Clough Marinaro, IsabellaRensmann, LarsAdams, Kelson Gregory2024-11-122024-11-122015Adams, Kelson Gregory. "The Legal Framework Limiting the Weaponization of Outer Space ". BA Thesis, John Cabot University, Rome, Italy. 2015.https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14490/694Thesis (B.A. in International Affairs, )--John Cabot University, Spring 2015.Space weaponization could indirectly lead to the inability for countries to access and use outer space in the future, involves all nations as they are directly or indirectly affected by the utility of space, and merits more attention than has been given to it in I-' recent past. The international community is becoming increasingly reliant on space assets. The potential for space weaponization to increase orbital debris (as seen with China’s 2007 ASAT test) seriously threatens all nations’ future access to space. Since the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 to the passing of the PPWT in December, 2014, attempts have been made to limit the placement of specific types of weapons into outer space. Therefore, this paper seeks to describe the current international and domestic legislation limiting space weaponization, to analyze the pitfalls of such legal framework, and to provide insights on the motives of different nations that support or oppose space weaponization. Due to the limited scope of this thesis, not all space-faring countries’ national space policies and behavior can be discussed. This study conducts four case studies on the main space-faring parties of 2015: the United States, Japan, the European Union, and China. Although it can be argued that other notable space-faring nations should be examined in-depth, their policies and behavior towards space weaponization are similar (though not the same) to these four chosen countries. This thesis finds that the international legislation limiting space weaponization is out-of-date, for the most part non-binding, and lacking means for States to dispute resolutions effectively. Acknowledging the weakness of international legislation on the topic, the paper turns its focus to national space policies and behavior on the issue. Individual national stances can be explained in four points: the arms race theory, the collective security theory, the politico-economic rationale principle, and the space utility principle. Space-faring nations that have close diplomatic relations with the United States, typically involving a military alliance, rely on this relationship for national defense. By conceding this authority to the United States, nations are subject to its will and, therefore, its own national interests. Evidently, the United States’ space policy revolves around protecting its own national interests, its space superiority, and its economy (primarily its Aerospace and Defense sector). Due to the United States finding it more beneficial to not limit space weaponization and States relying on the US for military support, such States abstain or oppose attempts to create binding international legislation preventing weapons in outer space (as exemplified by the actions of the EU and Japan). On the contrary, other countries that do not rely on a military alliance or do not have strong diplomatic relations with the United States seek to limit space weaponization through binding international legislation (as exemplified by the actions of China), as it would increase both their hard and soft power.viii, 63 pagesenAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Space weaponsSpace warfareArms controlArms raceThesis