derinite natidnal and internationsl mechanigm Was -
get up, and thig provides the guccesgful egrrying out and development of
the approved program. It includeg national Cnordinnting bodieg, unnual
conferences of the leaderg of the national bodieg, cnnferenceg of the per-
manent cnmbined vrork groupa for the bagic greas df conperation, nnd direct
tieg betWeen the head natinnal organizationg regpongible for Carrying out
the joint ++ork.
The succesgful devclopment oP cooperation under the Intercogmos F'rogrgtn
has affirmed the viability of the accepted orggnizgtional forreg ahich pro-
vide a flexibility in implementing the program and simplify decigion tnking
for the executinn of varioug joint projeetg by the concerned ngtiang.
The Greetings of the CpSU Central Gommittee, the f'residium of the USSR
Supreme Soviet and the USSR Cnuncil of Ministers on the occasion nf the
completion af the flight of the Soyuz-22 spgcecraft with multizone equip-
ment manufactured in the GDit emphngixed that "gpecialists from the gocisl-
inL cnuntrien having pooled their efforta under thr Intercogmon Progrem
gre making e weighty contribution to spnee research.0
At the seme time, the problems related to implementing the Comprehengive
F'rogram for the Flarther Deepening and Improving of Cooperation and for the
bevelopment of Socialist Economic Integration Among the CFMA Countries dic-
tate the necessity of providing permanent work to improve the content and
�urther develop the international 1ega1 mechgniam for cooperation among
the gociglist countrieg, including in the area of space.
Among the integration measures of the CflNA covntries, an importent plgce is
assigned to integration in the scientific end technical area. Its develop-
ment has been accompanied by the broadening and deepening of ties in $cience
and technology, and by the greater role of these relationships in the inter-
netional socialist division of labor.8
The Comprehensive Program provides thet the development of socialist eco-
nomic integration should be ca.rried out in accord with the principlea of
socialist internationalism, on s basis of respeCt for stgte savereignty,
independence and national interests, noninterference into the internal
affgirg of the countries, complete equality, mutual benefit and camredely
mutual aid. The program streaees that integration is noL to be nccompanied
by the creetion of supernetional bodies. The neceusity of improving the
30
1OR OPPICIAL U5S ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOlt UFFICIAL USE dNtY
lep,al baqeg af economic and aeientiPic-technical cooperation in noted among
the wnyn nnd menna of int.ep,ration. g
One or the farmg for improving the legal mechnnigm df cooperation in the
spnce nrea hng been the concluding of multilateral intergovernmental ggree-
mentg on eooperntion by the goeinligt countrieg in research and the uge of
space for peaceful purposez. The agreement vag gigned in MngcoW on 13 July _
1976 by repregentatives of the governmentg o� 13ulgarig, liungery, the dDR, -
Cuba, Mongolia, Po1and, Romania, the U88R and the CSSti. l0 Thin document,
without altering the e9genCe of the proven bagic organizgtiona1 prinCipleg
or cooperation, hgg given it a more defittite treaty bngig and iticilitates
the implementatiorr nf the neW ,Joint gpgee programs.
The intergovernmentnl agreement has made it pdsgible to reinforce the bc-
quired ponitive experience of codperatibn and at the same time to more ef-
fieiently orgnnize joint work by the soCialint countrien both in gtudying
outer spaee an We11 ag in utilizing the results of apace regearch in the
interests of the variotis nationsl economiC gectorg. Article 1 or the agree-
ment contains an csbligetion of the ngreeing partiea to aid in every ponntble
way in Lhe fut�ther development of cooperatidn among the concerned drganize-
tidns oiC ttieir nationg in the regearch xnd use of gpgce for peaceFul put'-
poses.
The ggreement p,ives the basic nreas of cooperntive Work. These are: Study-
ing the pt~ysical properties of space, sp$ce meteorology, space biology and
medicine, spsce communicatidns, and studying the natural envirdnment using
npace means. It has been stipulated that cooperation will be developed in
such forms gs the launching of space devireg for scientific gnd prartircil
purposes; the development of equipnent for Joint spece regegrch; the con-
ducting of experiments vith geaphysice.l snd meteorological rockete; the
cerrying aut of joint obaervatians ag uell as experimental and theoreticgl
reseArch, the processinp, analysis and use of the results of the Joint aork,
the preparstion o� joint publications; the providing of reciprocal scien-
tific and technical aid; the holding of scientific conferences and meetings,
the exc:hange of scienti�ic-Lechnical documents and information.
Cooperation amang the concerned orgenizations of the member netiong of the
ai;reement in the future Will be developed on the basis of coordinated pro-
rrams and plans Which define the ennditinna for carrying out the spec4fic
space experiments snd research.
The agreement reinforces the principle eccording to which in carrying out
the joint vork in space, the states, as a rule, vill not make recinrocel
payments. Precisely this procedure has been accepted at present in the
relationships bQtween the member states of the Intercosmos Frograa. The
rocketry, and the services of the command and instrumentation complex are
to be provided gratis by the USSR ta its partaers in cooperetion. An over-
ull fund f.s not created for carrying out the program. Each country finences
the work under the progrem which is to be carried out by its acientific and
31
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
~
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
F0R d"ICIAt. USg ONLY ,
productidn drgenizationg. 7'hin includeg the development of ingtrumentg and '
deviees for gpaeecraft, gatielliteb and regearch rdcketg, the carrying nut .
of nGientifiC renearch under Codrdinated progra.mg, data procesning, and go
forth.
~
7'he agreement had gugigned the rd1.e of the baaic leading body in multi-
igteral cnllabdrstion to the eonference of the 1egderg of the nationt1 '
bodieg, and haa nlgd deffned the procedure for cdardinating the activitiea
of the participantg in the joint prdgram during the period betuoen the en-
nua1 Cdnferenaea.
With the absence of tLn international gecretarigt for the Intercosmon program, ~
in practice itg �unctidng from the outset of Cooperation hgve been carried
out by the Intercoamos Council Under the USSR AcndenW of SCiences. It co- '
ordinateg the activitieg of the collectives from varioue nationg in the _
grea df carrying aut joint aork, it prepgreg the basic materielg for the
internatidnal canferenceg, it publlshea the informat,ional bulletiin, and so
forth. 'i'he agreement hag assigned n treaty nature to these internetionnl
functions of the Soviet ngtional coordinating boey.
The ogreement a1s0 stipulates that the gcientific regulte of the joint
gpece experimentg and reseerch under the understanding of all the nationg ,
psrticipating in thig can be made available to the gcientistg and scientific
orggnizutions of other countrieg.
Thig agreement ahich is open far signing ty other states hes reinforced on
the intergnvernmental level the principles of interstate relations of a new
type in the lending area of scientii'ic and technical progress. This is
gtill another proof of the broacleni.ng erid deepening of scientific aad tech-
nical codperation amorig the socieligt countries.
A significant event in the development of the Intercosmos Program was the
Soviet proposal for participation of citizens from the socialist countries
in the manned flights on Saviet spacecraft and stations. This proposal r+as
digcusaed in talks and consultations by delegations of the socialist countriea
in Moscow in July and September 1976�11 Ag a result of these meetings, it
wag agreed that in the period of 1978-1983, citizens of a11 the socialist
countries participating in the Intercoamos Progrem would partake in flights
nn Soviet spacecreft and stations together vith Savi�t cosmonauts.
Being the logical extension aad development of the Intercosmos Program, these
flights will be closely Coordinated to the scientific and technologi.cal ex-
periments being performed on board the Soviet spacecraft and atationa by
scientists of the bocialigt countries.
M analjrnis of the legal nature of the Iatercoamos Program indicates that
Intercosmos lncks such attributes of an intergovernmental organization as
aspecial constituent enactment, an international secretariat and a general
budget. For this reason, at the given stage, from the viexpoint of -
32
FOR OFpICIAL OSB ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
Fon nFrrcrnL usE orrLY
international law, Intereosmon cannot be viewed as an internat3onal, inter-
governmentEil organizatinn in the gtrict sense of this word. At the neme
time, thc presence of intergdvernmental agreements on multilateral coopera-
tion nnd the pxintenae o� a precige ittternational mechanism to carry out
thin cooperation make it ponnible to speak of Tntercosmos as an incipient
internstionnl orgai-~ization which in certain instunces can enter into 3nter-
natinnal dealings as a gingle whole, and in thig quality can establish con-
tacts with other goverrunental and ndngovernmental orggnizations,
- 2, The Jdint Activities o� States Under the Tntercosmos Program in Light
of Certain Common principles of Internationa]. Space Law
In the international agreements which reinforce the bases of modern space
1aw, it is a question primarily of two types of epace activit,3es by the
state: those cttrried out on a national basis and those within the inter-
nationttl, inte.rgovernmental organizations. Since Intercoemos is not an in-
ternational intergdvernmental organiz$tion in the strict sense of this
word, the question arises are the principles and provisions of general 3n-
ternational space law applicable to the current activit3es of states under
the Intercosmos Progracn.
Article XIII of the Treaty on the Principles for the Activities of States
in the Reseurch and Use of Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial
Bodies states that the provisions of the treaty are to be applied to the
uctivities of states, regardless of whether or not 3uch activity is carried
out by one member state of the treaty or ,jointly by other states, includ-
ing Within the international intergovernmental organizations."
The word "including" gives reason to feel that activities within the inter-
national, intergovernmental organizations are viewed merely as one of the
possibly forms of Joint activity provided for by the treaty and not as the
only form.
The validity of such an interpretation is affirmed by references to the
,joint activities of states in the area of the research and use of outer
space, as are found in other international agreements on space law. Thus,
mention o� ,joint actiuities is found in Articles V and XXVII of the Conven-
tion Governing International Liability for Damage. Article V of this con-
vention mentions the solidary liability of participants of a",joint launch,"
_ regardless of Whether or not this launch is made within an international
orpanization or not. The Convention Governing the Registration of Objects
Lnunched into Space approaches thia question from an analogous position;
its Article II mentions "two or more launching states."
Joint work by states in the area of space research, when carried out on the
basis of bilateral and multilatersl agreements, at present plays no less
an important role than the activities of the international space organiza-
tions. Platurally such work should be regulated by the generally recognized
principles of international space law.
33
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Cnoperation among the utates under the Intercosmos Program represents one
type of joint epace act3vity provided for under the current general multi-
- lateral and international space agreements. 7'he space law principles and
procedures stipu].ated in theae agreements apply to it.
From thia is follows, in particul.ar, that each of the states participating in the Intercoamos Program in the course of carrying it out may be involved
in legal relations with third states not invo7.ved in the program.
- Such a situation mey arise, for example, if an intercosmos satellite causea
harm to persons or property of a third state.
The 1967 Space Treaty establish international liability of states for activ3- '
ties in outer space, regardless of whether or not such activities are car-
ried out by governmental bodies or nongovernmental legal entities (Article
VI). The Treaty ascrib.ci the nature of international legal liability to a].l
types of liability in the area of international space law, and under this ,
the principals are the states for, under certain conditions, the inter-
national 4-ntergovernmental organizations. -
Article VII of the Treaty regulates a certain type of liability for space
activities which axises in the event that damage is caused by the space ob-
,ject-or their component parts. In this specific instance of legal relation-~
ships when it is a question primarily oF inaterial liability for the losses
caused, the liability also devolves on the state.
An important theoretical and practical conclusion stemming from theae con-
siderations is that in international space law, the legal relationships of
liability can occur only between the principals of international laW, re-
gardless of who is the party which has lost directly or is the party bound
to restore the losses--the state itself or its physical and legal entities.
The legal relationships in which pY~ysical or legal entities operate on one
or both sides.are not regulateO, by international law and should be vieked
' sepaxately in accord with the provisions of domestic state and international
private law.
Although Article VI of the Treaty which deals with international liability
in the broad sense of this word specifically mentions only national ac-
- tivities in space as well e.s the activities of international organizations,
Article XIII of the Treaty extended the provisions of the Treaty to a11
types of joint activities involved in the research and use of, space. In
practical terms this means that the states involved in the Tntercosmos
Program bear interiiatinnal liability so that the activities of the persons
and organizations empowered by them are carried out in strict accord with
the Space Treaty and the other provisions of international space lak.
- The questions of finnncial or material liability under space law have been
regulated in detail by the Conventior. Governing International Liability for
Damage Caused by Space Objects. As in the Space Treaty, the Convention
34
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOit OF:ICIAL U5E ONtY
_ proceedrs fram the �undamental provision that the principnls of lepal rela-
tion,ihip, involving liabilit;r are states, an In individual instances, inter-
nn.tional intergoverrmientA1 organizations.
in .tccord wlth thc Conventiori, the loasea are def ined ns "the logn or lii'e,
corporeal in,jury or other impairment or health; either the demage or de-
sti�uctton o� the property or the stAteq or phyaical or 1egal entitieg or
thA praptrty of international intergovernmenttLl organizntions" (Article I),
In terms of the Intercoamos progrs.m, of importnnt significance are the
provisions of the Convention denling With liability for Joint spsce activi-
ties.
Artir_le V(Point 1) of the Convention establishes the principle of solidary
linbility for uny losaes caused when two or more stnten carry out a launch
,)ointly. 'rhe concept of solidary liability, borroued from civil latr, in
Lerml of ttie situation examined by us, means thnt a state Which has the
- riErht to obtain compensation can at its oWn discretion demand complete re-
_ coverv of the loss from any of the participnnts in the ,joint launch indi-
vidually, from several o� them or from all of them together.l?
In line with the provision on solidary liability for damage caused by a
,jointly launched space ob.ject, the question of what must be understood
(from the standpoint of liability) as ajoint launcti of a apace object
nssumes important signi�icance. Neither the Treaty nor the Convention says
anythinP on this question. However, the Convention links the legal reln-
tionship of liubility With the concept of 'the "launching state" Which is
dc,fined as 1) astate which carrien out or organizes the launching of a
space ob,ject; 2) a state Whose territory or units are used for launching g
space ob,ject.13 In the understttndinp, of the Convention, in the instances
o� joint activities, the launching state must be understood not only as the
international, intergover:unental organizations, but also the states carry-
in.r, out such space activities outside the frameWOrk of international or-
ranizations. Thus, the satellites of the intercosmos series Which have
carried equipment from several cooperatinp, countries must be viewed as
jointly launched ones. Also arguing in favor of such an interpretation is
ttie circumstance that specialists of the nations cooperating under the In-
tercosmos E'rogram to one degree or another pnrticipate in all stages of the
work, including the prelaunch testing, the launching and control of the
sztellites in flight. ,
itowcver, certainly in contrast from an international organization Where all
the members should bear solidary liability, stmilar liability in the event
or damaFe caused by a space object launched under the Intercosmos Program
should be borne not by all the states cooperating in this program, but only
t}iose Which xere directly involved in the given specific launch, for exampZe,
the m3nu.�acturing of all or a portion of the satellite equipment or by pro-
viding the carrier rocket. The broad interpretation of the concept of
''launching state" :'a nhared by a number of specialists on international
spaCe law, 14
35
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
F01t UFFICIAL USE ONLY
In accord with the Convention, astate which hes covered the loss has the
right to a claim for exoneration againet the remaining participants in the
joint launch (Article V, Point 2). The Convention also provideg the right
of the participants in ajoint launch to conclude an agreement on allocat-
ing fittancial obligationg emnng themselveg and under which they Wduld bear
golidxry liebillty.
In keeping aith the further development of the Tntercoamos Program and the
increase in the number of space objects being launched, obviougly it would
be advisable to conclude a special agreement between the member states of
the prograun on the right of exoneration [redress] and the allocating of
financicLtt obligations which might arige with the 1ega1 relationahips of
sdlidary liability. Here it ig egsential to bear in mind that auch an
agreement, according to the Convention, cannot involve the rights of a
state which has suffered losseg to demand total compensation for the losses
from any of the lunching states or all the launching states vhich bear soli-
dary liability. This provision of international space law has a mandatory
- character and cannot be abrogated by auch an agreement.
- Finally, it is essential to point out that the provisions of the Convention,
in accord with its Article VII, are not to be applied fn the event of losses
caused to citizens of the launching atate as well as to foreign citizens
ahen they participate in operations related to the space object which has '
, caused the damage, or if they have been invited by the launching state and
are in direct proximity of the area of the planned launch or recovery of
the ob,ject. This circumstance may alao necessitate the concluding of a
speciul agreement betWeen the participants of joint space activities for
the purposes of regulating the questions of liability for damage which can
be caused in similar instances.TS
The above examined problems of liability, of course, are far from exhausting
- the range of legal relationships for the participants of the Intercasmos
Program with third states.
The states carrying out joint activities aili enter into legal relationships
of reliability primarily on the binding side, as the principals oP the ob-
ligation to repay the damage caused.16 However, in accord with the current
procedures of international space laW, it is also posaible to imagine legal
relationships in which the participsnts of the joint program act on the
authorized side having the riRht to demand Prom third states the execution
of certain actions or to refrain from such actions. Such legal relation-
ships can arise, in particular, over the violating of property rights for
spnce objects or their component parts, as well as over the question of re-
turning space objects which have landed on the territory under the juxisdie-
tion of third states.
Accordinf; to Article VIII of the Space Treaty, the right of oknershi.p to
space ob,jects launched into outer space and their component parts remain
inviolate during the time they are in space, on a celestial bod}r or upon
returning to earth.
36
FOR OPFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOtt nFFICIAL USE ONLY
'I'he oWnern oi' the gcientific equipment carried on the gatelliteg of the
interr.onmoci nr_rien nre thr. stateg (dr their legal etttities) in which the
c:orrhnronflinp, equirment hns been developed and mnnufactured. Violations nf
thenc riqhtts by nny third stAtes dg we11 ag by their physicA1 or iegai e.-
tities cnn entail the nccurrence of 1ep,a1 relationghips in which the par-
ticinants of the Intercosmon Program are the entitled party.
Article V(point 3) of the Agreement Concerning the Reacuing nf Cnsmonautg,
the fteturn of Coemonauts e.nd the peturn of Objects Launched into Outer 5pace
establisheg the right of the "authorities which have carried out the launch"
to demand the return of the space ob,jectg or their component partg which
have been discovered on the tprritory of other gtates or at any other place
not under the ,jurisdiction of any state. 'I'hig article given the partici-
pants of the Intercoamos Program the right jointly or individually to make
the corregponding demund to the third atate or states.
Thin same article provides the right of a state which has incurred expenses
in meeting its obligationa involved in the detection and return of a space
ob,ject or its component parts, to demand that these expenses be eovered by
the "authorities which carried out the launch." In instances of ajoint
launch, the state which has repaid this expenditure obviously should have
the right of exoneration against its partners in the ,1oint activities. Such
questions shoul.d be regulated by a separate agreement.
In addition, a special understanding or agreement is required betaeen the
states working jointly on the Intercosmos Program on the questions of the
registration of their common satellites, since space laW links definite
legal consequencea to the act of registration. Among such consequences,
sccording to Article VIII of the Space Treaty, is, in particular, the pro-
viding of jurisdiction and control by the registering state over the space
object and over any crex of this object While they are in space, including
on a celestial body. .
The Convention on the Recording of Objects Launched in Space introduces a
new element in this rule. Article II of this Convention directly permits
the possibility of the concluding of agreements between the participants
in ajoint launch on the question of jurisdiction and control over the
space obJect and any creW of it, Without linking or, more accurately, vith-
out compulsorily linking the act of registration to the carrying out of
jurisdiction and control.
At the same time, the Registration Convention introduces a compulsory
national registration of space objects by entering them in the correspond-
ing register Which is kept by the launching state as Well as in the UN
international registration.
In the event of a,joint launch, the states should determine Which of them ~
is to enter the given space object in its national register (Article II,
' Point 2). In the reading of the Convention, the multiple national
37
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOIt OFFICIAL USE ONLY :
regiutrntion of apece ob,)ectg in excluded. In practice up to noW o11 the
gatelliten of the intercosmos geries hgve been regigtered by the US8R.
Article XI of the Space Treaty envisages the desirability "to the maximum
pasgible and practically fesgible degree" of informing the UN Secretery
Ceneral, the public and the international sc3entific community of the nnture,
courge, places and reaults of activitieg in outer space, including the moon
and other celeatinl bodiea. This artic.le of the 7'reaty ].ayg out definite
obligations on informing the world gcientific community, and these hnve
been gtrictly observed by the pnrtiCipgntg of the Intercogmds Program. $ut
- from this glgo gtems the right of Intercogmos to be represented at the UN
Committee on the Use of Outer Space for peaceful I'urposes, COSPAFi, the
Internatinnal Astronautics F'ederation and at other international scientific
fdrums involved With the questions of the regearch and use of space and
hnving both an intergovernmental and nnngovernmental nature.
Thus, the multilateral cooperation of the gocialist countries in the Inter-
cosmos Program represents one of the types of ,joint qpace activities among
states, and thege activities are completely covered by the principleg and
procedures of internatinnal space law.
In the process of carrying out the Intercosmos Program, legal relationshipa
can arise not only directly among the participants of the program, but also
between them and third states. The legal relationships vith third atates -
or international organizationa should be regulated by the general principles
and provisions of international apace 1aW.
The absence of an intergovernmental organization in the traditional sense
o� this word ahich aould be concerned `rith implementing the Intercosmos
Program, is not an obstacle in the regulating of these relationships. Re-
gardless of Whether the joint space activities are carried out Within the
intergovernmental organizations or outside of them, a Whole series of legal
questions arising in the course of joint activities may require apecial
agreements and understandings between the participants in these activities.
FOOTNOTES
1. For the Intercosmos Program,see: B. N. Petrov and M. G. Kroshkin,
"Space Physics and Cooperation Among the Scientists of the Socialist
Nations," VESTNIK AKADEMII NAUK SSSR, No 4, 1972, pp 76-84; "Orbity
Sotrudnichestva" [Orbits of Cooperation], edited by B. N. F'etrov,
MoscoW, Mashinostroyeniye, 1975; "Po Prograame 'Interkosmos'" [Under
the Intercosmos Program], edited by G. N. Narimanov, 'Noscow, Mashino-
I stroyeniye, 1976.
2. PRAVDA, 24 November 1975 and 16 April 1967.
38
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
F0lt UFFICIAL USE UNLY
3, F'or the documentn oi' the Interaogmdg Cduncil under the USSR Acadeny of
- �c ihncec;, nee: "Mntcrial_y Soveshchaniytt Predstnviteley Sotsiolin-
tichenkikh Stran po Voprdgam n Sotrudnichegtve vIzuchenii i Igpd1'xovanii
Konmicheakogo Progtrnngtva v Mirnykh mgelyalch (14-20 Noyabrya 1965 g.,
g. Moskvs.)" (Materialg o� the Conference of Repreaentativeg from the
5ociaiint Ngtionn dn the questiong of Coopergtidn in the Study and Use
of Space for Peaceful Purposes (14-20 Navember 1965, Mdgcax)), pp 144-
1451 "Muterialy 5oveghchnniye EItspertov--pr.pdstaviteley 5otgialig-
ticheakikh Strt3n po Iggledovgniytt i"Ispol'zovaniyu Kogmicheskogo
progtrangtva v Mirnykh mgelyakh (5-13 Aprelya 1967 p,., g. Mngkva)"
[Materialg df a Conference nf Expertg frora the Bocialist Cnuntrieg on
the Research and Use of duter Space for Peaceful Purposeg (5-13 Apri1
1967, MOgCd1d)], pp 11-16.
4. For the text of the Regu].stion, gee the book: "Mnogontoronneye
E}conomichegkoyc Sotrudnichento Sotsigligticheskikh adsudarstv (bokumenty
zg 1972-1975 gg�)" CMultilnteral Economic Conppration Among the Sncial-
ist Stateg (bocuments for 1972-1975)], Moscow, Yuridicheskaye Litergturg,
1976, PP 268-271. �
_ 5. Ye. T. Usenko, "nvadtsat' I?yat' Let Mezhduuiarodnoy Organixateii Novogo
Tipa (mezisy boklada na XVIII Yezhegodnom Sobranii Sovetskoy Assotsiatsii
Mezhdunaroclnogn Prava)" [Trrenty-Five Years of a Nex Type of International
Organization (tieport Abstractg at the 18th Mnunl Meeting of the Soviet
International Laa Agaociation)], Moscow, 1975, pP 4-5�
6. For the Regulation Governing the Committee, see the book: "Mnogo-
_ storonneye Economicheskoye Sotrudnichestvo Sotsialiaticheskikh
Gosudarstv," Moscow, Yuridicheaka,yu Literatura, 1972, pp 151s155�
7. PRAVbA, 29 September 1976.
8. A. N. Bykov, "Nauchno-Tekhnicheskaya Integratsiya Sotsialisticheskikh
Stran" [Scientific und Technical Integration of the Socialist Nations],
Moscow, Mezhdunarodnyye Otnosheniye, 1974, pp 8-16.
. 9. "Kompleksnaya Programma Dal'neyshego Uglubleniya i Soverahenatvovaniya
Sotrudnichestva i Razvitiya Sotaialisticheskoy Ekonomicheskoy Integretsii
Stran--Chlenov SEV" [Cnmprehensive Program for the Further Deepening
and Improvement of Cooperation and the Development of Socislist Economic
- Integration Among the CFa4A Nations], Moscow, Politixdat, 1971, Section
1, Points 2 and 6.
10. PRAVDA, 14 July 1976. The agreement came into force on 25 March 1977.
11. PRAVDA, 17 July and 15 5eptember 1976.
12. For the concept of solidary liability, see: L. A. Lunts, "Mezhdunarodnoye
Chastnoye Pravo," Moscow, Gosyurizdat, 1963, p 187.
39
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOtt OFNICIAt U5L nNLY
13. Thig definition hag been borrowed by the Conventidn from Article VII
of the Space Treaty.
14. 5ee, for example: M. Marcoff, "'I'rnitg de broit Internationgl public
de 1' Egpace," F'ribourg--Oeneva--Perin--Nerr York.,Ed. Univ. F'ribnurg,
Suigge, 1973, p 250.
15. On the legal relntidnshipg df liability under international gpece 1cW,
see: A. A. Rubannv and p. I. Lukin, "SpaCe Activitieg end the Liability
of Stateg," "mendentaii Razvitiya Kogmicheskogo 1'rava" (bevelopment
mrends df Space Lar+) , Mogcow, Nauka, 1971, pp 188-242; Cl. P. Zhukdv,
"Liability for bamnge Caused by Space bbjectg," "Mezhdunarodnoye
Kosmicheakoye I'rnvo" [International Space IsW), Moscow, Mexhdunarndnyye
Otnogheniya, 1974, pp 159-1963; 0� P. Ztuilcdv, "The F'roblem of Liability
for bamage in Space Law," SOVETSKOYE (3OSUDAItS'I'VO Y pRAVO, No 6, 1965;
Yu. M. Ftybukov, "Lega1 Reguiation of Liability for bemggp Nelated to
Space Activities of Steteg," P12AVOVEUENIYE, No 1, 1967, pp 115-121;
Yu. M. Koloanv, "Otvetstvennost' v Mezhdunarodnom Prave" [Liability in
International Lax), Moscoa, Yuridicheakaya Literatura, 1975; A. A.
Itubanov, "Mezhdungrodnaya Kosmichesko-Pravovaya Tmushchestvennaya
Otvetstvennost'" [International Space Law Materia]. Liability], Mogcoa,
- Nauka, 1977; J. Itajski, "Odpovriedzialnosz miedzynarodoaa za szkody
rryrzadzone przez obiekty koamiczne," Warsaa, 1974.
16. The reverge case is poasible if damage were to be caused to a space
obJect launched under the Itttercosmos Program.
I
40
FOR OFPICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OPPICIAL U5E ONLY
- CHAF'TER 3: BII.AmEE'iAL CWPEEiAmIVE PEi0GRAM5 OF THE U98R WITH OTHER COUNTRIE9
Agreements vith the United States
7'he gtate end progpecte of internatinnal cooperation in spece development
tn a gignificant degree depend upnn the development of ties in this area
betWeen the USSR and the United StateQ. Although the firgt contacts be-
tween 3oviet and American gcientiste tvere egtabliehed st the outset of the
apace age, at that time they csae down chiefly to the exchange of obtained
gcientific resultg at verioug international con!'erences and meetinge. `
The first bilateral space agreement between the U9SR and the United 8tstes
was concluded in the form of an interdepartmental agreement of the U9SR
Acadeny of Sciences and the National Aeronautics and Spece Administration
(NASA) on 8 June 1962. Three yeare later, on 8 October 1965, this was
oupplemented by an agreement betueen the eame organizstions on the ~repare- ~
tinn ~d publication of ajoint work on spece biology and medicine.
In accord with theae agreementa, in the middle of the 1960's. Soviet end
American scientiats and specialists conducted certain joint projects.
Since 1964 a direct communicationa channel has operated between the xorld
meteoroloeical centers establiahed in MoscoW and Wsahington. Over thia
channel, around-the-cloek information is transmitted on the atate of the
atmosphere on our planet; this informetion is used in the operetional
xeather service of g number oP nations. Moreover 3oviet-Americen experi-
ments have been carried out to eatabliah coffinunications in space using the
Echo-2 pasaive comunicationa satellite, and there has been an exchange of
results of ineasurements for the purpoae oP draxing up maps of the edrth's
- magnetic field. Nork has been atarted on xriting ajoint work "Oenovy
Kosmicheskoy Biologii i Meditsiny" [Principlee of 3pace Biology and -
Medicine].
As a ahole, cooperation during these yeers xas extremely limited, and did
not correspond to the scales of the Soviet and American national programs
or to the role of theae netions in the studyr and development of apace.
A shift toward the development and deepening of Soviet-American coopera-
tion Was noted in 1970-1971. lluring these years there xes a aeries of
41
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOit OFFICIAL U5B dNi.Y
- meetingn and telks by acientigtg and technical gpecialigtg of both Countries,
and nt them they digcunged the opportunitieg of cdoperation in the area of
developing joint rendezvous and docking deviceg for npacec~�aft and gtationg,
ag Well ag in a bronder aree of gcientific gpncc reeFarch. Of particular
significanCe were the talkg betaeen the pregident of the USSN Acndemy di'
SCietlCen Acndemirian M. V. Ke1dynh anfl the temporary NASA director, rir J. Lor+
in ,tanunry 1971; thege ended with the approval of the "Final Docwnent on the -
Fiegultg of nigcugeing the Questiong of Cooperation BetWeen the USSR AcadenW
of SciertCeg and NASA."
These meetingg and talks prepared the grounds for the conclugion of gn Agree-
ment Betvreen the USSFt and United States on Collabnration in the Regearch
and Use of Space fbr Peaceful Purpoges during the visit of the U.S. presi-
dent tn Moscoa. It Wan gigned on 24 May 1972 by A. N. Kosygin, chgirman
of the USSFi Council of Ministers, and the U.S. F'regident R. Nixon.z
The agreement concluded for a period of 5 years With the posgibility of sub-
- sequent reneaal envisaged the develnpment of cooperation between the tao
countrieg in three basic areas:
1) Agsigtance in carrying out the understanding between the USSR Acadetqy
of Sciences and NASA stated in the "Final Ddcwnent" of 21 January 1971 on
the coordinating or joint execution of experiments, as kell as the exchange
of information in a number of gregs of space xesearch;
2) The carrying out of uork to develop joint equipment for the rendezvous
and docking of Soviet and American manned spacecraft and stations, inclucl-
ing the first joint experimental flight of ships of the Soyuz and Apollo
type for testing out such systems;
3) Aiding international efforts and cooperation betveen tre tiro parties
in solving international legal problems related to the research and use of
space for peaceful purposes in the name of strengthening laW and order in
space and further developing international space laa.
The "F'inal Document on the Results of Discussins Questions of Cooperation
BetWeen the USSR AcadenW of 3ciences and NA5A" of 21 January 1971, as men-
tioned in the Agreement, provides collaboration in the area of research on
near space, the moon and planets, as xell as in the area of the problems
of space meteorology, the studying of the natural environment from space,
as Well as apace biology and medicine.
The understanding between the USSR Academy of Sciences and NASA provides
for the coordination of research on these subjects and problems, an ex-
change of obtained scientiPic information, and in certain instances the
conducting of joint experiments. A number of work groups has been set up
for elaborating and carrying out the correspondfng cooperation programs.
42
FOR OFPICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOEt dFFICIAL U5E tlNLY
Let un brfePly tttke up the eontent of the Work whicti iA being dnne under the
.">ovietyAmericnn egreemerit.
'I'he tIS5R Aeadetry of Sciencee and NA5A have cxchanged ganples of lunar egrth
rcturned by both cauntrieg from varidug grens of the lunar qurfaCe. Spe-
ciuligts concernpd witti 3tudying the moon have made available td eaeh othtr
catelogg of maps and photographg of the maan, and htLve coordinated the basic
principleg for compiling gueh tnaps in the future.
A whole serieg of ,joint conferenceg, seminarn gnd ttorking meetingg have
been held by Soviet and Ilmericun scientigtg on the quegtiong of gtudying
the moon and plsneto of the solar aystem, as We11 as gtudying the magneto-
gphere of the earth and other questiana.
, mhere in n Weekly exchange of operational clnta from the rocket Weather
gotmdfng from the USSFi and American gtstions, and this makea it pogsible
i:o obtain g Comparative m$p of the meteorological nituation in the ebgtern
and western hemigpheres.
7'he work group studying the natural environment has carried out a number
- of coordinated observations using the data of ground, xircraft and satellite
- equipment. This Work is carried out Within five sections: geology and
geomorphology; vegetation, goil and land utilixation; water, snoW and
glaciology; microwave technologyr; oceanology.
Specialists in the area of space biology and medicine are jointly exemin-
ing the materials of the biomedical research carried out during the space
flights, and they are working out coordinated recommendations on the pro-
cedures for pre- nnd poat-flight examinstion of the cosmonauta. The pub-
lishing of the joint three-volwne work "nsnnvy Kosmicheakoy Biologii i
Meditsiny" has been completed. Ameri.can scientists have taken an active
part in the experiments on the Soviet Kosmos-782 biological satellite.
For a number of years, the Work of developing joint rende2vous and docking
equipment for the Soviet and American manned spacecraft and stations has
held a central place in Soviet and U.S. collaboratiott in space. In terms
ot its complexity and scale, this kas the largest project ever carried out
on the basis of bilatergl cooperation of states in developing space. Both
countries set the task of designing, creating end testing under real flight
conditions neW technical devices needed for the interaction of spacecraft
and stations from different countries.
Z'he goal of this work was dictated by a desire to ensure the safest con-
ditions for manned space flights and to create a technical possibility of
aiding one another in the event of an emergency situation. The develop-
ment of compatible docking systems also opened the xe~y to conducting
future joint scientific research aith the orbiting of cosmonauts from
various countries.
43
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOIt OFFICIAt. U3E dNLY
'I'he increage in the iNange of gpnce f'lightg and the durgtion mttn stnyed in
Apace adtLl.d ndt help but be accompanied by concern for raising the sgfety
of mgnned flightg. In precige].y the ggtne uqy that gailorg over the Cen-
turies have gacredly carried out the egtablished cugtom df proViding any
poggible aid tn g ghip in cligtresg, the humane ruleg of mutual help have
alno been born in spnce navigatinn.
In the pdat mutual aid in apace agn impannible ainee the aygtema ennuring
the rendetvous and docking of gpacecraft launched by the USSIi and United
Stntes were incompntible. A1though both gides poggegged gueh gygtems and
repeatediy used them during gpace i'lighta, they were unguitable far cnn-
ducting ,jdint operatidns in gpace.
On the bsgig of Gommon principles and coordinated demands, specialistg from
the USSR and United Stateg carried out the Work of degigning and developing
spaceCraft rendezvous gystems and docking devices, teating them initially
dn the pround and later, in July 1975, under the conditidng of the joint
experimental flight of aSoviet spacecraft o� the Soyux type and A-n American
craft of the Apollo type With the interchanging of cosmonautg.
The implementation of the plan involved the solution to a whole serieg of
involved technical, orgsnixational and other problems. Close interaction
aas required among the degigners, the cosmonauts, the control and instru-
mentation facilities and the mission control centers. The sides ,jointly
Worked out over 1,500 technical documents. Permanent mixed aork groups
were formed for the bgaic sreas of work, and their meetings alternated
betWeen the USSii and United States.3
From the example of the Soyuz--Apollo Project it is possible to trace hoW
closely 1aw and technology are intertwined in the area of internatinnal col- _
laboration in space research.
The 1967 Space Treaty provides the duty of cosmonauts from one state to
give any possible aid to cosmonauts oP other states in carrying out their
activities in space (Article V). In order that this provision of the Treaty
not remain a dead letter, the states launching spacecraft should equip them
with devices making it possible When necessary to execute a rendezvous and
docking of spacecraft from varioua countries. Precisely thfs is the aim of
the Soviet-American understanding stated in Article 3 of the Agreement of
24 Mqy 1972.
In addition to this, the practical realization of this program posed neu
legsl questions which were settled on the level of the authorized depart-
ments. Among such questions Were: the interaction of the control centers
during the flight, the subordination of the cosmonauts and nstronauts in
raoving into e apacecraft of another nation, the procedure for registering
the ships, informing the xorld .omnunity on the course of preparations for
and execution of ajoint flight, patent rights to the results of the
scientific experimenta, and so forth.
44
FOR OFPICIAL U5E ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FdR OFFICIAL USE dNLY
LuW and technology, thua, in earrying out the Soyuz--Apo11o pro,ject inter-
tacted elosely.
A reflection of the relationship oi' gcientific-technical and legal quegtiong
in the areA nf caoperation in the fact thnt the gcienti�ic nnd teclinica1
agreement bctWeen the USSR tind United 5tateg being examined here contains
an nrtiele Which states; "7'he partiea wi11 aid internatianal effarto aimed
at golving international 1ega1 problemn of the regearch tLnd use o� gpace
for pegce�u1 pttrpngeg for the gake of strengthening laK and order in npace
and fnr the further development of international gpace 1au, and they will
conperate among themselveg in thig area" (Article 4).
Here a dual obligation of the partieg is fvund: 1) Jointly aith nther
gtateg to ngnigt in solving the internatidntil legal problems of the re-
search and uae of gpace, including the further development af international
spuce 1aw; 2) cooperation amongst themselves in golving these prdblemg.
Indicgtive ig the fact that the degignated obligation hns been ansumed by
stntes Which not only hold a leading position in space research and inter-
ntttional cooperation in this area, but $lso embody opposite social systems.
In tlte modern age, only those provisions of international 1gW Which are
recagnized and abserved by a braad range of states can be considered among
the generally recognized. In the laW-making procegs in the nrea of space
law, as one of the areas of international public laW, a particular role
and respdnsibility are placed on the USSR and United States. The maintain-
ing of internetianal laW and order in space depends largely upon them.4
The practical realization of the essumed obligutions in the area nf solving
international legal problems related to the research and use of outer space
obviously should occur by the holding of bilateral consultations as well as
active search for mutually acceptable solutions in examining the corres-
ponding questions at international forums, and above all in the various UN
bodi es .
Article 4 of the Agreement should play an importgnt role in the progressive
development of international space 1aW and in strengthening space laW and
order.
The IntersLate Agreement Between the USSR and United Statea on Cooperotion
in the Area of Space, in containing both an understanding on a specific
compatible plan as well as broader and more extended obligations, was pos-
sible only unaer the conditions of an overall imprnvement in the political
relations betWeen the tWO countries. The broadening of contacts and cooper-
ation betWeen the Soviet and American scientific and production organiza-
tions, the carrying out of joint projects, and cooperation in the legisle-
tive sphere, in turn, should contribute to the further development of re-
lations of mutual trust and a general lessening of internntional tension.
45
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
NOtt dFFICIAt, U5L dNLY
ttoWever the forces ahich nre Working actively in the opponite directfon in
AmeriCan political life heve ndt overlodked the Space Agreement. In 1974,
an extengive higtorical goCioingical atudy entitled "Sdviet Caoperatidn in
Space" appenred in the United Stntea.5 Itn authorn Were the director oi'
_ the Wnnhirgton nepartment of the Center for Advanced Internntidnal 5tudies
at the Univergity of Miami, D. Hervey, and a coworker from this center, L.
Ciecdritti, ahile the forerrord td it wan vritten by the i'ormer U.S. Ambxs-
gador to the USSft, P. Ko.~ler.
The book was publighed during the peridd of the mogt intenge prepargtiong
for the joint flight under the 5oyuz--Apo11n Project, active exchangeg of
apecial.istg and gcientificrtechnicel informntion nn thig project, an ae11
ag frequent meetingg betvreen the technicgl directorg of the project and
- the 1enders oi' NASA and the USSIt Acndetqy of Scienceg. "
In this gituetidn the foxmer U.S. Ambasgador to the USSIi stated in the pregs
that the USSR aould endeavor to extrgct unilateral benefits from space co-
operatiott, tutd that the main element of the Soyux-Apo11o F'ro,ject (the de-
- velopment of joint rendezvous ancl docking devices for gpgcecrtt�t and stotions)
was "that area ahere the USSii was obviously having particular technical dff-
ficulties," cnd that ns s uhole spgce cooperation was essential for the
USSfi to use it as a precedent for access to AmeriCan technology.6
Such an interpretAtion of the Soviet-American Agreement in the space area '
- has nothing in common with the tasks of improving relations betWeen the tWo
states. It ig aimed at +:;i3ermining these relations and at distorting the _
esgence of the achieved understanding. The abaurdity of the assertions by
F. Kahler on any particulsr Soviet interest in gaining access to American i
docking devices becomes clear if one considers that both sides rejected as
unsuitable the devices Which previously existed in both nations for joint ,
space operations by ships of different countries, and they set as their
bnsic mission the joirrt development and testing of a completely nex dock-
ing device uxider real flight conditions. The reciprocal interest in this _
question was not disputed by any of the specialists and was repeatedly af-
firmed in the orricial statements of the NASA representatives.~
:'he suCCessful implementation of the Soyuz--Apollo Project was of historical
significance ss a symbol of the improvement in Soviet-American relationa on
the basis of the principles of peaceful coexistence. The fltght of the
Soyuz and Apollo spacecraft had a major political impact.
In the course of carryinq out the project, complicated problems Were solved
such as the development of compatible rendezvous and docking equipment
(this xould be of great significance for future manned space flights), the
transfer of cosmonauts from ship to ship aith a different atmosphere, the
interaction of the ship locating and rendezvous systems, the control of the
space flight from tao centers located several thousand kilometers apart.
46
FOR OFPICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOit UFFrCIAL USE ONLY
b11t`Iql{ the flight, a whole geries df joint and autonnmous experimenta wag
run in the area of astrophyeics, biologr and materialg engineering. Scien-
tints ntid enginQerg, the ahip crews and epecial3gts form the cnntrol centers
brilliantl.y carried out thetr missiona and completely ftilfilled the plenned
prnr,rcun for preparing and carrying out the flight. Of inval.uable signifi-
cance wae the experience acquired in :�aving large colleetives of specia].-
istri from different nations work tngether for the further deve7.opment of
international gcientific and technical cooperatinn. Based on thia experi-
ence, the U9SR Acadecy of Scienceg and NASA are preaent7.y studying the pos-
sibility of carry ing out a new large-3CA18 ,joint pro,ject for the atudy of
space for peaceful purposeg.e
The Agreement with F'rance. France waa the first nation in the cap3taltgt
world with which, the USSH signed an intergovernmental agreement on coopera-
tion in the research and develapment of space. Tmportant prerequisites
exinted for this: the established relations of trust und agreement between
the two countries and the presence in France of a large national space pro-
pram.
tn possessing its own apace centers, a developed aeroapace industry, mis-
siles, a space center in Guiana and a network of satellite tracking stationa,
France held third place in the world in terms of the scope of space research.
At the same time it was carryfng out an extensive program of international
cooperation on both a multilateral and bilateral basis.
The agreement between the USSR and France on cooperation in the area of
the atudy and development of space for peaceful purposes was signed by the
ministers of foreign affairs of both states on 30 June 1966 during a visit
of Gen de Gaulle to the USSR.9
The preamble of the agreement emphasized the importance of the study and
development of apace for peaceful purposes and pointed out that cooperation
between the U35R and France in this area conforms to the spirit of tradi-
tional friendship between the Soviet and French peoples, and would contrib-
ute to a further broadening of cooperation between the two nations and to
the establishing of European scientiPic and technical cooperation.
The governments of both states agreed on the preparations for and imple-
mentfng of a bilateral cooperative program and on the providing of support
and help to the concerned organizations of both countries for these pur-
poses.
The agreement defined the basic areas of cooperation; these were: the study
of space, including the launching of a French satellite by the USSR; space
meteorology using the most modern scientific equipment; the study of space -
communications via earth satellites; the exchange of scientific information,
trainees, scientific delegations and the organizing o.f conferences and
symposiums. By mutual understanding the cooperation would be extended into
other areas as xell. Space biologyr and medicine became one such neW area
of cooperation.
47
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FoR oFrYCtAL usE ora,Y
_ A 1ega1 mechanism was also establlshed which would ensure the development
and fu].fillment of the cooperative program. It included joint work groups
from the representatives of scientif3c and technical organizations, and
theae would be given the right to sign working protocals which determined
the content and conditions of cooperation. Scientific 3nformation obtained
_ in carrying out the ,joint experimenta should be access3ble to both sides
and should be turned over at acceptable times. The right of f3rst publica-
_ tion belonged to the authors of the experiment.
- mhe agreemer.* was concluded for a period of 10 years and would remain in
effect until denounced by one of the sides. Amendments and supplements
could be ,nade to it with the reciprocal agreement of the sides.
The v3ability of this agreement has been affirmed by the successful course
of its fulfi?:.menL, and by the s3gn3ficant scientific results obtained by
the Soviet and French scientists in conducting the ,joint experiments.
The organiz3ng of the practical work related to implementing the agreement .
was entrusted to the Intercosmos Council and to the National Space Research
Center of France (CNES). For each of the rr.entioned areas of cooperation,
joint work groups were set up by them with scientists and specialists from
both nations. The sessions of the work groups were to be held annually,
alternating between the USSR and France, The $pecific program of ,joint '
work, the reciprocal obligations of the sides as well as the times and
methods of carrying out the work were to be established in the working proto-
cols. The most important questions were to be incorporated in the general
protocol which would be signed by the intercosmos and CNES leaders.
In those instances when the obligations of the parties had a broader and
more extended nature, special interdepartmental agreements could be con- i
cluded for developing the general agreement. Sometimes they would be re-
inforced by an exchange of notes between the governments. On such grounds, ~
on 12 October 1969, intercosmos and the CNES signed a special Soviet-French
protocol on organizing a,joint study of photographic observations of space
objects on the Kerguelen Islands (a French possession in the Indian Ocean).
i
On 12 September 1972, the weather Gsrvicep of both countries together with
intercosmoa and the CNES signed an agreement to organize the launching of
Soviet and French meteorological rockets on these same islands for the pur-
pose of a,joint study of the upper layers of the atmosphere.along a hypo-
thetical meridian of 60-70� E. long.
On 12 January 1973, a protocol was signed for conducting ,joint scientific
experiments in 1974-1975 under the Araks Pro,ject on the Kerguelen Islands
and in Arkhangel'skaya Oblast.
The mentioned agreements define the rights and duties of the sides not only
on the essence of the ,jointly conducted research, but also on the questions
of utilizing the obtained scientific results, the conditions for the so-
_ ,journ of personnel and the locating of property on the territory of the
oiher country, and the liability for damage caused to personnel or property.
v,
48
FOR OFFICIAL USE QNLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FoR oFFicrAr. usE orn.Y
11
'I'hu:;, the ugreement en orNanizing the launching of wenther rocketn on the
Kerg,uelen Islands establiahed that Soviet and French personnel during the
c3tay on the Kerrttplen Ts1.rtnds3 was to be under the lawn and rules in effeet
I;hprr., �nd wnn t,o l,e undr.r the authorit,y of the district chi ef (Article 10).
Nn.r-11 ;s i(Ic. wan to uunnitmo r.r.;ipdnn t b 11 i ty to repny ]onncrs wh i rh mi rht br caunr.cl
t,o i t.c citlzenu nnd property, with the exceptinn of flap,rant vidlntinng or
intentional ur.tions und oversights the blame for which luy on the other pnrty
(ArtiCle 11).
important practical results were obtained in all areas of cvoperation an
outlined by the 1966 Intergovernmental Agreement.
`rrtir. F'rench scienti�ic devices caxried on the 3oviet Mars and Venern stations
and on the prognoz tLnd Oreol satelliten, studied interplanetary and near
- .3pACe. Laser scgcining of the moon was carried out using French reflectors
mounted on moon vehlcles. Soviet carrier rockets orbited two F'rench M/1C
sutellites desip,ned for conducting technological research, as well as the
a:;tronomical Sneg-3 satellite.
About 50 Oooviet weather rockets with Soviet and French scientific equipment
were launched on Hayes Island (Zemlya Frantsa-Iosifa) for the purposes of
_ conducting research in the area of space meteorolo&y and aeronorr~y. Joint
- rocket experiments were al.so conducted in other points of the world.
- `I'he scientific experiments, the choice o� which ia determined by the mutual
interest of hoth sides, ai�e carried out not only with Soviet spnce devices
but also on Frencti peophysicgl rockets and high-altitude balloons. Thus,
_ in 1975, Soviet and French scientists conducted n ma,jor ,joint experiment
in magnetically matched regions of the world under the name of Araks. This
experiment which opened the path to an active influence of man on the
processes occurring in the earth's magnetosphere Was carried out using
French rocketa and electron guns developed in the USSR.10
`Ile uork of Soviet and F'rench specialists in the space comzaunications area
- has madc it possible to ensure high-quality experimental TV program broad-
cs_t ,t:; t 1
On 10 October 1974, on the occasion o� the 50th anniversa.ry of the estab-
lishint; of diplomatic relations between the USSR and France, a Soviet-
F'rench conference was held in Kiev, and at this the bnsic scientific re-
sults were reported obtained in the course of the cooperatfon between the
two countries in the area of the research and use of space.
During tr.e Soviet-French surm.it meetings, both sides repeatedly expressed
their satisfaction with the course of carryinp, out the agreement and their
intention to deepen the mutually advantageous cooperation.13
The Agreement with India. The first contact betr+een Soviet acd Indian spe-
cialists on the questions of cooperation in space research Were established
49
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOIt OFFICIAL USE ONLY
at the outset of the 1960'g on the occnsion of the decision of the Indian
government to develop an internationnl teating range on its territory at
7'humba for the rocket sounding of the atmosphere. 7'he location of this
tenting range on the geomagnetic equntor running un equal dietance between
the magnetic polen of the earth made it possible to conduct important ecien-
tific experiments at it to gtudy the atmosphere and magnetosphere of the
eurth.
Several nations aere involved in organizing the range and conducting scien-
tific reaearch at it. On 13 January 1964, an agreement was signed between
the Mnin Administrntion of the USSR Hydrometeorological Service and the
Atomic Energy Department of the Indian Government in accord wi.th which the
Soviet Union wou].d provide India a helicopter, an electronic computer, and
several devices for testing and inspecting equipmettt for equipping this
range. Both organizations agreed to carry out at the range a scientific
research progrfun of mutual interest, and that the final resul*s of all the
experiments would be made available to the world scientific community.
In developing this agreement, on 14 May 1970, the same organizations signed
an agreement on the systematic rocket sounding of the atmosphere from the
Thumbu range using Soviet meteorological rockets. This work is not only
af scientific but also great practical significance. Initially both Soviet
and Indian specialists participated in carrying out the ,joint experiments
_ and in the launching of the rockets. At present, after corresponding train-
ing, the Soviet coworkers of the range launch these rockets independently.
The results of the joint rocket experiments have been made available to
the world geophysical data centers.
Although the first rocket was launched from the Thumba range in 1963, the
official opening of the range was after the f~Zll completion of construc-
tion in February 1968. At present the range has become a ma,jor inter-
national research and training center. In accord with the Resolution of
the UN General Assembly 2130 (XX) of 21 December 1965, the Thumba .range is
under the aegis of the United Nations.
The next important step along the path of deepening and developing Soviet-
Indian cooperation in the study of space was taken on 10 May 1372, when
the USSR Academy of Sciences and the Indian Space Research Organization of
the Indian Government signed an agreement on the launching of an Indian
satellite on a Soviet carrier missile.14
This agreement provided for the launching of a scientific satellite designed
and manufactured in India from Soviet territory on a Soviet carrier mis-
sile. The specific technical questions related to carrying out the pro3ect
kere to be settled by ajoint working group of specialists from both
countries.
The Soviet side provided gratis a carrier missile and launching equipment
for carrying out the joint project, and also provided the necessary consul-
tative und technological aid.
50
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOtt dFFICIAL USE ONLY
The successful ltiunchinp, of the firnt Indian satellite waa held on 19 April
1975. In the course of the work involved in the development, launching and
control of this aate.llite, Zndian scientigts and specialista acquired
gkilln in the dec+igning and manufacturing ni' complex space deviceg, an
well an contrdlling them during a flight.
In 1976, the USSR Acadetry of Sciences and the Indian Space Research Organi-
zation of the Indian Government signed an aPreement for launching a new
Indian 3atellite on a Soviet carrier missile in 1978; this satellite was
designed fbr conducting experiments to observe the earth's surface from
space.
The Declaration on the Further Development of Friendship and Cooperatiori
Between the USSR and India notes thnt the launching of the first Tndian
- satellite with a Soviet mis3ile from Soviet territory nnd the concluaing of
a new ggreement on the launching of a second Indian satellite opened up a
new cha
~ter in scientific and technical cooperation between the tao coun-
tries. l

The Intergovernmental Agreement on the Further Development of Economic a.id
Trade Cooperution Between the USSR and Tndia signed on 29 November 1973
also emphasizes the grent significance which the sides Qive to scientific
and technical cooperation, including in space research. The agreement con-
- tains the obligation of the sides to f.irther develop and strengthen this
cooperation.16
International Agremeents on Setting Up Satellite Tracking Stations. By
- the beginning oi' 1977, the USSR had bilateral agreements on setting up
satellite tracking stations'with Egypt, Bulgaria, Bolivia, Hungary,
Equatorial Guinea, India, Cuba, Mali, Mongolia, Poland, Somalia, Romania,
the Sudan, France, the Republic of Chad, the CSSR, Ecuador and Japan.
Virtually all these agreements were concluded on an interdepartmental level.
On the Soviet side, as a rule, they were signed by the USSR Acadeay of
Sciences, and for the other partners, on behalf of the academ}r of seiences
or the ministries (committees) for science and technology. The international
legal nature of these agreements, aside from all else, is affirmed by the
circurlstance that all of them have been concluded with the knoxledge and
agreement of the governments of the corresponding countries. The talks on
concluding the agreements in a number of instances were conducted through -
diplomatic channels. Those interdepartmental agreements Which Were re-
inforced by an exchange of diplomatic notes move to an intergovernmental
level.
The concern of the designated agreements is the establishing and operating
of joint satellite tracking stations on the territory of the corresponding
nations. The technical equipping of these stations is carried out by the
USSn.
51
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOtt 0FFICIAI, U5E ONLY
Satellite obgervations uging optiCal methodg (vigual, photographic, photo-
metrir_ and laser) make it posgible to egtablish geodetiC relationshipg ut
great distances, to provide an ephemeris survey needed for prediCting the
movement of satellitea and controlling the work of their gcientifiC equip-
ment, and to study the density of the ettrth's atmosphere und the irregu-
larity of the earth'n gravitational field. 'I'he conducting of guch regearch
is only poggible with the gimultaneoug and coordinated aork at varioug
points of the esrth, and requireg the getting up df a worldtride network of
trackinp, gtationa.
As can be seen from the given listn of nations with Which agreements have
been concluded, joint stations have been organized on the territory of a
number nf capitalist, socialist nnd developing nation3.
The joint work of scientists f'rom the socinlist countries on optiCal satel-
lite observations began in 1957. This Work formed the basig for further
cooperation among the socialiat countries in the study and development of
space. Initinlly such work was based not on officiQl agreements, but rather
on a direct understanding between scientific collectives and groupa of sci-
entists in different nations.
In November 1962, the first coordinating meeting of the Commission on multi-
lateral cooperation between the academies of sciences of the socialist coun-
tries r+as held in Leningrad on the given problem. Since then coordinating
conferences have been held annually. They rotate among the nations par-
ticipating in the cooperation. Since 1969, thia work which is under the
leadership of the Astronomical Council of the USSR Academy of Sciences in
the USSR, has become an organic part of the Intercosmos Program.17
On the basis of bilateral agreements concluded in 1967-1970 by the academies
of sciences of the socialist countries with the USSR Academy of Science, the
USSR has supplied the joint stations set up in these countries with the sci-
- entific equipment, and the equipment is completely operated by local per-
sonnel.
_
- Among the capitalist countries, cooperation in this area has developed with
the greatest results with France. For a number of years Soviet-French _
3atellite tracking stations have been operating on Kerguelen Island and in
French Guiana. Upon the initiative of scientists from both nations, in
recent years major international programs have been carried out in the area
of satellite geodesy (Isa,jecs, Aretic-Antarctic, and others). Developing
out of Soviet-French cooperation, these programs subsequently were shirted -
under the aegis of the COSPAR international nongovernmental organization,
and many countries have participated in them. For example, under the
Isajecs program, simultaneous observations have been carried out at 53
stations located in various parts of the world.
The agreement between the USSR Academy of Sciences and the Indian Space
Research Organization of 20 November 1975 can also serve as an exemple of
a bilateral agreement with the developing nations.
52
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOtt OFFICIAL USE ONLY
The agreement conCluded for a period of 5 years with the poesibility of an
automatic extension prdviden for the organizing of a permanent etation for
photot;raphic observations of space db,jectn in Indie.
'Che station has been set up ag ajoint ncientifiG ingtitutibn of the tWo
countrien, nnd it cnrries out dystematic photographic obsprvntions of space
ObjeCt9 over nn extended peridd of time. The observationa at the stntion
are mnde jointly by Soviet and Indign npecialigtg under coordinated prdgrams.
With the understanding of the nides, coworkers from ecientific institutions
af dther nations mgy be permitted to conduct observationa. Ttie regultn of
the observations made at the station are used by the Soviet and Tndian
scientific organizationg on equal grounds. The agreement provides the ob11-
gation of the U55R Academy of Seiences to supply the stntion with n com-
plete set of scientific equipment, to ensure its regular technical mainten-
ance, to send specialigts �or wnrking et the station along With Indian
scientists, and so forth. The agreement regulates in detail the financigl
and other obligations of the parties in building and operating i:he station.
At present, the station in India, aside from the standard Soviet AFU-75
device for photographic observations is equipped with a laser range finder,
an unique instrument developed jointly by the scientific organizationg nf
n number of the aocialiat countries. This device makes it possible to
measure distances to the satellites With an accuracy of up to 1 m.
7'he legal status of the other nations located in the developing countries is
the same as the one just examined. In organizing joint stations on the ter-
ritory of these countries, the USSR is carrying out not only the tasks posed
by its orm national space research program, but also provides substantial
aid to the designated countriea in training their own national personnel,
- and in involving states in the research and use of apace Where the economic
and scientific-technical development level of these states does not a11oW
_ them as yet to conduct independent Work in space.
As has been noted by specialists, satell{te geodesy makes it possible to
link islands With continents, to unite the geodetic grids of the contin-
ents across seas and oceana, and to study the earth as a single Whole.
Aecause of satellites, the external appearance of the earth has now been
3tudied 10-20-fold better than before 1957.18
The bilateral agreements are the most xidely found form of international
cooperation in the study and use of space. These are Widely used by many
countries in preparing and carrying out international space programs. The
specific content of the bilateral space agreements concluded by the USSR
is extremely diverse. In particular, on che basis of such agreements, the
larqest joint space programs are being carried out With the United States,
France and India. The scale and political significance of these programs
can be seen from the fact that agreements on scientific and technical co-
operation in the development of space have been concluded vith the desig-
nated countries on an interatate and intergovernmental level.
53
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
xoR nxFYCinL usE oxLY
7'he mont numeroun prnup nf bilateral agreemente, meinly interdepartmental ~
onen, hag been conaluded by the U38R for the purpose of setting up a net-
work of satellite tracking stations on foreign territoriee.
FaoTrromEs
1. A. A. $lagonravov, Soviet grd U.S. Cnapergtion in Space Regearch,"
VESmNIK AKAbEMII NAUK 89SR, Na 10, 1964, pp $2-84. For the text of the I.
first agreement, gee: United Steteg Interngtional Space Programs. ~
Staff Report F'repared for the Committee on Aeronautical and 3pace Sciences," United 3tetea Senate, 30 July 1965. ~
2. VEUOMOSmI VERKHOVNOCO SOVETA SSSEi, No 23, 19729 p 194. F'or the dig-
cugsion nf this agreement in the U.S. Congress, gee: "U.S.-U3SR Co-
operative Agreements. Report of the Subcommittee on Tnternational
Cooperation in Science and 8pace," August 1972, Washingtnn, U.S. Covern-
ment prittting Uffice, 1972�
3. F'or more detail on the project, see: "'Soyuz' i'Apollon'" [Soyuz and
Apollo], edited by K. D. Bushuyev, MoscoW, Politizdat, 1976.
4. On ttie role of the USSR and United States in creating the standards of
international laW, see: G. T. Tunkin, "Teoriya Mezhdunerodnogo Prava,"
Moscow, Mezhdunarodnyye Otnosheniya, 1970, PP 310-311. ~
5. D. L. Harvey and L. C. Ciccoritti, "U.3.--Soviet Cooperation in Space," ~
- Center for Advanced International Studies, University of Miami, 1974.
- 6. Ibid., pp XXXII-XXXIII.
7. PRAVDA, 21 March 1973; 9 January 1974, 23 March 1974, 13, 21 September
1974, etc.
8. With the lapsing of the Agreement of 24 May 1972, a neW Agreement be-
tween the USSR and United States on Cooperation in the Research and
Use of Space for Peaceful Purposes was signed in Geneva on 18 May 1977
and came into force on 24 May 1977 (for the text of the Agreement, aee: ~
IZVESTIYA, 20 May 1977)� A majority of the articles oP the neW Agree-
ment were maintained in their former vrording and srith the previous
numbering, r+ith the exception of Article 3, Where instead of the con-
cluded Soyuz--Apollo Project, it was a question of a further develop-
ment of cooperation in the area of manned space flights in accord aith
the agreement concluded for these purposes on 11 May 1977 by the USSR
Academy of Sciences and NASA.
9. PRAVDA, 1 ,Tu1y 1966. ;
54
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
NOR OFFICIAL U5E dNLY
10. pRAVbA, 5 P'ebruary 1975.
11. For the experimentp conducted in acaord ttith the Soviet-French Agree-
- ment, see: Yu. T. (3a1'perin and L. A. Vedeshin, "Soviet-French Coopera-
tidn in Space Renearch," VE3TNIK AKAbEMTI NAUK S55Ft, No 11, 1972, pp 811-
92; "Orbity Sotrudnichestva," edited by B. N. petrov, Moscow,
Maahinostroyeniye, 1975; J. C. Husaon, "Coop4ration franco-eovi4tique
_ pour 1'etude scientifique de 1'egpace," Y,E COURRTER DU CNES, No 10,
, 1973, pp 29-32.
12. "nesyat' Let Franka-Sovetekogo Kogmicheskogo Sotrudnichestva" (Ten Years
of Franco-Soviet 3pace Cooperation], joint publication of Intercosmos
and CNES, Imprimerie du 3ud, Toulouse, 1976.
13. pRAYUA, 31 October 1971; 13 January 1973; 8 December 1974; 18 October
1975�
14. For the text of the agreement see the Appendix to the book: V. S.
Vereahchetin, "Kogmog. Sotrudnichestvo. Pravo," Moacow, Nauka, 1974,
pp 160-i6i.
15. PRAVDA, 14 June 1976.
16. F'or the text of the agreement, see: PRAVDA, 1 December 1973.
17. A. G. Masevich and N. P. S].ovokhotova, "3cientific Reaearch Using
Satellite Observations," NABLYUDENIYA ISKUSSTVENNYKH SPUTNIKOV SFNLI,
Sofia, No 7, 1967 (1968), pp 205-213.
18. A. S. Masevich and S. K. Tatevyan, "Soviet-French Cooperation in Space
Geodesy," in the book: "Desyat' Let Franko-Sovetskogo Kosmicheskogo
Sotrudnfchestva," p 111.
55
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
r=
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFPICIAL USB ONLY
CNAPTER 4: "3PACE INTE(}RATION" IN WESTERN EUROPE
At the beginning og the 1960's, the nations of Western Europe set out on a
policy of joint apace development. For this purpoae two intergovernmental
organizationg were set up: the European Space Research Organization (ESRO)
and the European Launcher Development Organizations (ELDO). Later another
two Western European associations arose on an intergovernmental level.
These Were the European Communicationa Satellite Conference and the E1iro-
pean Space Conference. Tn addition, the Western European industriel firms
ahich are interested in obtaining large orders paid for by the states, cind
not wishing to fall behind their American competitors, have aet up their
own Eurospace Association, as well as a number of industrial conaortiums.l
Within relatively short times, an infrastructure of national and inter- ~
national scientific and technical institutions Was organized in Western
Europe, and development and implementation Were started on a series of
joir,t projects and programs, that is, everything ahich in political termin- ~
ology has been termed "space Europe." HoWever, as was rightly noted by the
Well-knoWn French writer on international affairs C. Colliard, "the results ~
of European cooperation in the space area have been extremely disappoint- 'ing.i2 Antagonistic contradictions inherent to imperialist integration
- have been clearly manifested in the attempts to develop a uniform policy
among the Western European nations in the area of the research and use of
space.3 At the same time, it must be pointed out that after 1973, With
the reaching of compromise agreements on a number of joint programs, as
well as on organizational questions related to Western European space co-
operation, a nex stage `ras started in the pooling of efforts by the nations
of this region in space development.
The official birthday of ESRO is considered to be 20 March 1964, When its
constituent convention signed on 12 June 1962 Went into force.4 The talks
on setting up E$RO continued for several years. The most active role in
the course of the talks Was plqyed by Great Britain, France and West
Germany. The task posed here was to provide the national research groups
of the Western E~Zropean nations With the technical possibilities for launch-
ing the scientific instrumentsdeveloped by them into space.
56
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
.
FOR OFFICIAL U5G ONLY
In drnwing up the E5R0 prop,ram, even before the officiel egtablishing of
the organization, the basic princ3pal of itd gctivities aas definecl, nnmely:
the development ancl mumifacturing of scientific equipment for the gatel-
liten, ghould, an a rule, be Carried out by the ingtitutione of the member
nntidnn of the orp,ani7ntion and pAid for from their nattonal currencier+.
'1'tic (tevelopment and crentian af the satellites themselves, their eupport
systema as we11 ag the ucquiring of carrier misailQS Were to br enrried out
by the orgenir.ation and under itg direct control.
At the moment of its �ound3ng, ten gtntes xere ESRO members: Belgium,
Great gritain, the Netherlands, Denmark, Spain, Ttaly, France, Wegt (}erman,y,
. Switzerland and Sweden. Austria, Treland, and later nn Canada, also parti-
- cipated in its work as observera. Other nationg could join ESRO only aith
the ngreement nf a11 its members.
ESRO set up an entire netwnrk of scientific and technical inatitutiong lo-
cated in the various European countrieg. The most important of them are:
the Center for Space Science and Technology in the Netherlands, the Control
and Space Data Processing Center in West Qermany, the Space Reaesrch Insti-
tute in Italy, the Research Rocket Lasanching Range in SWeden, and the sys-
' tem of satellite tracking stations which include four stations built in ~
Belgium, Alaska, Spitsbergen and in the Falkland Islands.
The largest of these institutions, the European Center for Space Science
and Technology, carries out the designing, development, asaembly and test-
ing of the satellites and instrument compartments of research missiles,
~ and also conducts joint research and development. Among the six co-WOrkers
of the center are citizens of five European nations.s
The mentioned ESRO institutions were located in the various Western European
nations in accord with a special resolution approved at a conference of
delegates convened in 1962 for signing the constituent documents of FSR0.6
The legal status of these institutions is defined by agreements concluded
between ESRO and the member states. The agreements regulate ';3 status of
the corresponding institution and its personnel on the territ..:y of the
member state, including the questions of privileges and immunities, lia-
bility, the law to be applied, the procedure for resolving disputes, and
so forth.
ESRO has signed these aPreements as a principal in international law.7
However, the activities of the organization on the territory of the member
states in a number of questions are subordinate to national lax.e Disputes
related to the application or interpretation of the agreements are examined
_ by international arbitration, the decisions of which are of binding force.
The superior directing body of ESRO responsible for carrying out its scien-
tific, administrative and financial activities is its council khere eech
member state has one vote. The council sessions are held at least twice a
year, as a rule, at the headquarters of the organizdtion in Paris. The
- 57
FOR OFFICIAL TiSE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
Fdit UFFICIAL USE ONtY
enuncil electn from among its membera a burenu consigting of a chairman gnd
two vice chairmen for a term of one year With the ri.ght of reelection for
not more than tWd terms.
According to the Constituent convention, the competence of the counCil in-
cludeg: determitting the policy of the organization on acientific-Lechnical and adminigtrative questiona; approving the prograng gnd annual wdrk plang;
determining the level of financing �or the subgequent 3-year period at the
end of every 3 years, and the approval of the annual budget; the admitting
of nea members, gg Well ag the taking nf other decigions related to the
activitieg of the organization (Article X, I'oint 14). Deciaions of the council involving admission of new members to the orgnni-
zntion can only be taken unanimously. beciaions on financial and certain '
other questions algo require unanimity or a gpecial majority.
The council by a ma3orit,y of tWO-thirds of the votes appoints the director
general who carries out the superior executive functions and is the 1ega1
representative of the organization. He slso directs the work of a11 the
ESRO institutions (Article XT).
mhe total number of ESRO employees has exceeded 1,000 persons, including
around 200 peraons working at the organization's secretariat in Paris.
7'he financial activities of the organization are regulated by the constitu-
ent convention (Article XII), as Well as by tvro special protocols approved
sfmultaneously With this convention. In 1964-1972, ESRO expenditures Were
not to exceed 306 million units of account (in 1962, this total Was 306
million dollars). For comparison we might point out that the NASA budget -
in 1966 exceeded the annual ESRO budget by 140 times.
It Was assumed that the money to be allocated to ESRO for the first 8 years
of its activities would make it possible during this time to develop 10-12
satellites and 300 research rockets. Actually by the Pnd of the designated
time, ESRO had launched 7 satellites and 171 rockets (125 rocket launches
were successful).9
The amounts of the contributions by the member nations were to be set on
the basis of national income under the stipulation that none of the ESRb
members would be required to pay over 25 percent of the total amount of the
payments (Article XII of the Convention). Around 70 percent of the contri-
butions come from Great Britain, France and West Germar~y.
Since the end of 1966, ESRO has begun to experience financial difficulties.
Even then it was clear that it would be impossible to carry out full,y the
launches planned over the 8-year period of research rockets and "small"
satellites at the designated times and within the limits of the allocated
funds.
58
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FCltt dFFICIAi. U5E ONLY
A number of nations, pnrticu7.tir1y England, openly voiced disnatigf'action
with the uneven allocation ai' induntrinl drderg betveen the individugl
courtti�tes. Spain ttnnounced its withdraual from the organization gg df
1 Junuary 1968, "far economic, technical and financial reagons," and re-
vised this decigion only aftor itg contribution wag reduced by 90 percent.10
In the second 3-yetLr periad of its existence (1967-1969), ESf2b gtarted with-
out a clearly defined propratn and a set budget. 'I'he aituation was frther
Complicated after the delay and unsuccesgful lnunch of the first ESF2O natel-
lite in 1967. Ag an "extraordinary mensure" for the purpdses of keeping
the brganizatiott alive, the 1967-1968 budgetg aere get by the council on
a temporary bagig and in violgtion o� the ru1os set out by the congtituettt
documents.
In November 1968, A conference of Western European miniaters in Bonn suc-
Ceeded in achievinp, compromise golutions on a number of the diBputed queg-
tions related to "space Europe" including on the questinn of a limit of
expenses for ESI20 in 1969-1971� At the same time, thia cdnference fdr the
first time decided that in the fLture ESRd aould halt itg existence as an
independent organization and become part of the unified European Space
Organization which w�ald brittg together all the intergovernmental space
orgnnizations existing in Europe.
F'rom 1964 through 1968, slthough there sti11 Was not a single orbited
satellite among the assets o� ESRO, its basic activities involved the
l.aunching of reaearch rockets, and this kas carried out Prom the ESRO
launching grounds in SWeden as well as from a number of national missile
ground3.
The first ESRO satellite, Iris, designed for studying solar radietion and
cosmic rays was launched on 17 May 1968 with a delay of one year againat
the planned date. The launch Was made from U.S. territory using an American
carrier mi3sile. The delsy in manufacturing certain scientific instrument3
und systems for the second Aurora satellfte also led to a deferral of the
launch for almost a year. Both satellites Were developed with the direct ~
participation and technical advice from NASA. NASA provided their launch-
ing gratis, but in return the United States gained the right for unob-
structed access to all scientific information from these satellites.
By the beginning of 1977, ESRO developed another six scientific satellites.
They Were all launched using American carriers from American territory.
However these launches Were nox made on a commercial basis. For each of
them the United States received several million dollars from Weatern
Europe.
The great 3ignificance Which began to be given to applications satellites,
and above all the communications and meteorological satellites, caused in-
creaaed interest in them by ESRO, although aceording to the constituent
convention, it could only be concerned with scientific satellites. From
1967, upon the request of the European Communications Satellite conference,
ESRO began to develop a program for creating a Elxropean cotmnunications
59
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
Fdk OFFICIAI, USE ONLY
gatellite. mogether with NASA, the design of a gatellite was digcugsed fnr
providing afr traffic control. In the middle of 1971, France proposed to
E5p0 the further ,jdint development of its weather gute111te. -
A ntymber of important decinions on the ESltb program was taken by the council
di this orggnization in becember 1971�11 '1'he main one concerned the programg
fbr developing applications sutellites, in particular Aerosat (aircraft
gervice gatellitee) and Meteogat (meteorological gatellites) and European
communieationg gatelliteg. In 1972-1974, it was decided to gpend around
300 million dollarg on theae programg to be carried out by E3R0. The organ-
ization was given the right tn plan the expenditure of funds for these satel-
liteg in the gubsequent yearg, up to 1980, aithin the established limit.
'1'he E5120 Council also decided to continue the program for creating ELropean
gcientific satellites, hoaever hnving significantl,Y Cut back on allocationg
for theee purposeg.12 At the game time for the sake of saving f'unds. it was
decided to eliminate the ESAO testing runge in Kirung, by turning it over .
to SWeden; the Space Research Institute in Itgly was also eliminated (it
was turned into the Interatfonal Center for Space Documentation and Tnfo:zna-
tion).
The broadening of the applied sphere of ESRO activities required a revision
of its constituent convention. 7'he amenclments to the convention prepared
by a work group specially convened for these purposes, provided for the par-
ticipation of the ESRO members in the development plans for applicationa
satellite systems of interest to them. For this pus*pose apecial protocols
were to be concluded by the concerned ESRO members for each such project
or program.
Although the mentioned amendments to the convention approved at the end of
1972 by the Council have not formally cmne into force, they have served
as the legal basis for the further activities of ESRO, particularly in the
sphere of the use of space for applied purposes. As Will be shown belrn+, the neW
stage starting in 1973 in the hiatory of ESRO was related to the system
of decisions involving "apace Ehrope" as a Whole.
From the analysis made of the 1^_gal status of ESRO, it follows that it was
set up as an intergovernmental organization directly -oncerned with the
creation and operation of certain types of space equipment. In this sense,
ESRO, like certain other operational space organizations, has differed from
the traditional interstate organizations which involve not joint produc-
tion activities but rather the coordinating of actions of their members in
one or another sphere.13
Within the limits set by the constituent convention, ESRO entered into
international intercourse as a principal of international lav. In this
quality, in particular, it established ties and concluded international
treatie3 with states and other international organizations. In a number
_ of instances, ESRO, as a legal entity, also entered into civil law rela-
tionships'regulated by national 1QW. In accord wfth the special protoco1,14
60
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
the member stateg of ESNO granted the organization and its personnel priv3-
legeg and immunities analogous td those which usually are granted to inter-
governmental organizationa.15
Tn parallel with the creation of ESItO and somewhat before, active diplo-
mutic talks were carried out over the question of establishing an European
"rocket poo1." for the purpose af producing carrier rockets.
As in the first instance, England showed the greatest activ3ty in the talks,
and it was interested in uging the English Blue Streak missile as an E1aro-
pean rocket. Such a decision made it posaible for the Engliah government
to some degree to recover the scores of millions of pounds spent on the de-
velopment of the Blue 5treak, and to involve the financial and scientific-
technical resources of the other countries in improving its missile. How-
ever this decision was not to the liking of the two other main participants
in the talks, France and West Germany, which also wanted to take a direct
part in producing the European launch vehic'Les. Only after England had
made concessions and had agreed to French and West German participation
in the development of the second and third stages of the missile, was it
possible to come to terms on sett3ng up a new organization. The other
- Western European nations joined the "pool" out of prestige considerations
and a desire to secure a certain share of the missile business for their
. industrial firms.
The Convention on the Establishment of the European Launcher Development
_ Organization (ELDO) was signed in London on 29 March 1962 and came into
force on 29 February 1964.~6
The members of the organization included seven states: Australia, England,
I3elgium, the Netherlands, Ita1y, France and West Germany. Denmark and
Switzerland participated in its work as observers.
The basic mission of ELDO was to provide Western Europe with its own car-
rier missiles for launching sattelites for scientific and comercial pur-
poses. It was assumed that ESRO would be one of the main consumers of the
missiles produced by ELDO.
The organization was directed by a council on which each state had one vote.
The council established financial and scientific-technical committees. The
international ELDO secretariat located in Paris and numbering over 300 em-
ployees was headed by a secretary general. We will not take up the struc-
ture and legal status of this organization in more detail since'at present
these questions are chiefly of historical interest. However, without at =
least a brief review of ELDO activities it would be difficult to describe -
the entire complex of acute political and legal contradictions in the space
research area betWeen the Western E~Zropean countries as well as between
them and the United States.
61
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
The initial ELDO program the completion of which was planned for the end of
1966 envisaged the creation of three-stage carzier nisailes capable of put-
tinF, a sate111te weighing up to one ton into a 1ow ci:cular orbit. The
duties of carryinp,out this program were allocated among the members of the
organization in the following manner. England was to provide its Blue
Streak missile and this was to be used as the first stage of the European
missile. France was concerned with the development of the second stage,
and West Germar~y with the third. Zta1y was entrusted with developing an _
experimental satellite, the Netherlands was concerned with the telemetric
system, and Belgium was in charge of the ground control station. Australia ,
= was involved in the work of the organization for the purpose of using its
Woomera Missile Range for the testing and launching of the carrier missiles.
Tn contrast to ESRO, ELDO di.d not have the powers to assign contracts in
the aerospace industry or to be involved itself in the product3on process.
Its functions bas3cally came down to the overall supervision and control
over the course of work in developing the launch vehicles.
A limit of 210 mil]ion units of account was set for carrying out the initial
- program,17 and here around 40 percent of the expenditures were to be paid
by England, while France and West Germany each would cover approximately `
20 percent.
From the very outset the work of developing an European launch vehicles
was carried out without coordination, in violation of the set dates, and
in a situation of unceasing arguments over the share of expenditures for
the ELDO members. Every 2 years; in 1966, 1968 and 1970, the organiza-
tion underwent an acute financiel crisis. The worl: of the organization
~ was halted repeatedly. Only the firm intention of France and West Germar~y
to keep the European program for developing the launch vehicles alive at
any price saved ELDO from complete collapse. The special interest of
France and West Germany in keeping ELDO alive was explained, in addition
to political considerations, by a desire to provide an European carrier
for the Symphonia communications satellite which was being developed by
these two nations. The United States, in viewing Symphonia as a competi-
tor for the comme:ocial corrmiunications satellites of the Intelsat system,
refused to guarantee the launching of this satellite with its carriers.
- Moreover, France was interested in using its missile range in Guiana for
launching the Europear_ missiles, as it had spent significant amounts on
its construction.
Soon after starting work on the EtzY'opa-1 missile it became clear that at
least double the amount of money would be needed to complete it than had
initially been assumed.
A conference of ministers from the ELDO member states meeting in 1966
decided to revise the initial program of the organization. In addition
to completing the work of developing Europa-l, a decision was taken to
institute a so-called supplementary program for the purpose of producing
a more powerful Europa-2 carrier. The plan was that the launching of
62
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
I?uropm-,'' Crom ri new mi.,sile
to uLilize this currier fnr
'1'hi:, would providc u mnrket
pettii independence t'rom the
sC,ncc systems.l8
H'OK nFFICIAL USE ONLY
range in r'rench duinna would make it ponnible
luunchinp European communicationtt satellites.
for the ELDO minniles and ensure Wegtern Euro-
Jnited States in the develdpment of the applied
For cnrryinr.11 out the initial nnd supplementary programs, the ministerial
con�erence established a limit of 626 million units of account, but just
a year after the approvnl of these decisions,.it was clear that it would
tFike nnother 100 million to carry out both programs up to the end of 1971.
A new finuncicil crinis developed and this wtts exacerbated by Lngland's
ttnnouncement (in April 1968) that it was immediately withdrawinp, from the
argani.^,ation.
_ Only undei� the strong pressure of its partners who linked the question of
- EnPlish membership in ELbO with its admission to the Commori Market did
Lnpland agree to continue its ffnancial participation in the organization
up to 1971. At the sfune time, ELbO more and more lost confidence in the
eyes of the other members of this organization. For example, Italy, de- _
prived of a number of orders, also announced that it would cease to sup-
port the ELDO program after 1971.
Difficult times arose for ELDO in the autumn of 1970, when a profound
crisis again shook all "space Europe." However the fate of the European
space ot�ganizations at thut time was determined on a different level, with-
in the permanent space conference with a membership of the ministers from
the Western E~Zropean nations.
As for the course of work on the Ezropa-1 and E~uropa-2 missiles, :he first
of these carriers has not yet succeeded in orbiting a single satellite,
regardless of the successful ir...flight and design testing, while work on
the F.uropa-2 missile was halted after a aeries of failures during trials.
Bf r,his time over 640 million dollars had been spent on the developmunt of
, the missile. rlor has there been r.uiy development of the most recent plans
of certain ELDO members Which provide for the development of an even more
- powerful Europa-3 carrier by the end of the 1970's.
On 27 April 1973, a fatal blow was dealt to ELDO, when at a session of
ttie council the representatives of France and West Germany announced the
decision of their _P,overnments to halt the financing of the program to de-
- velop the Europa-2 nissile. Since this time ELDO has begun to curtail its
activities and in fact has ceased to exist.
_ The third associution of Weatern European nations in the area of space de-
velopment, the E~zropean CorrQnunications Satellite Conference (CEPS), is
not an organization in the strict sense of the Word, although it has often -
heen termed such. -
63
_ FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOtt OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
The conference wun convened fur the first time in May 1963 for working out
a coordinated position among the Weatern European countries on an American
proposal to set up a worldwide communications satellite system. The co-
ordinntin; of the viewpointg of the Western European nations on the ques-
tions of using gatellites for commercial communications purposes became
its basic task. CETS did not have a permanent budget or scientific re-
search institutes, and was not engaged in the direct development of space
rncketry.
participatiing in the work of the conference, the sessions of which convened
periodically in different countries, were 16 states. 'I'he auxiliary bodies
of the conference were the Committee on Organizational Questiona, the Com-
mittee on Space Technology, the Technical Planning Group and the Secretariat.
The CETS carried out its activities in close contact with the other Euro-
pean space organizations as well as the European Radio Broadcasting Union
and Eurovision.
On the eve and during the course of the talks to work out the so-called
final agreements on the international communications satellites consortitun
Intelsat which were started in Washington in 1969, the Western European
governments used the CETS as a forum for coordinating a Luiiform European
position at the talks with the Americans. This was a sort of attempt to
undertake collective actions to defend the political and economic inter-
ests of the Western European nations when confronted by the American domin-
ance in the area of space communications.
The second goal which the CETS set for itself was to elaborate a European
program for developing a regional conununications system using satellites.
Upon the request of the CETS, ESRO was concerned with the direct elabora-
tion of the plans for an European communications satellite.
In July 1970 the European Space Conference approved a decision to halt
the activities of the CETS. There was no longer any necessity for its
existence since the talks to work out the Intelsat agreements had come
to an end and the development of European communications satellites had
been entrusted to ESRO.
Before 1966, work among the Western European space organizations was virtu-
ally uncoordinated, and no uniform policy was carried out area
space research and development. Difficulties in carryang out the desi8
nated programs, differences of opinion between the Western European nations
on the question of placing orders with industry, and the significant cost
overruns--all of this required the regulating and coordinating of activi-
ties by the existing space organizations.
Upon the initiative of the Ita2ian government, the question of the coordi-
natin_p, of the European policy in the space area was incorporated in the
agenda of the ministerial conference of the ELDO members in 1966� This
marked the beginning to the setting up of a neK permanent international
body, the European Space Conference.19
64
FOR OFFICIAI. USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OYFICIAL USE ONLY
I'nrttciputinr, in the first European Space Conferettce in December 1966 were
tte neven ELbO nations afl we11 us benmark, Spain and a number of other
nations as observers. 'I'he conference resolved to make an anKlysis and
evnluation ot' thr. existinp national end international space programs as a .
first step on thc way to working out a unified European policy in this
area.
The aecond conf'erence was held in Rome in the summer ot' 1967� Virtually
all the statea which were members of the European Space Organizations pt;r-
ticipated in its work. At I2ome a resolution was approved in which the
European Space Con�erence was made u permanent body which would hold its
sessions annually on a ministerial 1eve1 for the purpone of working out
a coordinated European space policy AIId observing its implementation. The
proposals to formulate such a policy were to come fron a speCially estab-
lished concultalive programs committee. In justifying its concluaions on
the necesaity of an extensive space research program for Europe, the com-
mittee mentioned first of all considerations of a political nature:
"Europe should first of all demonstrate its determination to be inde-
pendent."20
The third European Space Conference held in November 1968 in West Germany
approved conipromise decisions which involved the current activities of the
European space organizations and the more distant prospects.21 At the con-
ference a deci3ion was taken to merge the existing space organizations into
_ a single European organize.tion. A draft convention for the setting up of
such an organization was to be ready by 1 November 1969. The conference
approved the ESRO budget for 1969-1971, and empowered the ESRO Council to
ussuma obligations for the individual pro,jects the completion dates of
which were set for the period after 1971. As the long-range gosl.s, a
- European communications satellite and large scientific research aetellites
were to be develaped as their programs went beyond the economic and tech-
nical capabilities of the individual countries.
Due to the fact that various viewpoints arose funong the Western European
nations on the advisability of fl,irther development of European launch
- vehicles, the future program was to be given a more profound character
making it possible for the nations, in the event they so desired, to par-
ticipate not in al.l the projects but only in some of them.
The carrying out of the decisions approved at the conference in West
Germany immediately encountered difficulties, since England and Italy
refused to participate in the additional expenditures related to imple-
menting the ELDO programs approved by the ministerial conference. ELDO
was again in trouble, and along with it the entire system of decisions
relating to the future European space program.
- A new element in the already tense situation was introduced by the U.S.
proposal to the Western Etizropean nations to participate in the long-range
NASA proprams to deveZop orbital stations and reusable space t:anaports.
65
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOit OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Under these conditions, in July 1970, a fnurth European Spgee Conference
was held in Brussels. At thet time Ita1y wag in the midst of a govern-
mental crisis, and a new Conaervative goverrunent had recently come to power -
in England. Already because of these circumstances it was clear that the
decisions of the conference would have only a provisional nature. But the
questions which were ta be digcussed by the ministers of the Western
European nations involved the long-range future, namely: the European
space program up to 1980, the merging of the existing space organizations
and the participe,tion of Europe in a future U.S. space program.
A majority wt the conference approved a resolution to set up an European
~ communications satellite system in 1978-1980 on the basis of the communica- _
tions geostationary satellite to be developed in Eu.rope. A decision wns
taken tngether with NASA to continue Work on developing the Aerosat system
and to begin research on European meteorological satellftes. The confer-
ence considered it advisable at the beginning of 1971 to open for signature
a convention to found an unified European space organization. _
At the Brussels Conference there was a clear split between England and the
small countries, on the one hand, and France, West Germany and Belgium,
on the other. A situation had developed whereby the basic burden for car-
rying out the development program for the European carrier miasiles had
been assumed by the latter three countries, moreover Without having any
certainty that Europe would use these carriers. -
The situation was complicated even at the first session of the Brussels
Conference. During the second session in November 1970, also held in _
Brussels, the explosion occurred. The conference was unable to pass an
acceptable decision on any of the questions discussed (applications and
- scientific research satellites, launch vehicles and a unified European
~ space organization). .
The culminating point of these events Was the statement of France, West - Ge:1many and Belgium that since only these nations held a consistent posi-
tion on the questions of the European space program, they had decided to . .
follou their own path, if need be, outside the framework of the existing
European space organizations, and invited other nations to join them.
- The core of the program supported by the three nations Was the Europa-3 ~
carrier missile and the cotmnunications satellite.
The new period of crisis starting with the 1970 Brussels Conference Was
- the most extended and threatening for "space Europe." For 2 years it Was
impossible to convene the next session of the European Space Conference.
In speaking at the International Astronautical Congress in Vienna in
October 1972, the ELDO legal af�airs adviser, M. Bourdly, stated: "The
present situation is characterized by complete uncertainty not only for `
the date of the next Europear. ministeriel meeting for space affairs, but
even the very possibility of organizing such a�meeting, and, even Worse,
the results that might be expected from it.22 ,
66
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
~

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOtt OFFICIAL USE ONLY
mhe nituation wan further Compliaated by the split in the F'rench and West
(ierman poaitions an these notions had previously shown the greatest con-
nistency on the question of flevelnping the European lau.nch vehiclea.23
At nn unofPicial meeting of the scientific and technical ministers of
certain Western European nationg held in November 1972 and aimed ut recon-
ciling the viewpoints in the course df preparing fnr a session of the
European Space Conference, F'rance was the only nation which categorically _
insisted on developing the Weatern European Europa-3 iauncn vehicle.
West Cermany, in agreeing to make a certain financial contribution to this
carrier, atated that it-did not consider the development of the misaile
essential and intended to participate in the fl.iture American gpgce pragram.
On this occasion the F'rench Minister of National Defense Michel nebr6
stated in an interview with the newspaper FIGARO that F'rance Would be
forced to carry out an independent space program, since n,joint apace
progrcLm anong the Western European nations had reached a blind alley.
"Our partners are willing to be satisfied with the role of American sub-
contractors," said Debr6.24
A month after this statement, in December 1972, a sesaion of the European
Space Conference was held in Brussels. As a result of complicated diplo-
matic maneuvers, the ministers of the Western European nations succeeded
in reuching a compromise at this se33ion.
The next session of the European Space Conference met in Brussels in July
- 1973. At it it was decided that the unified organization of the Western
European nations for the research and use of space which was named the
European Space Agency should begin operating on 1 April 1974.25 Upon the
initiative of West Germany which had assumed over one-half of the required
expenses, a decision Was taken to participate in developing the orbital
_ laborutory (Spacelab) for the American reusable transport spacecraft.
Approval was gtven to a prop,ram for developing a nex European launch
vehicle, the Arian, with France carrying the basic share of expenditures,26
- as Well as a program for developing the Marots satellite for setving mari-
time navigation, and here England shoWed particular interest in its de-
velopment.
The decision taken as Well as the pro3ects which were already in the stage
of implementation determined the basic elements tn the program of the
European Space Agency activities for 1974-1980. This program included the
development of Spacelab, 27 the Arian launch vehicle, and the satellites
which were to be used for developing applications space systems (OTS for
communications, Meteosat for meteorological, and Aerosat and Marots for
navigational satellites), as Well as a series of scientific satellites.
A number of bodies in the European Space Conference Was involved in pre-
- parinp, the draft convention for organizing the European Space Agency.28
AlthouRh this draft was to be Worked out by 1 October 1969, the preparation
67
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
of the docwnent was delayed due to the absence of a unified pollcy nmong
the Wegtern European nationg over the support for the ,joint space programs.
7'he 1962 ESRO Convention was used as the bngis for working out the new con-
stituent document, incorporating the changee npproved by the LSNO Council
in November 1972 but which had not yet gone into force due to the decision
to set up the Agency. Thege changes, as was mentioned above, concerned
primarily the powera of ESRO regarding the programs for developing the
applications satellites. ESRO was also entrusted with coordinating a11
the civilian gpace programs cerried out by the Western European countries.29
The convention to establish the European Space Agency was approved at the
session of the European Space Conference held in Brussels on 15 April 1975, ,
and was opened for signing in Paris on 30 May 1975 at a delegates confer-
ence. The convention was signed by 11 states, 10 of which were ESRO mem-
bers: Belgium, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Denmark, Ireland, Spain, _
Italy, France, West Germar~y, Switzerland and Sweden. The new convention which consisted of 2'7 articles and 5 apPendices30 gave
the European Space Agency broad powers going far beyond the limits of those
- Which previously had been granted to the European space organi2ations.
For the first time the Agency was given the task of internationalizing -
the space programs of the member states, as we11 as coordinating thei.r
national space policy (Article II). The methods and wqys of this inter-
nationalization and coordination as established by a special appendix to
the convention (Appendix IV) in particular imposec3 definite restrictions -
on the right of the Agency member states to carry out bilatteral and multi- �
lateral space pro,jects with states which were not members of the Agency.
Such pro,jects whould not run contrsry to the scientific, economic and
industrial aims of the Agency, and wherever possible the other Agency
members should be informed of these projects and invited to participate
in them. The mentioned restrictions could have negative consequences for ' -
_ the development of extensive international collaboration on a bilateral
and multilateral basis, and they deprive the Western Luropean states of
independence in taking decisions on collaboration with other countries. ,
As for theinternationalization of the programs carried out by the Agency member states, the convention established the principle in accord With �
which each Agency member is bound to provide an opportunity for all the
other members to participate in all the new civilian space projects
planned by it. .
A particular feature of the Agency is also that the space programs are
divided into compulsory which all the member nations should join, and
- elective where the member states may participate at their discretion.
A corresponding division has been made in the financial obligations and
in the procedure for implementing these programs.
The compulsory program financed by all the Agency members includes the
development of scientific satellites as xell as the so-called "base
68
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOIt OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
act3vitiea" (technological research, the atudy of future plans, the docu-
mentution and information service, and others). The elective progrEUn
- which is financed only by the concerned Agency members includes the de-
velopment of the appl.icntions satellites and satellite systems, as well
as the carrier missiles and space tranaport systems (Article V).
A new element in the organization of Weatern European sPace collaboration
is the provisic: of the convention that the Agency can directly partici- -
- pate in creating o7erational (commercial) satellite systema. In accord
with the decisione approved by a ma,jority of the council members, the
Agency has the right to turn over technolog,y to operational organiza- -
tions, to uae these organizations for the launching o:'applications opera-
tional satellites and control their flight, as we11 as partic3pate in
other activities upon the requests of the mentioned organizations (Article
V, Point 3).
The convention was opened for signing for only the member states of the
European Space Conference. Membershfp in it is possible only with the
agreement of all the members of the convention (Articles XXI and XXIII).
In practical terms this means that the Agency has been set up as a closed
organization of Western European nations.
The basic leading bodies of the Agency are: the council consisting of
representatives from all the member states and a director general. The
organizational structure to a significant degree is analogous to ESRO.
Each state has one vote on the council. The council's funetions include
the approval of the work programs and plans of the Agency, the approval
of the annual budget and determining thP expenditure level for a 5-year _
period (the last case requires a unanimous decision). -
The Agency has maintained the financing principle which existed in ESRO, .
in accord with which the contributions of the nations are set depending upon their national income.31
In considering that the council can be formed on the ministerie.l level
(Article XI, Point 4), the coming into force of the conventi:,n will mean
the end of not only ESRO and ELDO but also the European Space Conference.32
In this manner the Agency legally and actually will be turned into the
single intergovernmenta.i space organization for Western E~zrope.
For directing the implementation of each elective Agency program, a pro-
p;ram council is to be established with representatives from all the
nations participating in this program.
The director general who is elected by the council is given executive and -
representative functions (Article XIII).
- 69
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL U5L ONLY
For settling digputed questions between the Agency members, an arbitra-
tion body is provided for, and itg cleeisiona are binding and final for
ttie diaputinR parties (Article XVITI).
The convention grants the Agency the right, in the event of the approval
of unanimous decisions by the council, to conclude agreements on coopera-
tion with other international organ3zations, as we1.1 as with governments
and national organi2ations of countries which are not members of the Agency
(Article XV). Such agreements can involve, in particular, the participa-
tion of other states in international organizations in the Agency programs.
Article XV reflecta the now wide7.y recognized right of interstate organiza-
tions to conclude international legal treaties.33
In accord with Point 1 of Article XXII, the convention is to come into
force after it has been ratified by the 10 nations which were members of
ESRO. The process of ratifying the convention, it is assumed, will last
from 2 to 3 years. In this regard legal questions hsve arisen related to
the agency's activities during the period from the moment of the signing
of the convention until it comes into force.34
Although the resolution approved in July 1973 by the European Space Con-
ference stipulates that the Agency is to be set up by the "merging" of
ESRO and ELDO, the latter of the mentioned organizations has in fact been
eliminated and, in the description of M. Bour6ly, since 1973 "has repre-
sented only a legal and political fiction."35 The new program for develop-
ing the E~aropean Arian carrier began to be carried out not under ELDO,
but rather as a special ESRO project even before the Agency was set up.
Considering that the convention on the establishing of the Agency to a
significant degree was worked out on the basis of the ESRO convention and
also that the current European programs were being carried out by this
organization, the functions of the Agency during the transitional period
were to be entrusted to ESRO. Here from the moment of the signing of the
Agency convention, ESRO was to carry out its activities under the name of
the'European Space Agency," in applying the provisions of the new conven-
tion wherever feasible. The representatives of the states on the ESRO
and FLDO couricils would hold their sessions jointly until the neW Agency
Council was formed. Thus, de faeto the European Space Agency began its
existence on 31 May 1975�
Of definite interest are the questions of succession related to the trans-
- ferral of the rights ar_d duties of ESRO and EI,DO to the new European
organization.
Article XX of the convention stipulates that as of the date it comes into
effect, the entire aggregate of rights and obligations of ESRO and ELDO
is to be assumed by the Agency. As of this same date, according to
Point 2 of Article XXII, ESRO and ELDO de ,jure are to cease their exist-
ence. In this manner the Western European states have formally decided
70
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
- noi; to reaort to the legal procedure of flissolving the organizations nn
provided for in the correoponding nrticl.es of their constituent enactments.
The solution to the question was facil.itated by the fact that all the
E5R0 and ELDU members, with the exception of Australia, announced their
intention to ,join the new Agency, Australia denounced the ELDO conven-
tion on 1 January 1975.36
mhe most corr,plicated questions of succession arose over the actual elimi-
: natfon of ELDO. A large portion of the personnel from this organization
_ was dismissed, the property was sold or was to be used by ESRO, remaining
formally the property of ELbO, until it ceased its 1ega1 existence, The
final list of rights and duties which shou].d be transferred from ELDO to
the Agency would be drawn up by the director general of the Agency.37
The creation of the European Space Agency has marked a new stage in the
"space integration" of the European capitalist nations. On the political
level the integration processes in the space area have been proclaimed in
- the press of these countries as the "instrument for build;ng Elzrope," and
as a firm intention to turn Western Europe into the third "space poaer."38
At the same time, even the Director General of the E~Zropean Space Agency,
R. Gibson, has not concealed the fact that the most difficult task con-
sists not in solving technical problems stemming from the new space pro-
gram, but rather to meet the "political challenge" caused by the "authentic
integration of European space efforts."39 In other words, it is a question
of achieving the complete elimination of the independent national space
programs of the Western E~aropean nations under the flag of integration.
Only the future will show how lasting the achieved compromise solutions
will be. However, it is indisputable that these decisions are unable to
10eliminate" the antagonistic contradictions inherent to all manifesta-
tions of imperialist integration.
FOOTNOTES
1. For the industrial asscciations and consortiums in Western Europe in
the space field, see: 0. Giarini, "L'Etzrope et 1'Espace," Lausanne,
1968, pp 222-228; "Europe in Space," (A Survey Prepared by ESRO),
Paris, 1974, pp 127-128; etc.
2. [C. Colliard], "Mezhdunarodnyye Organizatsii i Uchrezhdeniya" [Inter-
national Organizations and Institutions], Moscow, Progress, 1972, -
p 612.
3. For the economic and political contradictions of imperialist integra-
tion, see: I. S. Shaban, "Imperialisticheskaya Sushchnost'
Zapadnoyevropeyskoy Integratsii" [The Imperialist Essence of Western
E~iropean Integration], Moscow, Nauka, 1971; A. M. Alekseyev, A. I.
71
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR 0FFICIAL USL ONLY
Vikent'yev and B. P. Miroshnichenko, "Sotaialieticheskaya Integrataiyg
i yeye Preimushchestva Pered Kapitalisticheakoy" [Socialist Integra-
tion and Ita Advantagea Over Capital.iet], Moscow, Nauka, 1975, Pp 16-
114.
4. For the text of the convention, aee: "Basic Texts, Rules and Regula- -
tions, Agreements," Doc. E5R0 Sp-4, March 1969, p 15�
- 5. BULLETIN DU CERS/CECLES, No 6, 1969, pp 9-14�
6. Doc. ~SRO SP-41 p 44. In the course of the reorganizations of ESRO, `
the membership and name of the institutions were repeatedly changed.
7. The agreements were signed by the ESRO director general after epproval
by the council.
8. See, for example: 11Agreement Concerning the European Space Operations
-
�
Center," Doc. ESRO SP-4, pp 280-285.
9. "Livre Blanc du president de la CSE sur 1'Europe Spatiale," AIR ET
COSMOS, No 433, 1972, PP 15, 63.
10. Doc. ESRO, Rapport Gft6ral, 1968, p 22.
11. H. Kaltenecker, "The Reform of ESRO (Its New Legal Concept and Com-
mittee Structure)," ESRO/ELDO BULLETIN, No 20, 1973, pp 8-10.
. t
12. Up to 1980 the organization planned ta launch five scientific satel-
lites designed primaxily for astronomical and magnetospheric research
(one of them'jointly with England and the United States) ("Europe in
Space" (A Survey Prepared by ESRO), p 18).
13. In speaking on the successor of ESRO, the Etiiropean Space Agency, the
director general of this agency, R. Gibson, noted: "An organization
similar to ours has more in common with a large industrial firm than
with a majority of the other international organizations" (ESA
BUI,LETIN, No 1, 1975, P. 3)� ~
~
14. Doc. ESRO SP-4, pp 49-58� -
15� The legal status of ESRO and certain other space organizations has
a number.of cammon features with the international atomic organiza-
tions. For the legal status of the latter, see: S. A. Malinia,
"The Legal Nature of Atomic Interstate Organizations," SOVETSKOYE
GOSUDARSTVO I PRAVO, No 9, 1970, pp 66-74.
16. For the text of the conventipn and other agreements relate~~too4ELDO,
see: "Yearbook of Air and S ace Law," Montreal 1967, pp
_ 72
FOR OFFICIAL IISE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
17. tn 1962, thin totnled 210 millinn dolltirs.
18. BuLr,Errrr nu cERs/crcLEs, rto 12, 1970, pp 27-33.
19. R. di Carrobio, "European Space Conference," "Internat3onal Cooperat3on
in Outer Space: A Sympogium," pp 509-524; M. Bour4ly, "L'Europe d la -
recherche d'une politique spatiale," LA REVL1E FRANCAISE DE DROIT AERIEN,
rro 1, 1970, pp 13-36. -
_ 20. "European Space Conference. Report of the Advisory Committee on Pro-
grams," CSR/CCP (67)5; "Rapport du Comitd consultatif aur les programmes
spatiaux europdens," LA RECHERCHE SPATIALE, No 14, 1968, pp 25-28.
21. "Resolutions de la Conference Spatiale Europdenne," Bad Godesberg,
November 1968.
22. M. Bourdly, "La crise spatiale europ6enne," "Proc. XV Co11oq. Law
Outer Space," Davis, 1973, p 182.
23. Characteristic of the mood prevailing in Western Europe at thst time
were the titles of articles appearing in the French press: "A Diffi-
cult Summer for the European Space Conference," "Space Europe--Will
It Survive?" and others (AIR ET COSMOS, No 442, 1972, p 17; No 453,
1972, P 37)�
24. FIGARO, 15 November 1972.
_ 25. For the contradictions among -the Western Ezropean partners Vhich led
to new delays in setting up the Agency, see: AIR ET COSMOS, No 539,
1.974, p 35.
26. The Arian missile is to be built by a French-controlled 3ndustrial
- consortium.
27. For more detail on the Spacelab agreements, see Chapter 5(Part I).
28. H. Kaltenecker, "La nouvelle agence spatiale europCenne," ESRO/ELDO
' IIULLLTIN, No 26, 1974, p 16.
29. "E~irope in Space (A Survey Prepared by ESRO)," p 15.
30. For the text of the convention, see the book: N. M. Matte, "Droit
aerospatial," A. Pedone, Paris, 1976, pp 255-285� -
31. The Agency budget was, respectivel,y, 374 million dollars in 1975,
491 million in 1976, and 557 million in 1977.
32. The first session of the council on the ministerial level was held
in February 1977.
73
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOB OFFICIAL USE ONLY
33. F'or this riee: M. gourdly, "The European Space Agency's Contribution
to the De,relopment of Space Law," "Proc. XIX Colloq. Law Outer Space,"
Caliiurnia, 1977s pp 21-31.
34. M. Bourdly, "problbmes juridiques poeds par la eignature de la conven-
ti.on creant 1'Agence spatiale europdenne," "Proc. XVTI Co11oq. Law
Outer Space," Cal.ifornia, 1975, pP 100-106.
� 35� Ibid.
36. Austria, Norwqy and Canada participate in the work of the Agency as
observera.
- 37. Simultaneously he performs the duties of the director general of E3R0 ~
and the secretary -general. of ELDO.
38. "Et.irope in Space (A Survey Prepared by ESRO)," p 12.
39. ESA NEWSLETTER, rto i, 1975, p 3.
74
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 5: INTERNATIONAL SPACE PROGRAMS QF THE UNITID STATES
(POLITICAL AND LEGAL ASPECTS)
The scale of the U.S. international space programs and the constant atten-
tion given them by the president, the Congress and State Departl4ent show
the great foreign policy significance which is given to these programs in
the United States.l The heightened interest among American ofPicialdom
in space has been a direct conaequence of the amazement which American
society evidenced after the launching of the first Soviet earth satellite.2
For the sake of achieving "national leadership in space" and restoring the
shaken American international prestige in the area of advanced science and
technology, American capitalism has mobilized all its possible resources.
NASA which was set up in 1958 was given enormous funds and broad powers.
The annual budget of this organization has risen from 300 million dollars
in 1959 up to 6 billion dollars in 1966 in the course of carrying out the
most expensive Apollo program. During the period of the flourishing of its
- activities in the middle of the 1960's, NASA brought together 17 ma,jor
scientific research centers with a staff of 33,000 employees. Around
_ 20,000 industrial firms were working on NASA orders. The total number of
workers, engineers and technicians employed in American space industry
reached up to 400,000 persons.
The greatest benefits during this artificially inflated boom were reaped
by the major U.S. serospace corporations such as North American Rockwell,
Boeing, Lockhee3 Aircraft, McDonnell Douglas, and others. In playing the
- role of the main NASA contractors, they secured billions in orders guaran-
_ teed by the state and bringing high profits. Naturally these corporations
viewed the questions of international space cooperation primarily as an
opportunity to gain new profits by broadening the market for their products
or obtaining new state contracts.
NASA was formed under the National Aeronautics and Space
1958�3 This law stated the U.S. principles in space, it
of state leadership over space activities and established
for the international NASA programs.
75
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Act of 29 July
created a system
the legal bases
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
The 1958 law officially stated as the task of NASA the achieving of U.S. `
"leadership" in space activities (Article 102, C, 5). The same aim was
set in the statement made when President Eisenhower signed the law. In
this regard, a different evaluation must be g3ven to the so-called dualism !
of the 1958 law (international competition and cooperation), about which -
American authors have written.4 In granting NASA the rights to caxry out
international programs, the Congressmen were concerned that international
cooperation be used for carrying out the political and economic tasks ;
confronting the Ur,.ited States.
Thus, in discussing the draft law on the Committee on Aeronautical and
Space Sciences, Senator Saltonstal]., in giving the reasons for incorporat-
ing a special article on cooperation in the 1aw stated: "Should we solve
this space problem by ourselves? Certainly it would be better if we worked
out international measures which would make it possible to employ the minds
of many nations as well as ours." The subsequent practices in carrying
out the international NASA programs have firmed the validity of the con-
clusion that a ma,jority of these programs were dictated by the interests
of the U.S. aerospace industry or by a desire to employ the scientific
_ and technical potential of other nations for American purposes.
In developing the general declarative provision on U.S. cooperation with
other nations or groups of nations, as was four.d in the first version of
the draft law, in its discussion within Congress Article 205 was incor-
porated and this gave NASA the righl: to participate in international co-
operative programs in accord with agreements concluded by the president
"with the advice and consent of the Senate."
Thus, on the basis of U.S. domestic legislation, international agreements
- on cooperation in the research and use of space can be concluded only by
the president with the subsequent ratification of Congress. NASA, accord-
_ ing to Article 205, acts as.the organization entrusted with carrying out -
~
the programs provided by these agreements.
However, even in signing the 1958 law, President Eisenhower gave it an interpretation msking it possible to conclude less formal agreemen`.s on
space cooperation. In a statement made at the signing, Eisenhower pointed
out that he viewed Article 205 "only as recognition of the fact that in
this area international treaties may be concluded, and not as a prohibiting _
of the inclusion of less formal cooperative arrangements in the appropriate
' instances."6 This interpretation opened up the possibility of signing
(for the NASA international programs) so-called "executive" as well as
- agency-to-agency agreements.~
Among the agreements relating to the NASA international progra.ms as yet
there haue been virtually none which have been concluded with the observ-
ing of the entire procedure stipu3ated by Article 205 of the 1958 law.
The agreement between the USSR and United States of 24 May 1972 is an
- example of an agreement signed by the president but without subsequent
congressional ratification.
76
FOR OFFICIAI. USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOk OFF'ICIAI. USE ONLY
l1 predominant mitijortt;y of thA agrecment:; under which NASA carries out its
inLurnatlonal activi.tien hu3 been concluded i.n the form of executive or
rtE;enc,y-to--af,enc,y agreements. In a number of instances these are signed
dirf-ct],y by f1A5A. At time3 the agency-to-agency agreements are coneluded
to c:rirry out already existing executive agreements or with subsequent ap-
proval on a governmental level.0
The decision to use ane or another type of agreement is taken in each ape-
cific i.nstance depending upon the significance, nature and duration of the
obligations, and by consu].tation with the State Department under which a
special subdivision has been formed concerned with space problems. The
State bepartment takes an active part in all stages of the talks concerned
with concluding these agreements.
In concluding international agreements in the aren of space reaearch, the
State Department and NASA have made u number of requisite condit3ona which
include the demand t:iat each side participating in the Rgreement pay for
the exp enses related to carrying out its portion of the joint pro,ject, and
also th at the pro,ject be of mutual interest and scientific value, in aiding
the fulfillment of the U.S. national space program. Preference is given
to agreements on specific scientific pro,jects and not general-purpose
- progrrsms.
As a total NASA has concluded over 250 international agreements and under- _
standings of di.fferent types with more than 30 states. To one degree or
another, scientists and scientific organizations from more than 70 nations
have participnted ir, the various NASA international programs.9 =
Many of the agreements signed by NASA involve the locating of stations for
= receiving information and controlling the flight of American spacecraft
and sateZlites on foreign territories. A series of agreements provides
for the launching of foreign satellites using American carrier missiles,
the placing of scientific equipment of other nai:ions on American space -
devices, and the conducting'of ,joint experiments using research rockets.
Another group of agreements dealt with work of an applied nature involving
communications, meteorology and earth resource satellites. Finally, in
recent ycars agreements have appeared related to manned space flights
(the Soyuz--Apollo Pro,ject and the Spacelab Project).
The overrill results of the NASA intertiational space programs can be charac-
- terized by the following figures: More than 20 foreign satellites launched
- by American laui:ch ve'iicles over 30 foreign instruments located on
American space devices, hundreds of ,joint launchFS of ineteorological and
geophysical rockets made f;om the territory of - states, and a series of
international programs in applied areas of space use.10
f[owever, behind these figures one must not overlook the fact that many
llmerican space pro6rams are aimed at securing one-sided political, eco-
nemic a.^.d QciPn+,ific-technicq.l benefits and advantages.
77
FOR OFFICIAI. JSE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
in dePending the interests of ita space rocketry indugtry, the U.S. is
endeavoring to provide it with markets in other nations, to make the apace
progrems of thene countries dependent upon the United States, and to pre-
vent competition by foreign countries in the area of the practical use of
npuce.
The U.S. 1.egislation containg principles in accord with whieh the commer-
- cial application of space has been put into the hnnda of private capital.
'I'he second U.S. national law in the area of space, the Communications Satel-
lite Act of 31 august 1962,11 gave the right of planning, creating, owning
and operating the commercial comunications satellite syatem (independently
or jointly with other statea) to the private American Comsat Corporation.
7'he approval of this law and the subsequent development of events have shown
that U.S. international policy in the area of appl3ed space quite definitely
- and openly is dictated by the economic and political interests of the Ameri-
' can monopolies. One of the vivid examples of this could be the talks on
the conclusion of an agreement between the United States and Western Europe
on developing an international satellite system for air navigation.12
Commercial advantape is one of the dominating factors in the American in-
ternational cooperative programs in the area of space research.
In speaking in the U.S. Senate in March 1970, the former NASA director
T. Paine stated: "The satellites which the other nations are deliveri.ng
to us for launching by our carriers are significantly more expensive than
the carriers used by us for orbiting them.... Wherever possible We should
encourage the other nations to take up the most complicated questions,
such as, in particular, the German solar probe.... International coopera-
tion is a good way to help extend our reduced budget for the purpor;e of
obtaining tlie best results fnr our side and the nations cooperating with
us.i13 We might note that the total cost of the Hellios Project ~the
~ solar probe mentioned by T. Paine) was estimated at 260 million dollars,
- of which 180 million would be paid by West Germany.14
To the question asked him by one of-the Senators of what inf].uence inter-
national space cooperation would have on the U.S. aerospace 'Paine
T. Paine replied that he viewed this influence as very positive
gave data that the foreign purchases from U.S. industrial firms under the
international projects would provide the United States with foreign ex-
chanee earnings from 10 to 20 million dollars annually.15 Virtually all
the foreign satellites launched by NASA would be built with the aid of
American firms.
~ All of this provided full ,justification for the director of the American
space aPency to state that the international pro,jects brought "very real
- bencfit~ for the United States."
The total value of the NASA international programs carried out and in
process in. 1976 was estimated at 1.5 billion dollars. Over the last 10
_ 78
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONY.Y
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOEt OFFICIAL USE ONLY
ycctrn approximutely two-thirds of the expenditurea made under the joint
pror;ramg wus r.overed by the U.S. foreign partners.16
Approximatr7.y one-half of the funds spent by other countries to carry out
J projectn jointly with the /Unericans goes to the United Statea in the form
_ of payment for purchased equipment, the carrier mioailes and to pay fot,
the cost of the le.unches. Thus, the NASA international activities con-
tribute a signi�icacit influx of gold into the United States and aid the
marketing of American aerospace industry products. Tn addition, since
virtually all the ,joint projects in one way or another fit into the U.S.
national space research program, the participation of foreign etates in
them in essence means a partial financing of the American national program.
_ In the summer of 1969, the U.S. secretary of state and the Japanese minister
of foreign affairs signed an agreement on cooperation in the area of space
- development. In accord with this agreement, American industry aecured the
right to export to Japan unclassified equipanent and technical information
needed for the production of carrier missiles and satellites. On this
question the State Department spokesman T. Nesblt stated that the U.S. was
ready to export widely its space equipment and technolog,}r to other coun-
tries.l7 Several years later the U.S. president proposed that American
= carrier missiles be sold to a11 countries in those cases when they would
no be used to launch satellites competing with American ones.l8
_ The official documents have emphasized that launching of foreign satel-
lites under the condition of pq}ring for the cost of these launches repre-
sents a PIASA international activity of "growing significance."19
The United States gives great significance to the political aspect of
international cooperation in space research.20 "There is a close tie be-
tween our space program and the aims of our foreign policy...," stated _
R. Packard, leader of the State Department subdivision concernet', with
space problems. He saw the for"eign policy task of space research to cre-
ate for ttie United States an image of a technically developed, competent
and dynamic society with whieh the other nations would associate their
interests.21
Tn broadly publicizinq the NASA international Frograms, and in particular .
i:hrough the channels of the U.S. Information Agency, American propaganda
has endeavored to present the United States as a country which willing
shared its scientific and technical achievements with other nations, here
failing to mention the economic and scientific-technical benefits ex-
tracted by the United States from this cooperation.
On the political level, in the NASA internat?onal programs an important
place has ueen given to the developing countries. In September 1969,
tIASA concluded an agreement with the Indian Atomic Energy Department for -
organizing educational-type television broadcasts with an American satel-
lite to receiving stations serving 5,000 of the Indian villages which were .
79
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOit OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
moyt distant from the center.22 Talks for analogous programs in the area
of space communicationg have also been held with a number of the South
American nations, At present the United States is actively involving the
developing nations in the American prdgram to use satellites to atudy the
natural resourcea of the earth, and has alreac'~y concluded a aignificant
number of bilateral agreements for this purpose.
In addition to economic and political considerations which have guided
the United Statea in carrying out its international space programa, acien-
tific and technical reasons are also of important significance.
One of the basic reasons why NASA was empowered to conclude agreements with
foreign nations was the necessity of creating a worldwide network of track-
ing and data receiving stations for the spacecraft and satellites. Many
NASA agremeents were concluded precisely for this purpose.23 In certain
- instances, the expenditures for running these stations and their peraonnel
are completely or partially paid by the host country. NASA rslso maintains
� close working contacts with the systems of satellite tracking stations
created by the European Space Research Organization and France.24
The experimental communications satellite work carried out initially by
NASA, and the meteorological and geodetic research have also required the
locating of ground equipment on foreign territories.
I'he interest of the United States in conducting ,joint work is also mani-
fested in the fact that in a number of instances foreign ccuntries have
fl.tlly assumed responsibility for carrying out important and cost]~y scien-
tific research provided in the American national program. The results of
such research immediately becomes the property of NASA. Thus, the NASA
ionosphere research program was carried out with Canadian satellites, and
West Germar~y carried out a complex project for developing a solar probe,
- and so forth. A series of scientific discoveries and technological inno-
vations obtained in foreign countries as a result of the cooperative pro-
grams have gone into American hands.
The NASA international activities have permitted the United States to in-
volve the best foreign scientists in carrying out NASA pro,jects. This is
the purpose of the widely organized training and retraining of foreign
_ specialists in the area of space science and technology carried out by
NASA ,jointly with the U.S. National Academy of Sciencet3. The conditions
for the trai.riing of foreign specialists in the United '3tates are such that
the studer.-'L.s and trainees should remain in the American laboraties until
they have made a practical contribution to these laboratories. Mar~y U.S.-
trained foreign specialists have remained permanently to work in U.S.
industry and scientific research centers.
At the sa.me time it is essential to point out that the scientific and
technical interests in conducting joint space research as well as the
factors of an economic and political nature contribute to the development =
80
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
of cooperation between countrics with different gOC3ill systems. Precinely
8uch an interest, along with the overal.l improvement in the state of
Soviet-American relations, made it possible to cociclude the Agreement
Between t}ie U55R and United StQtes on Cooperation in the Research and Uae
of Space for Peaceful Purposes in May 1972. However it is beyond doubt
that cooperation with the USSH, as with the other socialiat countries, is
possible only on the bas3s of mutual advantage and equal righta.
Among the NASA cooperative programs witti the Western European countries,
the most significant was the Spacelab i,,ogram under wliich the E~zropean
countries were responsible for developing and turning over to the United
States one of the important elements for the new American spacE transport
system. Let us take up in somewhat greater detail the history of the
talks which 1ed to the conclusion of an agreement on this program, as well _
us an analysis of the agreementa them3elves.
After the conclusion of the Apollo Program, the development of a reusable
space transport system occupied the central place in the American national
space research program. Among the transport spacecraft, the plans were
first to develop the so-called "shuttle" for making trips between space
and near-earth orbits, and secondly a transport towcraft for moving freight
to higher orbits and for other purposes. It was assumed that the shuttle
could make up to 100 flights in space, carrying a crew of up to seven men
and up to 30 tons of freight. The shuttle would land on earth similar to
- an aircraft or more accurately a glider.25
The decision to develop the transport shuttle was taken by the U.S. presi-
dent on 5 January 1972. About 7 billion dollars were required to develop
- and manufacture two flying prototypes of this ship. The first manned
orbital flight of the shuttle is planned for 1979, and the start of opera-
tional flights for 1980.
In proposing that Western E~.irope participate in 9.ts long-range space pro-
gram, the United States was pursuing two main goals. _
The long-range goal was to impede Western Europe from developing its own
r.arrier missiles capable of orbiting applications satellites that would
compete with the American ones, since the relatively broad parti.cipation
in the American program would necessitate funding that exceeded the total
expenses of Western Europe on the joint space pro,jects.
The second purpose was of a more competitive and specific nature. In pre-
senting its "post-Apollo" program as an international one, NASA was hoping =
to win greater support in Congress for obtaining multibillion allocations
for this program supposedly in the name of "Atlantic solidarity" and carry-
ing out its international ob?igations.
, After th.e peak reached in 1966, the U.S. Congress con,tantly reduced the
NASA budaet, and by the beginning of the 1970's it had a budget that was
81
~
- FOF, OFFICTAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USL ONLY
half the amount or 1966. Thia 1ed to a decline in the workload and even
to the closing down of certain NASA gcientific research centers. The
NASA director J. Fletcher admitted that "critics of the program (NASA,
author) have used this period of ambiguity to foster the impression26at
NASA has carried out its historic mission and now can be diebanned.~~
F'or precisely this reason, in the first stege, when the new prngram had
sti11 not been approved either by the president or Congress, NASA showed
particular activity uround this question, in offer3ng Europe the most -
advantageous and broad conditions for participating in all stages of the
program, but after the allocations for the program had been approved,
NASA gradually narrowed its proposals for the participation of the Euro-
pean countriea in it.
These conclusions are affirmed by the entire course of the American-
v European talks on the participation of Western Elxrope in the "post-Apollo"
program and which were held over a number of years and were characterized
by upswings and falls in the mood of the European partners of the United
States.27
It was first officially proposed that Western Europe participatP in the
future American space program in October 1969 simultaneously with the
submission of this program for review by the U.S. president. Such a pro-
posal was contained in the statement of the NASA director, T. Paine.
Subsequently there followed a series of ineetings on various levels be-
- tween the Europeans and the Americans, and in the course of them the
given proposal wa; repeatedly affirmed and broadened.
For the major Western European aerospace firms, the proposals of the
Americans were enticing, as they could involve large orders and profits.
Some of these firms, without waiting for a coordinated decision by the
Western European nations, entered into direct corltact with the American
firms, and obtained preliminary orders from them to design the individual
systems of future transport spacecraft.
Since participation in the American program would absorb virtually all
the funds allocat^d by the Western European nations for the ,joint space
- program, it was necessary to immediately determine the fate of the Euro-
pean carrier missiles, as well as the conditions for obtaining American
de:.ivery systems needed for launching the E~zropean satellites. In Septem-
ber 1970 and February 1971, the chairman of the European Space Conference,
the Belgian Theo Lefevre, twice traveled to the United States to discuss
the political, financial and other conditions of Etiiropean participation
in the future U.S. space program, as well as the question of the possi-
bility of obtaining American launch vehicles to orliit the European
applications satellites.
Without giving firm guarantees to sell American launch vehicles for
launching Etiiropean commercial satellites, the United States simultaneously
82
FOR OFF'ICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
1et it be known thatit would be absurd to develop independent European
delivery system3 since they wou].d be obsolete and would be uselesa with ~
the appearance of the American reusable transport spacecraft.
As for the participation of the E~.iropeans in devel.oping such spacecraft,
in spite of ita �nitial promises on the broad participation of Western
- Europe in the "post-Apollo" program, beginning in December 1971, the
United States in every possible way restricted the opportunities for such
participation, and after the approval of the program for developing the
transport spacecraft by President Nixon in January 1972, the Americans
radically altered their position and left for the Europeans only the pos-
sibility of participating 3n the development of one of the elements of
the transport spacecraft. "NASA has obtained what it wanted," wrote the
informed French ,journal AIR ET COSMOS, "and what had been the reason for
its proposals to the Europeans, namely the credits to bu31d its transport
_ spacecraft. Consequently, the time has passed of generosity and a policy
- of a'condescending elder brother' who offers his broad aid to the 'under-
developed' nations.i28
Unemployment in the U.S. aerospace industry as well as the circuristance
that the transport spacecraft was to be used for military purposes, as
was frankly stated by the NASA leaders, played an important role in re-
- ducing Etitropean participation.29
After the hopes of Western Europe had evaporated for equal partnership
in developing the transport spacecraft and consequently for using it to
orbit satellites, and here there was no guarantee that in the flzture
ordinary American rockets would be for sale, again the urgent question
arose of developing L`urope's own powerflzl launch vehicle. ~ However, the
profound differences of opinion between the European partneria over the
American proposals as well as the technical setbacks in deveioping the
Europa-2 rocket for a lon6 ti.me did not make it possible for the inter-
ested nations to come to any coordinated decision.
On 9 October 1972, on the eve of the p]_anned E~zropean Space Conference,
President Nixon made a statement which the Western Etiiropean circles in-
terested in participatinf; in a future American program, interpreted as
a guarantee for the delivery of carrier missiles to Ezrope without any
restrictions. Nixon said: "The United States is ready to provide car-
- rier missiles to any nationsand internationaZ organizations for launch-
ing satellites for peaceful purposes, iP this is compatible with current
international agreements."30
France reacted with a certain amount of mistrust to this statement. On
- this question the press wrote: France is not certain of the possibility
of receiving American carriers, and the new statement by President Nixon
containing the same restrictions as before should not change anything in
this sense.1131 83
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
~ FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Attention was flrawn to the fact thst the stipulation on compatability with
existing international agreements applied primarily to the agreement
the American-controlled Intelsat space communications system.
of this agreement placed serious restr3etions on the participation of
Intelsat members in other international apace ec di cause nec n micgloss
t h e y, in the o pinion of the Intelsat assembly,
ta this organization. Under this pretext the United States could re fuse
to sell missiles to launch the Etiiropean communications satellites.
In December 1972 and July 1973, after long hes3.tation, the European space
conference decided to accept American conditions on participating in the
development of the transport spacecraft. The project which was named
_ Spacelab was to be based on a series of agreements concluded between the
- Western European nations and also with the United States.
On 14 August 1973, the United States and nine European countries (Belgiwn,
Great Britain, the Netherlands, Denmark, Spain, Italy, France, West Germany
and Swi.tzerland) concluded an Intergovernmental Agreement on a Couperative
- Program for the Development, Delivery and Use of a Space Laboratory for the ,
Space Transport System. In further developing this agreement, ESRO, on
behalf of the Western European countries, and NASA on behalf of the Uniteu
States, on 24 September 1973 signed a memorandum which fixed the under- _
standing on procedural and technical. questions involved in carrying out the
project.32 Moreover, the internal relationships between the Western Euro-
pean partners and also between them and ESRO were regulated by still an-
. other agreement.33
In accord with the understan%iing reached, the Western European nations
promised, in working througi! . ESRO, tc) develop, create and deliver an or-
~ bital laboratory to the United State.s by the end of 1978; this laboratory _
would be repeatedly put into a low arbit and returned to the eaxth as an _
inseparable component of the American transport spacecraft.34 The labora-
tory consisting of two parts (a four-man living module and an open in-
strument platform) designed-for conducting scientific and applied experi-
ments and research.
Thus, although Spacelab was called an orbital laboratory, in actuality it ~
was not an autonomous space ob,ject but rather one of the elements of an
American spacecraft inseparably linked to it during the entire flight.
Having created Spa.celab, the cost of wt:~ich has now been estimated at 500
million dollars, Western E~zrope would then put it actually under the com-
plete control of the United States. The intergovernment,al agreement gave
~ the UnitPd States +.he right of "full control" over the first Spacelab,
including the final determination of the purposes of its use (Article VII D).
The Furopean partners merely gained the right of joint planning and the
free carrying out of experiments during the first flight; they were also
, promised that a citizen from one of the Western E~zropean countries would
be a crew member (Article VIIE, G). =
84
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Aa for the conditions for the subsequent use of the Amer3.can transport space-
_ craCt by -the Western European countries, in the agreements these conditiona
were defined very imprecise],y. It wan merely said that during the future
- Spacelab flights, ttie experiments would be carried out either on a cooper-
attve or a commercial basis. In the latter ins�tance the European partners
would be given preference 3n comparison over third countries only in select-
ing the experiments (Article VII A, B). If the European nations wanted to
launch a Spacelab for their own needa, they would be obliged to cover the
complete launching expenses as they dn presently for their satellites.
As has been assumed by the West German iegai expert, von Preuschen, a ma,jor-
~ ity of the future flights wi11 be made under the condition that the EuropeQns
- pay the launching expenses.35
The United States d.id not assume any firm obligations to order a certain
number of additional Spacelabs in Western Europe.36 The agreement merely
provided that the United States would refrain from developing its own orbi-
tal laboratori(es if these woul.d "essentially duplicate" the design and capa-
bilities of Spacelab (Article V).
The monopolistic aspects of these agreements, in the definition of the
French scientist 5toebner,37 axe also manifested in the fact that ESRO
promises to make available to NASA all information and documents dealing
with Spacelab, while the United States would provide Western Europe with
information on the transport spacecraft only within the limits needed for
the development of Spacelab.
In signing the memorandum on the Spacelab ProJect, the U.S. acting secre-
tary of state and the chairman of the Furopean Space Conference stated that
the concluding of this agreement "marked the beginning of a new age" in
space coo~eration between the United States and the Western E~zropean
nations.3
An analysis of the agreements shows that there are no serious grounds for
_ such an evaluation. Western Europe acts not as an equal partner iri develop-
ing the future space system, for which it has worked for a number of years,
_ but rather as a subcontractor supplying at its own expense one of the im- _
portant elements for the American space transport system.
On the basis of what has been stated, the following conclusions can be
drawn.
The United States is carrying out extensive and diverse activities in the
space area and these activities have been given active support by the state
system. It would be wrong to underestimate the results of these activities
or their influence.on international political and scientific-technical life.
The legal bases for tr.e NASA international prugrams were established in
the National Aeronautics and Space Act approved by the U.S. Congress in 1958.
85
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICYAL USE ONLY
The appropr.iate international agreements can be concluded in the form of
treaties approved "with the advice and consent of the Senate," as well as
"executive" and agency-to-agency agreementa.
Many U.S.-international space programs have been aimed at extracting vari-
ous unilateral benefits and advantages. In a number of agreements, the
United States has imposed unequal cond3tions on its partners. This is true
of the major international Spacelab program in accord w3th which Western
Europe is to develop one of the elements of the new American space system.
_ On the ot,her hand, the experience of carrying out the Soviet-American
Soyuz--Apollo Project shows that under the condition of the strict ob-
- servance of the principles of equal3ty and mutual benefit, the objective
scientific-technical, economic and political prerequisites can be widely
usea for developing cooperation in the space sphere among states with dif-
ferent soc3al systema.
FOOTNOTES
1. "Statements by Presidents of the United States on International Coopera-
- tion in Space. A Chronology; October 1957-August 1971," Washington,
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1971; E. Galloway, "Congress and Inter-
national Space Cooperation," "International Cooperation in Outer Space:
A Symposium," U.S. Senate, Doc. N 57-92, 1971, pp 3-12; R. F. Packard,
"Space Activities in the State Department," "Interna;:ional Cooperation
in Outer Space: A Symposium," U.S. Senate, Doc. N 57-92, 1971, pp 55-64.
2. See, for example, the statement of Congressman Hechler ("Hearir,g Before
the Subcommittee on Manned Space Flights of the Committee on SprLce and
Astronautics," "U.S. House of Representatives," 1972, 31/V, p.?.b). See
also the opinion of the former U.S. Ambassador to the USSR, F. Kohler
("U.S.--Soviet CooperaLion in Space," University of Miami, 1971+, p IX).
3. National Aeronautics and Space Act, Public Law 85-568. 4. See, for example, the book by the leader of the NASA International Pro-
grams Department: A. W. Frutkin, "International Cooperation in Space," -
1965, pp 8, 172.
5. "International Cooperation in Outer Space: A Symposium," p 6.
6. "United States International Space Program. Staff Report Prepa.red for
- the Committee on Aeronautical and Space Sciences," United States Senate,
30 Ju1y 1965, p 1.
7. The concluding of executive agreements by the U.S. government is based
not on constitutional provisions but on practice (A. M. Belonogov,
"The Executive Agreement as a Form of U.S., International Obligations,"
SSHA--EKONOMIKA, POLITIKA, IDEOLOGIYA, No 6, 1973, pp 8-19).
86 
.
FOR OFFICIAI. USE ONLY '
~
~
~

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR 0FFICIAL USE ONLY
B. S. 11. Lay, H. J. Taubenfeld, "The Law Relating to Acvitities of Man in
Space," Chicago, 1970, PP 233-236; "United States Snternational Space
Proprama..," pp 4-6,
_ 9. A. W. Frutkin, "NASA's Internai:ional Space Activities," "International.
Cooperation in Outer Space: A Symposium," p 13. According to other
American sources, the number of various NASA international agreements
has reached 800 ("Legal Implications c: Remote Senaing from Outer -
Space," S3.jthoff--Leyden, 1976, p 4).
10. "NASA International Programe," Washington, May 1973.
11. Communications Satc:llite Act, Public Law 87-624.
12. For more detail oii this, see ChaptEr 4(Part TI).
13� "Hearing Before the Commtttee on Aeronautical and 5pace Sciences,"
- United States Senate, 11 March 1970, Washington, U.S. Government Print-
ing Office, 1970, pp 995-997.
14. THE CLEAR LAKE NEWS CITIZEN, 13 February 1975�
15. According to a statement made by one of the NASA leaders in 1975, for =
several subsequent years the United States would receive 150-170 million
dollars annually from foreign nstions for providing carrier missiles
and carrying out launches (AVIATION WEEK AND SPACF TEGHNOLOGY, No 19,
1975, P 11; No 20, 1975, P 11)�
. 16. "Questions About Aeronautics and Space," NASA Doc., 1976.
17. AIR ET COSMOS, No 310, 1969, p 16. ~
~
18. AIR ET COSMOS, No 452, 1972, pP 16-17. _
19. "NASA International Progra.ms," April 1972, p 11.
20. G. S. Khozin, Kosmicheskiye Issledovaniya i Vneshr~yaya Politika SShA,"
_ [U.S. Space Research and Foreign Policy], Moscow, Znaniye, 1969.
21. R. F. Packard, Op. cit., p 55.
22. For more detail on this pro,ject, see Chapter 3(Part IT).
23. NASA has around 20 stations on the territory of other states.
24. For the agreement between NASA and ESRO on these questions, see Doc.
ESRO SP-4, pp 330-334� At present this station belongs to the Euro-
pean Space Agency.
~
87
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAY. USB ONLY
25. "Space Shuttle," Rockwell International, Space Diviaion, 1976.
26. J. F:Letcher, "Remarks to the Salt Lake City Rotary Club," NA3A NEWS,
6 June 1972, p 1.
27. A. Hocker, "The Diacussions Between Europe and the United States on
Partic3pat3on in the Post-Apollo Program," ESRO/ELDO BULLETIN, No 19,
1972, PP 4-7.
28. AIR ET COSMOS, No 442, 1972, p 12.
- 29. The NASA director, J. Fletcher, in a speech of 6 June 1972, said:
"The spacecraft will be of important military use" (J. Fletcher, Op.
cit., p 3)�
30. AIR ET COSMOS, No 452, 1972, pp 16-17.
31. Ibid., p 17.
32. The texts of the agreement can be found in: "Hearings Before the
Committee on Aeronautical and Space Sciences, 30 October 1973,"
Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1974, pp 121-135�
- 33. Doc. ESRO/c (73)2, Rev. 3.
34. The first flight is planned for 1980.
35� R. F. von Preuschen, "International Cooperation in the Use of Space
Laboratories," "Proc. XVIIth Colloq. Law Outer Space," California,
1975, p 236.
36. In August 1976, NASA informed the Etiiropean Space Agency of its inten-
tion to order a second Spacelab.
37. A. W. Stoebner, "Stations spatiales presentes et futures: technique
et droit," "Proc. XVII Colloq. Law Outer Space," pp 320-321.
- 38. ESRO NEWSLETTER, No 5, 1973, p 2�
88
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFYCIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 6: THE ROLE OF THE TJNITID NATIONS AND INTERNATIONAL NONGOVERNMENTAL
ORGANIZATIONS IN WORKSNG OUT AND IMPLFIMENTING SPACE PROGRAMS
The presently existing international "space" organizations can conditionally
be divided into two groups: the so-called operational organizations set up
for directly carrying out international srientific or applied space programs,
and organizations the mission of which includes assisting the development
_ of space research, the joint discussion af the obtained results as well as
a stucLy Qnd elaboration of the legal aspects of space development.
In the former of these groulls, belong, for example, the European Space
Agency as well as the interne,tional Intersputnik and Intelsat communications
satellite organi zations. They, as a rule, are established by states, they
pdssess large financial assets and have their own scientific and technical
facilities.
The second group of organizations (to which this chapter is devoted), with-
out carrying out independent work involving the use of space equipment,
_ nevertheless plays an important role in developing cooperation in space
research on the broadest international basis. Among these organizations
we will find both interstate as well as international nongovernmental or-
ganizations. l. The United Nations and Its Specialized Agencies
The Resolution of the UN General Assembly approved in 1961 states that the
United Nations should be the "center for international cooperation in the
research and use of space for peaceful purposes."1 In the UN system, the
Committee for -G;:n Use of Space for Peaceful ,.'urposes, a body specially
established by tht UN General Assembly, plays primarily the role of such
a center.
The, special role of the Committee is explained by the fact that it is the
sole special intergovernmental body in which the states belonging to dif-
ferent social systems can ,jointly disc!iss the broadest range of political,
legal and scientific-technieal questions arising in the process of space
development.
89
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02148: CIA-RDP82-44850R000100034407-4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Initially the committee was confronted with numerous difficulties caused by
American attempts to secure in one form or another a predominant posit3on
on the committee and its budies. The USSR, in initiating the proposal to
organize extensive international cooperation in space development through
- the United Nations, saw to it that such cooperation was equally based.
Since space problems were closely linked to important aspects of ensuring
state security, the principle of equality in the organizing and function-
ing of the UN Space Committee was of decisive significance. For this
reason it is quite natural that the USSR, the other socialist states, as
well as India and the UAR refused to participate in the committee's work
with its initial membership when of the 18 member states of the Committee,
12 were U.S. allies in political-military blocs.2
On 12 December 1959, the UN General Assembly unanimously approved Resolu-
tion 1472 (XIV) which established the Committee for the Use of Space for
Peaceful Purposes as one of the permanent UN committees and established
its new membership. On the basis of a compromise agreement, the Committee
included 24 nations representing the three basic groups of states existing
in the modern world.3
However, another several years past before conditions cou'ld be created
- needed for the normal work of the Committee and it could begin its p':acti-
- cal activities. The first session of the Committee with its full member-
- ship was held only in March 1962.
The UN Space Committee was confronted with a series of tasks, including aiding fl.irther space research started during the period of the IGY, the
disseminating of information, providing help in carrying out national re- .
search prograas, and studying the legal problems of space development. ~
The Committee had to provide a close tie with all governmental and non- '
governmental organizations involved in space questions.
For a more concrete study of the ways and metY:;.ds for organizing coopera-
tion, the Committee organized two subcommittees each with a full membership:
one for the purposes of discussing scientific and technical questions, and
the other on the legal aspects of cooperation. Later on under the Committee
and its scientific and technical subcommittee, three special work groups
were formed: for the use of satellites for navigation purposes, direct
broadcasting and the-study of earth resources from spdce.s The Committee
submits reports on its activities to the UN General Assembly.
In accord with the understanding reached in 1961, the decisions of the
- Committee and its bodies are taken without voting on the basis of the -
rule of consensus. The consensual taking of decisions without voting, -
- in being used presentl,y ever more widely in the UN bodics and at inter-
national conferences, prevents the imposition of unacceptable decisions
on states. The positive significance of the consensus rule, in particular
for the codification and progressive development of interna4 .-ional law,
has been noted both by Soviet as well as f.oreign inter�ational law expprts.6 '
90
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
2 MARCH 1979
m
6Y V. S. ' VERESHCHET I N
~ 2 OF 3
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL USE 0liI.Y
- `I'he clo:,e linY, between scientific-technical and legal attpects of coopera-
t;ion araonp, states in the 3evelopment of ,pace is clearly manifested in the
- role wt,ich the t1N Space Cotnmittee plqyn in working out the procedures of
internutional gpace law. Within'thirs body, scienticts, diplomats and legal
e>:pert:, have an opportuni.ty to discuss jointly the most complex problems
of international law posed by the development of the leading areas of
science and teChnology.
In accord with Article 13 of the UIl Charter, the General Assembly is bound
to ornanize research and make recommendation^ for the purposes of encourag-
ing and progressively dEVeloging international law. Consequently, assist-
ancP in the developmen-Z of international space law is part of the direct
duties of the United Nations in accord with its Charter. bue to the uni-
versal nature of its membernhrp and the tasks confronting it, the i3nited
Nations and its bodies, including the Space Committee, are the most suit-
able place for an interr.ational l.egal regulation of the space activities
oi stltes.
Upon the initiative and with the active participation of the USSR and the
' other socialist counL�ries, the United Nations has been concerned xit2: the
examination of a majority of the legal questionr of cooperation among
states in space. The USSR and other socialist countries have endeavored
_ to prevent space from beir.g turned into an arena of international con-
flicts and to make it an area of peaceful cooperation amonE; all states of
the world. The elaboration of the ap,reements vhic:h presently comprise
the basis of international space lax and order uas a major achievement of
the UN Space Committee and its legal subcommittee.7
At present the practice oP elaborating new co:rnon procedures oP inter-
national space law has become even more corapler.. In accord Xith the UN
;,eneral Assembly recoamendations, the Legal Subcomafttee of the UN Space
Committee is to study and courdinate the dra.fts submitted by the states;
then the approved drafts are turned over for further reviex to the UN
~pace Committee and throuP,h ft to the UN General Assembly which, in turn,
in approving these drafts, appends then to its resolutions and recommends
~ them for sipning by all interested states.e
In accord with the resolution approved by the U?1 General Assembly at its
31st session in 1976, the Legal Subcommittee of the UN Space Committee
wit;h an equal degree of priority is to be concerned with examining a draft
treaty for the moon, the question of working out the principles for the
use of satellites by states for direct televfsion broadcasting, and the
question of the leggl consequences of remote sounding of the earth from
- space.
At present, almost 20 years after the establishing of the UIi Space Committee,
it can definitely be said that its basic achievement has been lea making
; activities in the area of space law, and the regulatfng of legal relation-
ships amor;v states in the proceas of the development of space.
91
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
The Committee has been significantly less succeasful in the immedfate organiz-
- ing of international space research programs. As can be seen from the pre-
ceding text, this aspect of state activities in space has been basically the ~
concern of other organizations. Such uork is also carried out on the basis
of biiateral and multilateral agreementg. The UN Space Committee as yet
does not have any substantial influence on the specific types of ,joint space
programs.
However it would be wrong to underestimate the role of the Coruaittee as a
catalyst of international cooperation in the scientific and technical area.
'T'hus, the Committee carried out important work to organize the international -
resear�ch rocket launching ranges under UN aegis.
In 1962, the UN General ,1ssembly directed the attention of states to the
advisability of setting up international rocket ranges, and approved the
basic principles uhich their esL-ablishment should meet.9 The setting up of
such ranges by individual nations or groups of nations should contribute
to a deepening of international collaboration in the development of space
and the training of specialists in the developing nations. The carrying
out of systematic rocket sounding in tht equatorial regions is of particu-
lar scientific interest-for research in the area of ineteorology and aeronomy. -
The principles which the states should follou in setting up the interna-
tional ranges are contained in the report of the UN Space Committee of
27 Septer.ber 1962.10 These principles stipulate, in particular, that re-
sponsibility for the leadership of the ranges and their operation is born
by ttae states on whose territory these range~ are located. The ranges
can be used only for carrying out scientific experiments for peaceful
purposes. The UN Space Comnittee and the xorld scientific community are
to be informed ahead of time on the purpeses and preliminary schedule
for conducting the experiments. The results of the research carried out
should be published in unclassified periodicals.
The relations between the range-oWning states and the user states are de- _
termined on the basis of the corresponding agreements. At each range a
consultative council is to be set up consisting of representatives from
the scientific circles of the user nations. The range is taken over by
the United Pdations by the General Assembly in accord with a recommendation
- of t2-,e UN Space CommitLee.
The povernments of India and Argentina turned to the United Nations xith a
requPst fr)r it to take over the rocket ranges being developed on their
territories. International groups of scientists Who visited the site of
_ the ranges for an inspection recommended that this request be granted. In
response to the recommendations of the UN Space Committee, the General Assembly in 1965 put the Indian rocket ranae in Thumba under UN aegis, and
in 1959, tne Argentine range at Mar del Plata. Brazil is also considering _
the possibility of establishing an international range on its territory.
On the question of organizing international ranges, Italy and France have
officially announced that the equitorial moSile range of San Marco and the
92
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
~
;lpnr.n center of Y.ourou in Cuiantt which belong tv them could also be uned
Cnr Joant international pro,jects under i1N sponsor3hip.
Another i.mportnnt measure which has had a catalyzing effect on the dev--lop- _
ment of international cpace cooperation was the setting up of the Inter-
- nrlt.ioniil Conferenr.c for ne:.carch arid Use of Space for Peaceful Purpoacs
by the United Nutions in August 1968 in Vienna. The con:erence organized
under Soviet initiative haE become a worldwide forum at whi.ch 78 nations
and 13 international organizations summed up the first decade of space
research. At the conference the focus was to show in what manner the re-
sults of this research cou].d help in solving the practical problems con-
fronting the developing nations. At the conference around 200 papers
were presented and these were heard at 10 special-sub,ject sessions as xell
as in the coursP of special disCUSSions.ll -
mhe i1Pd Space Committee also carries out useful activity in coordir,atinF
the work of various international organizations in the space research area.
Contributing to this work, in particular, are the reviews published regu-
larly by the UN Secretariat upon the request of the Committee of activities
and resources ot' the United Nations, its specialized agencies and the other
- competent international bodies invol�red in the use of space for peaceful
purposes.12 In sccord with Article XI of the space treaty, the UN Secre-
tariat is also concerned with the collection and distribution of informa-
tion concerning the uctivities of states in space. Such information is
provided cn a voluntary basis b,v many countries, and is published periodi-
cally in the series of UN documents. Since 1962, the Department on Space
2uestions of the liN Secretariat has been keeping an official register in
uhich information provided by the states on ob,jects launched into space
is, kept.13 :'he UIJ Space Com.-nittee and Its Scientific and Technical Subcommittee de-
- vote aCreat deal of attention to seeking out opportunities to provide aid -
to ;he developing nations in the area of education and professional train-
ing for personnel involved in the practical use of space technolopr. Over
the last several years, the "U'l1 Program fo: the Application of Space Tech-
nology" has been carried out under the leadership of the Comtaittee. Within
this program, a mueber of UN member nations have provided scholarships for "
training specialists from the developing nations. For the ssme purposes, _
_ eacti year the United Nations holds meetings, scminars and practical ses-
sions in various nations, in particular on questions related to the use
- of remote sounding raethods for studying ea:th resources and environmental
conservation. The 31st General Assembly Session approved the UN program
on the use of space technoloU and recoIImended that it be continued.
?�7ithin the system of the United Nationss a whole series of groups of
sFecialized agencies is also concerned to one degree or another With the
questions of cooperation in space development.
93
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
The International Telecommun3cation Union (TTU) holds first place emong
them in term3 of the quantity and range of work related to space. Space
research is incanr,.eivab].e without the use of telecommunications. The ITU
and the bodiPs t:nder it sre concerned with allocatfng thE radio banda on
an internatinnal basis for var3ous types of space activities and radio-
astronomy for the purpose of preveriting interference.
The wireless communications regulations worked out at the worldwide admin-
istrative radio conferences of the TTU are also applied to the International
Telecommunica.tion Gonvention and have the force of an international treaty.
The first attempt at allocating radio bands for space research was made in -
- 1959� However in 1963 ft was eesential to revise the assigning of fre- '
quency bands for the varfous services of space wireless communications, ~
and this was explained by the limited nature of the radio apectrum and
the ever growing demand fur the use of radio frequencies. -
In June-July 1971, the Worldwide Administrative Radio Conference on Space
- Communications was reconvened in Geneva. On the basis of the proposals
by ITU members, the conference at which 100 states were represented re- -
viewed the entire range of questions related to the use of wireless com-
munications in the development of space, including the problem of the
- placing of satellites in ageostationary orbit and the use of satellites
for direct broadcasting. The wireless communications regulation which
was revised at this conference came into force on 1 January 1973. The
laat Worldwide Administrative Radio Conf.erence on Space Communications -
was held in January-February 19^,7. A-t this conference a number of impor-
tant decisions wpre taY,en relateri to assigning positions for radio broad-
~ casting satellites in a geostationary orbit.14
The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) is anotner example of a special-
ized UN agency which is largely involved with space research. The World
Weather Service and the Program for Studyir.g Global Atmospheric Processes
are the two basic long-range WMO projects which to a decisive degree rely
5
on the use of satellites.1
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
has shown an ever greater interest in the use of space technology. In par- _
ticular, a specially created group of experts for a number of years has
been concerned With Working out the areas of UNESCO activfties on the use
of space communications for educational, scientific and cultural purposes. -
The use of sEtellites for the purposes of navigation, radio position Pind--
ing of aircraft and ships and traffic control are within the sphere oP
interests of ttie International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the
- Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization (IMCO). The last of
these orp,anizations has done significant Work in discussing the techr,ical,
economic and legal aspects of an international satellite system for serv-
ing maritime navigation, and in 1975 convened an intergovernmental confer-
ence for eaamining the question of establishing the appropriate international
organization.16
94
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102108: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
The F'ood and Agriculture Organization (FAO) also has contributed to the
development of international cooperation in the area of using satellites
to study and protect the earth's resourees, and the World Health Orga,niza- -
tion (WFtO) has been interested in the possibilities of utilizing the most
recent achievements in the area of space biology and medicine for public
health.
The abcve-mentioned as we11 as other specialized UN agencies have made their
contribution to developing international space cooperation mainly by ex-
changing information and coordinating national research programs or in{f;i-
ating international projects. Some of them, in particular the ITU, have
carried out important funetions of international regulation and codification -
in this area. None of these organizations is engaged in direct activities
fn space.l7
2. International Nongovernmental Organizations
Let us examine the structure and the basic forms of activity of two non-
governmental scientific organizations which play an important role in the
develonMent of international space cooperation. These are the International
Committee for Space Research (COSPAR) and the International Astronautical
F'ederation.18
The significance of these organizations in establishing contacts between
scientists and scientific organfzations in individual countries was par-
ticularly great during the initial period of space activities, when the
intergovernmental organizations in the given area had not yet been set up
or xere not functioning. Because of this COSPAR activities assumed a semi-
official nature, and this was reflected in its charter, procedural rules
and methods of work. The resolutions and recommendations made by COSPAR
have had an indirect impact on the law-making process in the area of space
law. Within the International Astronautical Federation since 1960 there
has existed the International Institute of Space Law and this has been ac-
4 V-ively concerned with the doctrinal elaboration of the most urgent legal
problems.
Although COSPAR and the International Astronautical Federation, in being
nongovernmental organizations, do not possess an internati.onal legal
personality, their study is of serious interest for the sc3ence of inter-
national space laW.
G. I. Morozov h[ts quite rightly noted that the absence of a legal person-
ality in international nongovernmental organizations "cannot explain the
insufficient attention paid to them, for many of them have played a very
significant role in modern international relations."19 One cannot help
but also agree with G. I. Morozov that "to deny the role of the inter-
national nongovernmental organizations in international relations and the
presence of a certain minimum of legal elements uhich allox these organi-
zations to operate means to ignore objective facts. HoXever, to identiPy
95
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102108: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
- these organizations with intergovernmental ones and to recognize them as �
principals of international law ia at least unrealistic."20
The International Committee for Space Research (COSPAR) was founded in 1958
for continuing work in the area of cooperation in space research after the
end of the IGY (1957-1958). COSPAR arose with the rights of a special
committee of the International Council af Scientific Unions, the organiza-
tion which initiated the IGY.21 This made an impression on the structure
and forms of activity of COSPAR.
- The members of COSPAR are the academies of sciences and their equivalent
scientific institutions in 34 countries, as well as the following 12 inter-
national scientific unions which comprise the International Council of .
Scientific Unions: the Internar3.ona1 Astronomical Union, the Interna-
~ tional Geodetic and Geophysical Union, the International Union of Theoreti-
cal and Applied Physics, the International Union of Biological Sciences,
the International Union of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, the Inter-
national Union of Pt~ysiological Sciences, the International Biochemical
Union, the International Scieiitific Radio Union, the International Mathe-
matics Union, the Internstional Union of Theoretical and Apolied Biophysics,
- the International Union of Theoretical and Applied Chemistry, and the Inter-
national Union of Geological Sciences.
Ea.ch of these scientific ur.ions is concerned with various aspects of space
research. The participatiop of the unions in COSPAR activities makes it
, possible for it to consider the interests of the various scientific disci-
plines in examining the results and the plans of space research.
= During the fir3t year of its existence (up to November 1954), COSPAR was
directed by a temporary charter. Life showed that certain provisions of
this charter, particular]y those concerned with membership in the Committee
as well as the structure and powei�s of its leading bodies, did not meet -
+,he serious tasks confronting COSPAR, and did not create the bases for -
- equal participation in its work for the scientific organizations of the
socialist countri.es. Due to the fact that the membership and organiza-
tional principles of COSPAR did not provide the grounds for fruitflal in-
ternational cooperation in arrying out scientific research in space, and
the proposals of the USSR Acaderqy of Sciences aimed at broadening the rep- -
resentation of 5cientists from different nations on the Commi+tee were re-
jected by a ma,jority of votes, the USSR Academy of Sciences was forced to
abandon further participation in COSPAR work. It resumed its activities
in COSPAR only after-its neW charter had come into force, and this appeared _
after extensive discussions and was the result of a compromise agreement
' between the scientific agencies of various nations. The history of the
elaboration of the COSPAR charter indicates that international nongovern-
mental organizations in the space area are closely tied to interstate re- _
lations and are influenced by the contradictions between the various socio- _
economic systems.
96
- FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102108: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
According to the charter approved in November 1959, the general asaembly,
thc executive council and the bureau are the basic leading COSPAR bodies.
In the intervnls between th'e general assemblies, the activities of the
Committee are directed by the executive council which incl::des seven rep-
resentatives from the scientific institutions of the countries elected at -
the general assembly and one representative from all the scientific member
unions of COSPAR. The executive council can meet with a restricted member-
ship af the seven elected members who form the bureau. All the decisions -
of the executive council are considered binding only in the instance that
they are supported by two-thirds of the votes of the elected members.
~ The charter specially stipulates that ttie voting method for the COSPAR
officials (the president, two vice presidents and the four bureau members)
_ "should be such as to provide representation corresponding to the distribu-
_ tion of basic efforts in space research among the COSPAR members" (Article
III).
- In accor3 with this provision, the procedural rules of COSPAR provide a
_ special procedure for electing officials under which one of the COSPAR
vice presidents is ;.'lLcted by the general z:ssembly from candidates sub-
mitted by the USSR Acadeny of Sciences and the other from among candidates
submitted by the U.S. National Acaderr~y of Sciences. Two members of the
bureau are elected from a list of candidates submitted by one vice presi-
- dent, and the other two from a list of candidates submitted by the other
vice president. The president is elected from among candidates submitted
by the executive council or directly by the general assembly.
The basic mission of COSPAR is on an international scale to contribute ta
progress in all types of scientific research conducted using rockets,
rocket transports and balloons (Article I of the Charter). COSPAR is
conccrned only with fundamen+al scientific research, excluding from its
activities the problems of spu--e technology related to the designing of
missiles, engines, missile flight control, and so Porth. _
Like other international scientific organizations, COSPAR does not directly
conduct scientific research. Its sessions discuss the obtained results
and work out recommendations on planning and coordinating scientific ex-
periments carried out under national and international programs. COSPAR
does not have the right to pass any binding decisions relating to the
national scienti.fic research programs.
COSPAR carries out its basic scientific activities in eight working groups.
- At the annually held sessions of these groups, information is exchanged on
space research programs being carried out and planned. The recemmendations
of the working groups represent the authoritative opinion of the inter-
national collective of scientists in s certain area of space science.
Although these recorrunendations cannot be viewed as international legal
documents, they do carry great weight in scientific circles. In carrying
out their space activities, as a rule, the states consider them.
97
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY -
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102108: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
The first COSPAR workinq group ia concerned with the scientific problem3
o� satellite traeking usinp opticsl and radio equipment, as well as study-
ing the dynamics of satellite motion. This keeps a list of the tracking
atationa and this is published in the COSPAR Information Bulletin. Th,e
group he,s worked out a special manual on organizing optical observation
stations. It gives great attention to preparing international cooperative
programs in the area of space geodesy.
The second and fourth COSPAR working groups are concerned with examining
the results and coordinating scientific experiments to study the inter-
planetary medium, the magnetosphere and the upper atmosphere. One of
these groups participated in elaborating a new major international draft
on studying the magnetosphere. The result of the work of the fourth group
was the compilation of an "International Atmosphere Reference" which gave
important information for experimenters and practical workers on the aver-
age characteristics and composition of the atmosphere at verious altitudes
and their variations related to the time of dqy, season, phase of solar
activity, and so forth.
The moon and the planets of the solar system are the subject of study of
the seventh working group. The problems of the use of space technology
for solving astrophysical problems, including the forecasting of solar
flares, are the concern of t.he third COSPAR working group. The sixth
working group assists in international cooperation in tre area of using
satellites and rockets for meteorological purposes and the investigation
of the earth from space. With its help, in particular, the rocket sensing
of the atmosphere has been coordinated in the various countries. The
eighth group examines the theoretical and experimental prublems related
to the behavior of various materials under space conditions. Finally,
one other COSPAR group (the fifth) has as its task an investigation of
space biology problems.
In 1962, the COSPAR concultative group on the questions of the potentially
- harmful consequences of experiments conducted in space was establisned. This group has opera.ted as the basic center of the International Council
of Scientific Unions for reviewing the consequences of space experiments
which could represent a danger from the viewpoint of changing the natural
environment or cause interference for further research. The recommenda-
- tions of the group, after their approval by the COSPAR executive council, -
have been disseminated in the various nations and international organiza-
tions. In particular, this group has given a great deal of attention to -
� the measures of preventing microbiological contamination of the earth
and planets in the course of space experiments.23 The COSPAR sessions are held anr_ually in various countries. During thesP
sessions, in addition to scientific and organizational meetings, the general
- assembly of COSPAR members is held and at this papers are presented by the
national scientific institutions and international organizations on the
results of space research conducted during the year. Thus, the COSPAR
98
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102108: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR 0FFICTAL USE ONLY
seasions annually aum up the restil.ts of work done throughout the world on
the study of space.
COSPAR publishes an infbrmation bulletin which appears in English,24 as
well aa the works of its anriual sesaions. It mQintains close ties with a
number of international organ3.zations, including the UN Space Committee,
which has granted it consultative status in accord w3th the UN General
Assembly Resolution 1721 (XVI) of 20 December 1961.25
The International Astronautics Federation is the other nongovernmental
scientific organization which aids actively in extensive international
exchange of results and ~lans in the area of the development of space
~ science and technology.2 The federation arose in 1950 as an association
= of eight national societies interested in the problems of rocket produc-
tion and space research. The International Astronautical F'ederation, in
, the view of its founders, should become that body which would make it pos-
sible to concentrate the efforts of many countries for the preparations
= and subsequent execution of .n i.nterplanatary flight.
The fir5t federation charter approved in 1952 in Stuttgart stated that the
- Federation "set as its goal to aid in the founding of an International
Astronautical Sc;.2ntific Research Institute the task of which would be to
carry out space flights for nonmilitary purposes" (Article 6). Although
this task of the Federation has remained unrealized and obviously could -
_ not be carried out by the forces of an international public organization,
i.t plays an important role in the development of internatlional cooperation
in space research. Its activitizs increased particularly after the launch- .
ing of the first satellite.
The Federation is presentl,y led by a charter approved in 1961 in Washington,
with amendmenis made in 1968 and 1974. It brings together around 60
national astronautical societies from 37 countries. Each nation can be
represented on the FeJeration by several national societies, but only one
of them has the right to vote in the leading bodies.
The charter reinforces the provision according to which the role of the ~
country in space research should be considered in the elections to the
leading bod.tes of the Federation, as well as the principle of a,just geo-
graphic distribution.
The general assembly is the superior body of the Federation. Its membe:-
ship includes one representative from each federation member. The assembly =
' meets annually in different regions of the world simultaneously with the
astronautical congresses. In the intervals between the sessions of the
assembly, the current work is carried out by a bureau.
Within the Federation several standing committees have been created. These
are for bioastronautics, on educational questions, applications satellites,
publications, and others. The astronautical congresses which are organized
99
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102108: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIIALL USE ONLY
annually by the Federation hold a central place in its activities. The
first such congress was held in Paris in 1950. Since then they have been
held regular l}r in different nations bf the world. The aessiona of the
astronautical congresses are attended by acientiata and specialiats of
- virtually all nations engaged in work in the area of space r-aearch. The
aubjects of the papers given at the congresses, as a rule, encompass a broad
range of scientific and technical questions related to space research, in-
cluding questions of a social and legal nature.
The Federation maintains close ties with a number of intergovernmental organizations. In particular, it has been given Fonsultative status under
UNE-SCO as well as the UN Economic and Social Council, and also observer -
status on the UN Space Committee. _
Soviet scientists have participated in the activities of the Federation -
starting with its sixth congress (1955)� In 1956, at the seventh Inter-
_ national Aatronautical Congresa in Rome, the Commission on Interplanetary
Communications under the USSR AcadeW of Sciences27 was admitted to the
Federation.
Within the framework and under the leadership of the Federation two other
international organizations established in 1960 also carry out their ac- "
tivities. These are the International Academy of Astronautics28 and the
International Institute of Space Law the membership of which includes
scientists elected for life who are well known for their achievements in
the area of astronautics and srace law.
The interest oi' the Federation in the problems of space laW xas initially
reflected in the establishing of the Standing Legal Committee. This was
established in August 1958 during the Ninth International Astronautical
Congress upon the initiative oP the prominent American legal expert E.
Haley who at that time was the Federation president. In 1959, before the
Committee had actually begun its work, a decision was made to transPorm
it into the International Spaae Law Institute. The charter of the Insti-
tute was approved in August 1960, in Stockholm.
The tasks of the Institute include the holding of international col]oquiums
on space law, the carrying out of special research, publishing activities,
_ the awarding of prizes, and so forth. At present around 400 legal experts
from 48 nations are members of the Institute. The work of the Instltute
is headed by a council of directors with 15 members elected by the general
assembly for a period of 3 years. In electing the members of the council,
the principle of adequate rPpresentation of the various legal systems of
- the world should be considered.
The basic activities of the Institute (like 41-hose of the International
Acaderry of Astronautics) consist in organizing scientific conferenees and
publishing the works of these conferences.29 Un3er the leadership of the
Institute each year international colloquiums are held on space laW. These
100
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102108: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
contribute to the scientific elaboration of the most complex queations af
international space law. The organizing of these colloquiums within the
international astronautical congresse3 provides the representatives of
natural and eocial acience.- with an unique opportunity to discuss jointly -
the scientific-technical and social problema related to the study and de-
velopment of space.30
In describing the significance of COSPAR and the International Astronauti-
cal Federation, the American 1ega1 'experts S. Lay and H. Taubenfeld have
,joint].y emphasized their important role in exchanging scientific and tech-
nical information and in "the generating of ideas." As these authora note,
COSPAR and the Federation, being riongovernmental organizations, do not es- -
tablish international procedures directly, although in certain instancea
their researcYi and activities can bear directly on the positions held by
the governments on the corresponding questiona.31
Above it was alreac~y mentioned that to one degree or another a large num-
+ ber of~governmental and nongovernmental international organizations are
concerned with space problems. However, as-yet there is no intergovern-
mental space organization which in terms of its membership Pad functions
would have an universal cr,aracter. In the literature the idea of creating
- such an organization has been voiced, for example, similar to the Inter-
national Atomic Enerpr Agency. Here the plan is that the new organization
should be concerned both with the "operational" aspect of cooperation
among states in space development, that is, the use of space rocketry, -
. as well as the legal regulation of space activities.
Considering the scope of the national and international space programs -
, and their proportional amount in international scientific ar_d technical _ life, these id.eas merit the closest study. However it is obvious that the
creation of such an organization would be Justified only in the instance
that it can introduce a qualitatively new element in interne,tional space cooperation, and would not duplicate the alrettdy existing and successflilly
- operating channels of cooperation. FOOTNOTES
1. fiesolution of the UN General Assembly 1721 (XVI) of 20 December 1961.
2. The Temporary UN Committee for the Use of Space for Peaceful Purposes
_ with such a membership was set up by the Resolutio.� of the UN General
Assembly 1348 (XIII) of 13 December 1958.
_ 3. In 1961 and 1973, the membership of the Corrmittee was increased ini-
tially up to 28, and then up to 37 states (Resolution of the UN
General Assembly 1721 (XVI) of 20 December 1961 and 3182 (XXVIII)
~ of 18 December 1973). For more detail on the history of the setting
up of the UN Space Committee, see: F. N. Kovalev, "The UN Coamittee
- 101
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102108: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
on the Use of Space for Peaceful Purposes," "Kosmos i Mezhdunarodnoye
Sotrudnicheatvo" [Space and International. Cooperation], Moscow,
Mezhdunarodnyye Otnosheniya, 1963, pp 77-109.
4. Of great importance for increaeir.q the work of the Committee wsn the'
ftesolution of the UN Qeneral. Aesembly 1721 (XVI) of 20 December 1961.
5. For more detail on the activities of the working groups, see Chaptera
3, 4 and 6(Part II).
6. See, for example, A. P. Movchan, "Problerqy Kodifikatsii i Progressivnogo
Razvitiya Mezhdunarodnogo Prava" [Problems of Codification at;u Progres-
sive Development of International Law], Doctoral Dissertation Resume,
Moscow, 1974, p 25; E. R. Finch and A. L. Moore, "Outer Space Law and
the Global Community," TIiF INTERNATIONAL LAWYER, No 4, 1974, p 761;
E. Galloway, "The Future of Space Law," "Proc. XIX Colloq. Law Outer
Space," California, 19779 p 7.
7. As was noted above, s special systematic examination of these agree-
ments is not part of the current research. The corresponding provi-
sions of the agreements have been analyzed in the work in relation
to a specific problems of cooperation. For a detailed history of
the elaboratian and an analysis of these agreements, see: G. P. Zhukov,
"Kosmicheskoye Pravo," Moscow, Mezhdunarodnyye Otnosheniya, 1966; L
G. P. Zhukov, "The Questions of the Peaceful Use of Space in UN Activities," "OON. Itogi, Tendentsii Perspektivy" [The United Nations.
Results, Friends and Prospeets], Moscow, Mezhdunarnodnyye Otnosheniya,
1970, pp 188-228; G. P. Zhukov, "Mezhdunarodnoye Kosmicheskoye Pravo,"
Moscow, Znaniye, 1971; Yu. M. Kolosov, "Bor'ba za Mirnyy Kosmos" [The _
Struggle for Peaceful Space], Moscow, Mezhdunarodnoye Otnosheniya, 1968; '
A. S. Piradov, "Kosmos i Mezhdunarodnoye Prave," Moscow, 7naniye, 1970;
A. S. Piradov, "The�Struggle of the USSR for Elaborating the Provisions
of International Space Law," "Tendentsii Razvitiya Kosmicheskogo ~Prave" [Development Trends in Space Law], Mosco-vr, Nauka, 1971, pp 5-32;
G. P. Zadoroznhyy, "The International Legal Status of Space," "Kurs =
Mezhdunarodnogo Prava," Moscow, 1972, pp 154-161; "Mezhdunarodnoye
Kosmicheskoye Pravo:' [International Space Law], edited by A. S. Piradov,
Moscow, Mezhdunarnodr~yye Otnosheniya, 1974, and so forth. _
- 8. 1 . M. Yanovskiy, "The Role of the United Nations in Shaping t.ie Provi-
;.;s,ons of Space Law," SOVETSI{OYE GOSUDARSTVO I PRAVO, No 11, 1969,
a)p 65-68.
~ 9. Resolution of the UN General Assembly 1802 (XVII) of 14 December 1962.
10. Official Reports of the General Assembly, 17th Session, Appendices,
Point 27 oP the Agenda, Uoc. A/5181.
102
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102108: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
N
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
11. "Practical Benei'its )f Space Exploration," (A Digest of Papers Pre-
3ented at the UN Conference on the rxploration and Peaceful Uses of
Outer Space, Vienna, 1968), New York, United Nations, 1969; "Space
Exploration and Applir.ations," United Nations Publication, N E.69.1.16,
vol,s 1-11. 12. See, for example: Un Doc. A/AC 105/100.
- 13. B. G. Mayorskiy, "The Registration of Space Objects," "Mezhdunarodnoye
- Kosmicheskoye Pravo," pp 125-142. The importance of this UN activity
= has increased even more after the Convention on the Registration of
Ob,jeets Launched in Space came into force on 15 September 1976.
14. For the activitfes of the ITU, see: P. I. Lukin, "The Use of SatPllites
for Radio Communications," "Pravovyye Aspekty Ispol'zovaniya Iskusstvennykh Sputnikov dlya Tseley Meteorologii i Radiosvyazi"
[Legal Aspects of the Use of Satellites for Meteorological and Radio
Communications Purposes], Edited by :1. A. Ushakov, Moscow, Nauka,
1970, pp 103-126; P. I. Lukin, "Communications Satellites and Inter-
natiunal Relations," "Kosmos i Problema Vseobshchego Mira" [Space and
the Problem of Universal Peace], Edited by G. P. Zadorozhnyy, Moscow,
Nauka, 1966, pp 152-160; G. P. Zhukov, "Kosmicheskoye Pravo," pp 178-
198. - 15. For more detail on this see Chapter 5(Part II). See also: E. G.
Vasilev5kaya, "Legal Problems of Space Meteorology and International -
Cooperation," in the book: "Pravovyye Aspekty Ispol'zovaniya
Iskttsstvennykh Sputnikov dlya Tseley Meteorologii i Radiosvyazi,"
pp a 5-102 . -
_ 16. The second and third sessions of this conference were held in 1976
(far more detail on this see Chapter 4(Part II)).
17. For the role of the specialized UN agencies in the exploration and
development of space, see UN Doc. A/AC.105/100.
18. For more detail on the history of the founding of these organizations -
and their activities in the initial period, see: "Kosmos i
Mezhdunarodnoye Pravo," Edited by Ye. A. Korovin, Moscow, Mezhdu-
narodnyye Otnosheniya, 1962, pp 153-170. 1
19. G. I. Morozov, "Mezhdunarodnyye Organizatsii (Nekotoryye Voprosy
Teorii)" [International Organizations (Certain Questions of Theory)],
_ Moscow, Mysl' , 1974, p 4(1,
20. Ibid., p 317.
21. Ye. D. Lebedkina, "Mezhdunarodr~yy Sovet Nauchr~ykh Soyuzov i Akademiya
Nauk SSSR" [The International Council of Scientific Unions and the
USSR Academy of Sciences], Moscow, Nauka, 1971+, pp 185-196.
103
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102108: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFIGIAL USE ONLY
22. Charter of COSPFR (November, 1959)�
23. In 1972, the activities of th3s conaLil.tative group vere temporaril.y ,
halted.
24. See COSPAR INFORMATION BULLETIN, Nos. 1-76, 1960-1976.
25. For COSPAR also see: R. W. Porter, International Scientific Community:
- IC9U and COSPAR," "Internati,nal Cooperation tn Outer Space: A Symposium,"
U.S. Senate, Doc. N 57-52, 3.97?.. 26. On the history of the creation of the Federation, see: A. G. Ha1ey,
"Space Law and Government," New York, 1963, pp 3437380; "International
Astronautical Federation," Parts, 1971.
27. Later this coirmiission was renamed the Commission on the Research and
- Use of Space. Since 1976, the Interkosmos Council of the USSR Academy
of Sciences has been a member of the Federation. _
28. For the history of the founding and activity of the Academy, see:
"The International Academy of Astror,autics. The First Decnde," Paris, 1970; C. S. Draper, "International 4cademy of Astronautics," "Inter-
national Cooperation in Outer Space: A Symposium," pp 565-574� -
29. Also known are such publications of the Acadeiqy and Institute as thA
n:ajor dictionary on astronautics in seven European languages, the -
, journal ASTRONAUTICA ACTA, the annual bibliographies on space law,
and so forth. 30. For more detail on the institu+,e, see: E. Pepin, "International In-
stitute of Space La.w,10 "International Cooperation in Outer Space: A
- Symposium," PP 575-580. .
31. S. H. I,ay and N. J. Taubenfeld, "Tlie Law Relating tc> Acvitities of
Man in Space," Chicago, 1970, p 238. '
104
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
_ Foa OFFtcrat. usE oxLY
~
~
PART IT: LECAL PROI3LIIMS OF IN'PERNATIONAL APPLICATION SPACE SYSTEMS
CIiAPTER 1: 'PHE USE 0F SPACE FOR EARTH-ORIENTID PURPOSES AND STATE SOVgiEIGNTY
In the noW customnry phrase "research and use" of apace, emphasie more gnd
more ia being put on the Word "use." 'i'his is not a playing doWn of the
role of fundamental research in apace Which in the ILture will hold the
mo3t ir;portant place in elucidating the true picture and laWS of the world
around us, but rather a quite natural desire to more ranidly put space to
Work for man and to help in solving many terreatriel problems.
- Communication3, meteorology, navigation, and the study of the naturul re- -
sources of the earth--these are the basic areas of hu.=n economic activity
which are nos+ inconceivable without the use of space equipment. In the
_ sphere of the practical applications of astronautics, the benefit of ex-
tensive international cooperation ia particularl,y great.
The desip,nated areas of space activity directly involve the political end
economic interests of states. Fo,: this reason the international legal
problems which must be solved in organizing cooperation assume particular
urgency.
A majority of these problema to one degree or another is related to the
principle of the respect for state sovereignty, underlying modern inter-
national 1aw. The answer to the queation oP Whether or not the given spe-
cific type of space activity could inPluence the realization oP a state's
inalienable right to i-overeignt,y acts as the starting po�nt in determining
the tieed to elaborate special legal conditions for this type of activity.
This is xhy the problem of state sovereignty in termg of the applied use
of space haa a general nature and is of great theoretical and practical
significance.
Bourp,eois doctrine of international apace laa has rather Well confused the
question of the role of the principle of state sovereignty in international
space lax. During the first years oP the space age, certain Western inter-
national law experts used the universal recognition of the principle of
the freedom of research and use of space as a pretext Por attacking state
sovereignty generally, declaring it an "obsolete" concept in the space age.
105
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
F+OIt OFFICIAI. USL ONLY
Now we are aitnese of a nea attsck on atate sovereignty related to the in-
cipient age of the active uae of space for the prsctical needa of man.
However, it aould be wrong to depict the picture ag if such a position was
held by all or a mnjority of the repreaentatives in the bourgeois acience
of gpar.e laa. Many legal experts in the developing and capitaligt countries
Who have investigated these queations approach this problem realistically.
In discussing the various aspects of the 1ega1 regulation of the applied
types of space activity in the United Nations, a majority of nations has r
actively come to the defense oP state sovereignty. At the same time,
~ American representgtives in the United Nations and a number of American
international legal experts see the principle of reapect for state sovereignty
merely as an interference in the earth-oriented use of space.
'Phe international applicationa space systems based on national economic
satellitesl, are firmly entrenched in the life of many countries and
= peoples. Telephone, television and other types of long distance communica-
= tions for a number of yeara have been carried out by international communi- ~
cations arganizations and syataacs via the Intersputnik and Intelset satel-
lites. Upon the initiative of an intergovernnental maritime consulting
organization, at preseut a nes+ international organization has been estab-
lished for a maritime satellite system. The nations of Western Europe,
the United States and Canada are Wor:cing on the plans for setting up au ~
experimental Aerosat satellite system designed to monitor air navigation
over the Atlantic. Weather satellites are also of decisive significance
in carrying out the global cooperative programs in the area of mateorologyr.
The UN Space Committee for several years has been concerned xith examining
the legal and organizational questions related to txo other types of the
practlcal use of space: studying earth resources from space and direct
televisi.on broadcasting via satellites. The prospects of creating inter- _
_ national orbital stations xhich have came significantly closer as a result of carrying out the Soyuz--Apollo Project open the taay to the integrated
use of suc1i stations for solving s ahole series of national economic prob-
lems.
Common to all types of applied space activity is the Pact that the employed
- space devices in the literal and figurative sense of the word are facing
the earth. The applications satellitea are designed not Por apace research
- as such, but rather for solving purely terreAtrial problems; maqy of them
"participate" in human economic activity.
d As xas noted by one of the French authors, the applications satellites
have posed greater problems on the earth than in space.2 These problems
_ involve both relations betveen the participants in the internatioral ap-
plications space systems (the necessity of ensuring the legal equality of
the states), as vell as the conditions vhereby it vould be possible to
carry out various types of space activities over foreign territories.
106
FOR OPFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
From the political and legal viewpoint, the greate3t complexity has arisen
over the questionn of stuclying earth resources from space and direct tele-
vinion broadcasting via sntellites. In the first instance it has been a
qtiention of the necesgity of preventing violationa of the sovereign righta
nf u state to i�ts natural riches, and aecondly, the inadmissibility of
interference intc the internal affair3 of a state.
In line uith the discugsion of the legal aspects of the use of these types
of applications satellitea, in the Western legal literature recently two
theoretical concepts have appeared on the role of atate govereignty in
international space lax. Conditionally let us term them the "American"
and the "F'rench," although,' undoubtedly, not all American and French legal
experts adhere to these views.
7'he Americsn notion proceeds from a denial of the applfcability of the
principle of state sovereignty to any types of space activi~y. The French
viewpoint is based on the asserti.on that the prfnciple of state sovereignty
is inupplicable to space resQarch, but is fully valid in terms of the use
of space.
Let us immediately stipulate that we do not intend to put Loth these views
on the same level. In actuality, while the American theory is aimed at
establishing the freedom of ar~y space activity over foreign territorie3,
the French pursues the directly opposite aim of establishing the nscessity
of respect for state sovereignty in the use of applications satellites.
At the same time a serious shortcoming of the French theory is the provi-
sion that international space law in its first stage supposedly rejected
the concept of state sovereignty.
In an article devoted to the legal problens of studying earth resources
from space, the American legal expert G. Robinson mentions sovereignty as
an "illusory dogna" of international lax, and -,xges a revision of the
theory of sovereignty in light of the most recent technical achievements.
He supports the statements that "the possibilities of remote sensfng from
manned and automatic satellites have neutralized the effectiveness of
sovereianty...and made it obsolete."3
Other American authors have developed the notion that since the current
ugreements in the area of apace law do not impose concrete limitetions on
the various types of the use of space, there is no basis to incorporate
~ such limitations in space law in the future. Proceeding from this position,
nfficial U.S. representatives in the various UN bodies have impeded in
every possible way the elaboraticn of legal dociunents which xould regulate
the spec'iic types of space use.
Such viexs have mingled With appeals to re3ect the principle oP state
sovereignty; these appeals have been particularly vociferous after the
appearance of the first satellites. "Sovereignty is neither necessary
nor su:ficient for solving problems created by the space age," wrote the
107
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL USL ONLY
specinl advisor tn the Commission on the Questions of Scienc:e and Aeronautics
of the House of Aepreaentatives of the U.S. Congresa, S. Beresford, in 1959.4
"...The concept of sovereignty could in prsctical terms be tslken out of the
dictionn of both air and space 1aw," echoed the Canadian 1ega1 expert
A. Binet. At that time proposals Were also voiced to aet up supernational
bodiea for controlling a11 apace activities, as we11 as to transfer such
control functions to the United Nations or a specially established inter-
national space agency.
On a broader level, the ideas of the rejection af atate sovereignty have
long been propagandized by the supporters of the theory of structural func-
tionalism Which ia widespread in the United States; one of the prominant
representatives of this theory is E. Haas, profesaor at the University of
California.G
The true ptcture of the development of lnternational space law repudiates
the theoretical constructs on the inapplicability of the principle of the
' respect of state sovereignty in this area of international law.
Sovereign states and international intergovernmental organizations which
carry out activities in space are the principals of international space
law. Having rejected the extension of territorial sovereignty to apace,
including the moon and other celestial bodies, space law at the same time
is based on a respect for state sovereignty in carrying out space activity.
Sovereign states are the participants to all multilateral international
agreements in the area of space law. The principle of sovereign equality
among states, in particular, is reflected in the universal nature of these
agreemen*s and in the absence of a binding court procedure far their in-
terpretation and for solving international disputes betWeen the participants
of the agreements. .
If we turn to the specific agreements, We Will see that the 1967 Space
Treaty, having prohibited national annexation of space and its component
parts by proclaiming sovereignty over them, by use, occupation or ar~y
other means (Article II), and having declared space and its component parts
open for research and use by all states (Article I), at the same time es-
tablished the duty of states to carry out their activities in apace re-
search gnd use in accord With international lau, inrluding the UN Charter
(Article III). The UN Charter is based upon principles of sovereign equal-
ity and noninterference into the internal affairs of states (Article II,
Points 1 and 7 of the UN Charter).
In accord with the principle of respect for state sovereignty, the Space
Treaty has imposed a whole series of limitations on the freedom of space
activity. In addition to the already mentioned provision on the extension
of the comcnon principles and provisions of international law to space
activities, one must mention the prohibition on ar~y discrimination against
states Whatsoever (Article I), the necessity of proper consideration of
108
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
.
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL U5E ONLY
the corregponding intere3ts of a11 other stntes (Article IX), the liability
ot stntes for all national, activities in space, including the activities of
nongovernmenta]. legal entities (Article VI), und other restrSctions. The
treaty directly prdhibit8 certe.in types of the military application of space
(Article IV). In it attention is drawn to the applicability of the regolu-
tion of the UN General Agsembly condemning the propagandizing of War to
space.
The maintaining of jurisdiction and control over npace objects and crewa by
the 3tntes while they are in space (Article VIIT) is also one of the mani-
festationg nf sovereign rights. The 1968 Nescue Agreement regulates the
relationships between states also with strict consideration of the principle
of sovereignty. Even operations involving the rescuing of cosmonauts who
have made an emergency landing cannot be carried out on foreign territory
without the agreement of the state possessing this territory, and in any
instance should be carried aut under its leaderahip and control (Article II).
The 1972 Convention on Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects regulates -
the material relationships betWeen states and not between physical and legel
entities, that is, it does this from the positions of state sovereignty and
the sovereign equality of states. Such an approach is also cheirrseteristic -
for the Convention Governing the Regtstration of Objects Launched into Space.
It must be pointed out that certain Americun authors have also dravm atten-
tion to the desfgnated circumstances, although as a whole American doctrine
~ is characterized by a negative approach to the given problem. "At the same
time that a t;eneral opinion exists, particularly among nonspecialists,"
wrote S. Gorove, "tha+ sovereignty has been completely abolished in terms
of space, it is essential to emphasize that the Space Treaty bans onl,y
'national annexation' by the proclamation of sovereignty, but not the reali-
zation of all forms o� sovereignty, sovereign rights or jurisdiction."7
Thus, the assertions that space laW has deweloped under the badge of derying
state sovereignty or without consideration of this principle clearly do not
conform to reality or to the actual state of affairs. Equally inadmissible
is to put the principle of respect of state sovereignty in opposition to
the principle of the freedom of space, when it is a question of space ac-
tivities Which directly involve foreign territories. The freedom oP apace
cannot serve as grounds for violating the sovereign rights of states on
the earth.
The French notion of the rolc of the principle of sovereignty in inter-
national space law has been stated in a number of korks :iritten by legal
experts collaborating in a Work group on sp&ce laW under the National
Center for Scientific Research of France. This group Was set up in 1963
upon the initiative of Prof Suzanne Bastide, and brings together university
- instrucLors, specialists from the National Center for Space Research and
the National Center for Scientific Research, as Xell as representatives of
the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
109
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR UFFICIAL USE ONLY
The group has prepared a geries of special studies, and periodically pub-
_ lighes an information bu].letin entitled LE DRbIT DE L'E3pACE [3pace Law].8
The group has been repeatedly instructed to work out the c;ficial French
poaition in the United Nations on individual questi.one of international -
space 1aw. ,
2'he designat,ed view has been stated most extensively in an article pub-
lished in 1973 in the journal RECHIIiCHE 3PATIALE by the prc:ninent French
intern9tional 1ega1 expert C. A. Colliard who heaned the apace law working
group.
rrom the standpoint of 1ega1 regulat,ion, C. A. Colliard draws a sharp dis-
tinction between research and use of apace. Tnitially, in his opinion,
international space law developed as law applied to research in the particu-
lar apace domain. Although Lhis spatial domain itself was not clearly de-
fined, sinne the boundary between air space and outer space xas not estab-
lished, the system of law relating to it had an autonomous and "revolution-
ary" character, since it "abandoned the clasaical concepts of sovereignty
and ownership."10
Activities in the area of the uae of space pursuing not space but rather
terrestrial aims, in the opinion of C. A. Colliard, lead to a situation
where autonomous space law gives way to "terrestrial" international law,
rrhere the concepts of sovereignty and savereign equality are dominant.
According to this theory, the "revolutionary and autonomous" space law
regulates only activities related to space research, but as Por the use of
space, it should be carried out in accord With the provisions not of space
law, but rather "classi;:" international law.ll
A number of the provisions in the ;iven viexpoint cannot help but cause
dispute. In the first place, current international space law encompasses
activities related both to research as Well as to the =t of space. In
the 1967 Space Treaty and in other general multilateral agreements i+hich
lay down the bases of space law and order, the xords "research and use"
are almost alkays employed together. The provisions of international space
law are extended to all types of space activity. However the broad scope
of practical activities in space during recent years, as Well as the circum-
stance that in a number of instances these activities may involve foreign
_ territories have necessitated the Ptitrther progressive development of inter-
national space law, in particular by Working out apeeial legal conditions
for certain specific types of applications satellites.
_ Secondly, international space law has never rejected the concepts oP
sovereignty and ownership. Being one of the sectors of international
public laW, international space law accepts its general principles and
provisions, including the principles of sovereignty and the sovereign
equality of states. As was shoWn above, international space laW, in intro-
ducing into international law the neW principle of the freedom of space
and the nonextension oP territorial supremacy to space, regulates the
110
FOR UPFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR nFFICIAL USE ONLY
relutionships between states in the area of their space activitiea on a
basis of strict respect �nr the principle of gtate sovereigni;y.
As fbr the connept of ownerahip, it alno is not alien to international space
1_aw. f(avinp, prohibited the nnnexation a� space, including the moon and
othei, celestial bodies, the Spnce Treaty defined that the rights of ormer-
ahip to space objecta launched into space, including objecta delivered to
or built on a celestial boc'~y, and their component parts remain unimpeired
while they are in space or on a celestial bncLy, or upon return to the
earth (Article VIII).
Finally, alsn debatable ie the view of C. A. Colliard that in the use of
spuce, international space law "gives way" to international public lnw.
7'he extension of international law to aii typeg of space activity is spe-
ciglly stipulated by the Space Treaty (Article ITI). Moreover, the elabora-
tion oi" new international documents which regulate the speci�ic types of
the practical application of earth satellites is cgrried out precisely with-
in the limits of international space law, the current provisions of which
encompass both the research and uae of space. Consequently, it would be
more correct to speak not of the halti.ng of the action of space larr, but
rather that in line with the specific nature of the practical use of space,
certain principles of general internatfonal law (primarily the prineiples
of sovereignty and the sovereign equality of states) Khich simultaneously
are principles of international space lak, assume greater force as applied
to the given types of activity.
However, regardless of all the shortcomings and the dubious provi.sions of
- the designated viewpoint, it is essential to emphasize its great positive
significance Which consists in the fact that, as was already pointed out
ubove, it focuses attention on the rnle of the principles of sovereignty
and the sovereign equality of states in carrying out practical space ac-
tivities. This concept proceeds from the limited nature of the principle
_ of the freedom of space and the inadmissibility of putting it in opposition
to the supremacy of states on their territory.
Over the centuries, in the theory and practice of international law, the
principle has been established of the unchallenged poWer of the state over
its territory, including the land, the waters and the air. The aupremacy
inherent to a state on its territory and independence in international
relations are the most important component elements of state sovereignty
in its political and legal understanding. Without the principle of state
sovereignty, modern international law is inconceivable.12 A discussion of
the question of Whether or not state sovereignty is vielated with the
passage of satellites over the territories of foreign countries at one
time was the startin,q point in the birth of international space lav.
A predominant ma,jority of authors has been unanimous in the fact that the _
flight of satellites above the territories of foreign states does not vio-
late the control of these states over their air space, and access to space
111
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOIt UFFICIAI, U5E pNLY
for ttte pitrpose of its peaceful exploration and development shauld be open
on equat bases to all nations of the world withnut any discrimination.
7'he ubiquitous and rapid recognition of '..his principle wns 1arge gided by
the circumstance that the gpace age began in the period of carrying out an ~
unprecedentedly broad program of tnternational scientific aooperation, the
Tnternutional Qeophysical Year (T(}Y). The Special Committee to Carry Out
the ICY even in 1954 approved a resolution which noted the great Acientific
interest of setting up experiments uginq research rocketg and gatellites.
Although the I(}Y program officially Was M,t of an internationol character,
it was carried out with the active auppo: and approvul of governments.
But, of course, an even grea+er role in establishing the principle of the
freedom df space was played by a recognition of the historic significgnce
of matt's entry into space and those posatbilities Which Kere opened up in
this reggrd for scientific gnd technicnl progress and for strengthening
international cooperation.
The principle of the freedam of apace immediatel,y became established in
international relations at firat with the tacit conaent of the states and
later in the form of resolutiona of the UN General Asaembly, and, finally, -
in a multilateral international treaty.
Because of this, of course, the claims advanced recently by certairl nations
_ to extend their sovereignty ta certain parts of space itself cannot be
considered as valid.13 The ban on the national annexation of nny part of
space is presently a generally recognized provision of international laW.
At the same time, Soviet legal acience from the very outset has emphasized
_ the circumstance that the nonextension of the sovereign poaer of a state
to space as such does not obviate the action in space of the general prin-
_ ciples of international law ahich are binding Por relationships betaeen
states, regardless of Whether their activities are carried ouc in the open
sea, in gir space or outer space.14
The special rules established by statea in terms of the conditions of each
of these spaces do not obviate but merely clariPy, develop and concretize
such general grinciples of international law as the observance of terri-
torial integrity and atate aovertignty, noninterference into internal
affairs, the prohibitirig of aggresaion and the propagandizing of aar, and
so forth. These provisions noW are aPfirmed by the conventional provisions
of international space law. As rras rightly noted by A. P. Movchan, "The
rise and development of space law have convincingly shown that scientific
and technical progress do not entail a revision or abrogation of the basic
principles of modern international law uhich have uithstood the test of
_ time and reprPSent A general],y recognized basis for fruitful collaboration
anong states in the most diverse spheres oP international relations, in-
cluding the areas engendered by the acientific and technical revolution."15
112
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FdR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Thus, aince the birth of space 1uw, the freedom to explore and use space haa
been interpreted within the relations between sovereign and equal statea
which carry out their activitiea in space in fu11 accord to the bQeie prin-
- ciplen oi' international 1aw. The freedom of space has never been underetond
� an ci totally unrestricted freedom for any activity in epace.
In analyzing the content of the principle of the freedom of epace, the
- French speCialist Simon Courteix has written; "The 1967 3pace Treaty in
the first article proclaims the principle of the freedom of the research
; and use of space. This freedom in egsence consists in equal acceas for all
- states to apace activities, and 3n the nonannexation in any manner of any
part of spgce, the moon or other celestial bodieo. However it can be car-
ried out only in obaerving definite conditions and restrictiors established
by the treaty itself."16
The Czechoslovak professor J. Busalc has correctly drawn attention to the
fact that "in accord with the Space Treaty the principle of the free uae nf -
_ space in no way is an exception to the binding principles of current inter-
national law applied in relations between states."17 "And precisely for
_ these reasons," writes J. Busak, "the activities of the applications satel-
lites shoul.d be regulated by the generally recognized principles of inter-
nationul law, and in particular by the principles of the respect for the
sovereign rights of states...."ie The treaty provisions of international
space law do not contain deFinitions for the concepts of "research and use"
of space. In the texts of the agreements, these concepts, as has already
beer, pointed out, are used together. Although the conditi,ts for the use
of space is more restricted in comparison xith the conditions of reserirch
_ (for example, certain types of military use are directl,y prohibited), in-
ternational space laa does not eatabliah a separate general legal regu].a-
tion for the use of space in contrast to the lE6t%?. regulation of space
research. -
By the use of space, in the broad sense, one must understand a17 activitiez,
in space Which pursue not only the aims of broadening acientific knoxledge
about space itself. In other xords, the term "use of space" includea both
the concept of the use of space itself and ita component parts, for example,
by exploiting the resources of celestiQl bodies, as uell as the concept of
the use of space equipment for solving various problems on earth.
From the viezrpoint of legal regulation, of partic-alar significance are
those types of space uae the consequences of Which are felt on the earth.
All types of the presently used applications satellites are used to satisfy
terrestriel needs. Hoxever the degree of their impact on terrestrial af-
fairs and the consequences of their use are far from the same.
The basic types of practical satellite use can be conditionally ranked in
the folloWing sequence in terms of the degree of their possible impact on
the exercisinp, of sovereign rights by states on the earth: space communica-
tions eniploying ground receiving and tranamitting sLations, space navigation,
113
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL U5E ON1.,Y
space meteorol.ogy, remdte sensing of the earth, and direct televieion broad-
eQatinp;.
As for the firat two types of satellite use, the problem of atate aovereignty
arises chief].y in terma of ensuring sovereign equality for the states and
the prohibiting of any discriminat3on whatsoever among the states in setting
up and operating the corresponding internstional syatems and organizationa.
Uncontrnlled activ3ties via any type of communications and navigation satel-
lites on the territory of atates ar.P impossible, sfnce their use requires ~
the placement of complicated receiving and transmitting stations on the
ground. This is inconceivable without the knowledge and approval of the ,
corresponding statea. The systemt~ of auch communications and navigation ~
sate113tes do not represent a thueat to realizing the territorial supremacy
of states.
The uae of satellites for meteorological purposes up to now has also not
created any specific international legal problems. Such satellit�es are
widely used on a national baeis and fit easily into the international
meteorological programs. However, even now the necesaity has arisen of -
preventing the danger of the use of space as well as other acientific and
technical devices for controlltng the natural environment and climate for
military and other purposes not compatible with the interests of ensuring
international security, well being and the health of people. Moreover,
any activtty involving a change in weather and climatic conditions over _
vast sreas can involve the intereats of a number of states and demand the
corresponding legal regulation. The use of satellites to study earth resources (remote earth sensing satel-
lites) requires a special international legal regulation which prohibits
the use of the obtained information on the resources of foreign states to
the detriment of their sovereign rights.
Direct television broadcasting via satellites to home receivers xepresents
a type of space activity the purpose of Which is to produce a definite ef-
fect on earth. Obviously if such an effect is aimed at a foreign territory,
the agreement of the appropriate atate must be obtained. Othezwise this
activity must be viewed as interference Into the internal affairs of the
state and as a flagrant violation of its sovereignty.
The given considerations make it possible to conclude that it is scarcely
possible to elaborate a special general legal framework for all types of
use of space objects for practical purposes. Certain types of satellite
use generallyr do not require the elaboration of special legal conditions
Which differ from those Which have already been defined by current space
law in terms of any activity related to the research and use of space.
The particular features of the use of satellites to study earth resources
and dfrect television broadcasting, in involving their effect on the exer-
cising of sovereign rights by states, first of all necessitate a speCiel
legal regul.aton Por these types of space activity.
114
FOR OFPICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
The legality of each sperii.'ic i;ype of the use of space devices for carrying
out prnctical missiona on the earth and, respectivel.y, the degree of freedom
i'or the use of apace (with the abaence of special legal conditiona for the
given type) should be determined depending upon whether or not these ac-
tivitiea conform to the generally recognized pr3ncip].es of international
1aw (including apace 1.aw), in incorporating the principles of respect for
state sovereignty and the sovereign equality of states.
FOQTNOTES
1. The concepts of applied, practical and natfonal economic use of space
are used as synonyms.
2. A. W. Stoebner, "Domaine d'application des satellites: donn6es scien-
tifiques et techniques et prablkes pos4s," Paris, 1972, p 16.
3. C. S. Robinson, "For a Worldwide Utilizatinn and Dissemination of Data _
Acquired Through Remote Sens3ng," "Legal Implica+,ions of Remote Sensing
from Outer Space," Si,jthoff--Leyden, 1976, pp 114, 117.
4. S. M. Beresford, "The Future of National Sovereignty," "Second Colloq.
Law Outer Space, London, 1959," Vienna, 1960, p 8. '
5. H. Binet, "Toward Solving the Space Sovereignty Problem," "Second Colloq.
Law Outer Space, London, 1959," p 15.
6. For the theory of structural functionalism, see: G. I. Moroaov,
"Mezhdunarodnyye Organizatsii" [International Organizations], Moscow, -
Mys1', 1974, pp 71-811.
7. S. Gorove, "Developments in Space Law: An Impressive Record Por the Hall
of Fane," Almagordo, 1976, p 8.
8. LE DROIT DE L'ESPACE. BULLETIN D'ANALYSES ET D'INFORMATIONS, Paris,
1.967-1g74.
9. C. A. Colliard, "Le droit de 1'Espace et les satellites d'applications,"
LA RECHERCHE SPATIALE, Vol XII, No 2, 1973, pp 1-5.
10. Ibid., pp 1-5� -
11. Ibid.
12. G. I. Tunkin, "Teoriya Mezhdunarodnogo Prava," Moscow, Mezhdunarodr~yye
Otnosheniye, 1970, p 252.
= 13. Such claims were advanced in 1976 by agroup of equatoriel nations -
over the sectors of a geostationary orbit. -
115
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL 'JSE ONLY
14. F'or the first time in Soviet 13.terature +.his v3ewpoint was stated by
the founder of the Soviet ecience of space law, Ye. 0. Korovin (Ye. 0.
Korovin, "On the International Conditions of Space," MEZHI7UNARODNAXA . �
ZHIZN', No 1, 1959, p 74).
15. A. P. Movchan, "Problemy Kodifikatsii i Progressivnogo Razvitiya
- Mezhdunarodnogo Prava," Doctoral Diasertation Resume, Moacow, 1974, p 24.
16. "Documents d16tudes. Droit international public. La documentation
frangaise," Paris, 1973, No 3.04, p 7� _
17. J. Busak, "Some Reflections on Applications Satellites," TELECOMMi1N. J.,
- vol 43, 1976, p 356.
18. Ibid. `
116
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047102/08: CIA-RDP82-00850R000100030007-0
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 2: INTERNATIONAL SPACE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS: LEGAL PRINCIPLES
OF THEIR CREATION AND OPERATION
A number of factors explains the particular interest in the political and
legal principles for setting up the international space communications
systems. Communications via earth,satellites is one of the earliest and
most developed areas of the practical application of space technoloRy.
Certain other practical areas (navigation, direct television broadcasting)
- from the viewpoint of the equipment can be viewed as varieties of space
communications. In the Western doctrine of international apace law and in
the pi�actical activities of certain capitalist states, these circumstances
- gave rise to a tendency to use international legal principles and methods
of work in one of the existing space communications organizations, Intelsat,
as the precedent for future legal regulation in other applied areas of
space activities.l
- At the same time precisely differences over the political and legal prin-
ciples have led to the creation of two para11e1 international space com-
muni;:ations organizations and systems (Intersputnik and Intelsat), although
the advantages of one worldwide coaanunications system are obvious from the
- technical and economic standpoint. Sharp differences over political, eco-
nomic and legal questions related to the coaun