Will the U.S. have control over Musk's Mars colony?

[ncb1397]

I only ask this because:

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1142890265369202688?lang=en

Looking up the definition of technocracy:

the government or control of society or industry by an elite of technical experts.

https://www.google.com/search?q=technocracy

It seems incompatible with the U.S. democratic system where the electorate chooses their leaders, and seems to be more modeled after the the chinese system, whose spread is generally considered to be a national security threat.

Musk could choose to retain U.S. jurisdiction over his spacecraft, but it seems that his intent is not to do so.

[Slothman]

Martial law. Literally. I don't doubt that any space colony will be first occupied, built and directed by military. No way will paying civilian customers like DearMoon be colonizing mars until the military has worked to establish the colony.

[PaulVla]

I'd say if it is going to be a Technocracy it'd still fall under US juristdiction; it's a US company discovering/colonizing a planet. Setting up a Technocracy might be harder to pull off than colonizing Mars itself if you'd ask me.

Imagine a cargo shipping company finding an Island out on the ocean, of those claiming ownership I'd expect to find the countries nearby and the country from where the company that owns the ship is from. That combined with the credits of landing people on Mars which will probably be claimed as a pure US accomplishment.

Then again, you could just hop over and declare it a country on its own. It's not like the military will be able to chase you out anytime soon or have to worry about people sneaking in

EDIT: upon googling I found This reddit post with a discussion about finding a hypothetical island out on sea.

[john smith 19]

I only ask this because:

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1142890265369202688?lang=en

Looking up the definition of technocracy:

the government or control of society or industry by an elite of technical experts.

https://www.google.com/search?q=technocracy

It seems incompatible with the U.S. democratic system where the electorate chooses their leaders, and seems to be more modeled after the the chinese system, whose spread is generally considered to be a national security threat.

Musk could choose to retain U.S. jurisdiction over his spacecraft, but it seems that his intent is not to do so.

This has been discussed before.

Several times.

It's a base supplied from the US by a US company.  It'll be subject to US law, just like a diamond mine inside the arctic circle.

Failure to obey US law will result in supply flights to the base ending with predictable consequences.

And you might have noticed but SX and Musk use the term "settlement" not colony.

The word "colony" has very negative connotations for a large part of the worlds population, not to mention making the settlers sound like bacterial infection. 

[Robotbeat]

In answer to title question: As long as it’s a “colony,” then by definition, yes. But we want it independent long-term...

And I agree “colony” is a bad word to use as the word has almost purely negative connotations to a large number of people living in certain parts of the world.

[Taxidermista]

It's a base supplied from the US by a US company.  It'll be subject to US law, just like a diamond mine inside the arctic circle.
Failure to obey US law will result in supply flights to the base ending with predictable consequences.

So what will happen the day those supply flights end and said settlement become autonomous?

[Slothman]

It's a base supplied from the US by a US company.  It'll be subject to US law, just like a diamond mine inside the arctic circle.
Failure to obey US law will result in supply flights to the base ending with predictable consequences.

So what will happen the day those supply flights end and said settlement become autonomous?

Short answer: The settlement will die.

Long answer: For a settlement to survive being cut off from the rest of the world/solar system, it needs to be widely autonomous already. Not reliant on supplies like food/water, materials or inhabitants from earth. This means it needs to be big. Very big. With hospitals, emergency services, education system, vast industry to satisfy all the needs of the large and naturally growing population.
It must also be self reliant to deal with catastrophes like sandstorms and asteroid impacts and be able to recover from those.
We're probably talking several hundreds of years until that even becomes remotely something that the mars inhabitants could consider. If indeed all needs can ever be satisfied with local ressources on mars. Not sure what minerals and other ressources can be mined or extracted from mars. I don't think I can imagine a whole electronics industry on Mars to replace solar panels, batteries and other computer technology that will inevitably break over time. It would really take an immense effort and number of workers to produce every necessary thing on mars.

[Yaotzin]

It's a base supplied from the US by a US company.  It'll be subject to US law, just like a diamond mine inside the arctic circle.

Failure to obey US law will result in supply flights to the base ending with predictable consequences.

Why would it be subject to US law? US law applies in the US, which Mars is not and cannot be unless the US withdraws from the OST (and even then no one else would recognize the claim). Mars would be like Antarctica, a legal blank slate that requires treaties to have any law apply.

Realistically it would probably play out like Antarctica: an international research station prompting a set of treaties laying out the law. If that grows into a settlement they'll build on that.

US (or any other probably) law wouldn't be fit for purpose for a Mars settlement anyway. The kind of freedoms and civil protections the law provides wouldn't be tenable in such an environment.

[Spaniard]

So what will happen the day those supply flights end and said settlement become autonomous?

Not expected soon, but technically, a totally selfsufficient colony could declare independent and you cannot stop it (at least not peacefully).

As Musk said, think in a million habitants colony to be totally selfsufficient.
Not in this century.

The most aggresive movement could be to transfer the control to another country. If SpaceX grows and have multiple centers worldwide with enough capacity, they could close the US center and control its base from another country more receptive to theirs demands.

Not so far in time like the first option, but not soon too.
SpaceX hasn't the power, the will and the resources to do this... at least for now.

[su27k]

Betteridge's law...

Pretty sure the Outer Space Treaty requires US has control of the colony.

BTW, there're US Marshals stationed in Antarctica: https://www.usmarshals.gov/history/antarctica/, they provide law enforcement because The Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 (enacted October 12, 1984) covers crimes committed by Americans or crimes committed against Americans. Any American who is outside of the United States, but not in another country, is still subject to certain U.S. laws. All Americans committing a crime, and any foreigner committing a crime against an American outside of a sovereign state, are subject to prosecution in a U.S. federal court., I think this would apply to Mars too.

[Zed_Noir]

So what will happen the day those supply flights end and said settlement become autonomous?

Not expected soon, but technically, a totally selfsufficient colony could declare independent and you cannot stop it (at least not peacefully).

As Musk said, think in a million habitants colony to be totally selfsufficient.
Not in this century.

The most aggresive movement could be to transfer the control to another country. If SpaceX grows and have multiple centers worldwide with enough capacity, they could close the US center and control its base from another country more receptive to theirs demands.

Not so far in time like the first option, but not soon too.
SpaceX hasn't the power, the will and the resources to do this... at least for now.

In theory an Independent Barsoom (aka Mars) breaking off from Earth can claim other Celestial bodies in the Solar System since they never sign up to the Outer Space Treaty. The validity of any such claim requires the ability to control access to those bodies. If the majority of space shipping tonnage is from SpaceX than in effect SpaceX could be like a modern day East Indian company with their own military and judiciary. This scenario is possible until someone else build enough vehicles similar to future versions of the Starship to counter the numeric advantage of the Barsoomian (aka SpaceX) navy fleet. 

The Earth's Moon could also be claimed as well by the Barsoomians. 

[capoman]

The outer space treaty does not allow any country to own any planet or portion of. That being said, if the US government funds a colony, they would certainly have a say in it, but a private company creating a colony should be self determining since they are funding it. A technocracy is likely the best form of leadership initially since it will all be about survival, and all resources will need to be put towards technical survival. The people who are the experts are likely the best to direct resources and priorities.

Also, if people are permanently settling there, they would no longer be US citizens.. they are Mars citizens. The US would have no jurisdiction over them.

[zodiacchris]

Concur, a technocracy, where EXPERTS in the relevant field are making the decisions seems the only sane way to run a settlement on a planet without a breathable atmosphere and a harsh radiation environment. Would you really want Bob from the canteen to be in charge of the life support system just because he is more popular?

Democracy has a few hiccups down here at the moment, maybe logic might be a better initial approach to a Mars settlement. And China is not a technocracy, it is a degraded and mutated totalitarian pseudo-communist system. And all the more reason to move to Mars...

[ncb1397]

Concur, a technocracy, where EXPERTS in the relevant field are making the decisions seems the only sane way to run a settlement on a planet without a breathable atmosphere and a harsh radiation environment. Would you really want Bob from the canteen to be in charge of the life support system just because he is more popular?

Democracy has a few hiccups down here at the moment, maybe logic might be a better initial approach to a Mars settlement. And China is not a technocracy, it is a degraded and mutated totalitarian pseudo-communist system. And all the more reason to move to Mars...

Since the Reform and Opening initiated by Deng Xiaoping in 1978, any casual observer of China’s leaders might note how many of them were educated as engineers. Indeed, at the highest level, former presidents Jiang Zemin (1993–2003) and Hu Jintao (2003–2013) as well as Xi Jinping (2013–present) all studied engineering

https://issues.org/perspective-the-benefits-of-technocracy-in-china/

Whether or not China is a degraded and mutated totalitarian pseudo-communist state doesn't speak to whether it is a technocracy or not. A country can be both ruled by technical experts and have a myriad of policies and activities that would be consistent with your description.

Also, if people are permanently settling there, they would no longer be US citizens.. they are Mars citizens. The US would have no jurisdiction over them.

Not necessarily true. Musk, for example, is permanently settled in the United States and has U.S., Canadian and South African citizenship. Anyways, the U.S. has jurisdiction over "its own" vessels at sea whether commercial or government. A murder during Dear Moon would almost certainly be investigated by U.S. law enforcement for instance. The problem is that Musk seems to want to be governed by a political structure other than the United States.

Anyways, no state can own or have jurisdiction over mars itself. The question is who has jurisdiction in the facilities and spacecraft

[RonM]

Article VI of the OST specifically states "the activities of non-governmental entities in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, shall require authorization and continuing supervision by the appropriate State Party to the Treaty."

So, at first, any SpaceX operations on Mars will be under U.S. jurisdiction.

As the refueling depot becomes a research base and later a settlement, the question is when does it stop being a company activity and becomes a local government? Can't be run like a U.S. territory because that's not allowed under the OST. Looks like the OST will need to be amended for off world settlements.

This leads to interesting science fiction type scenarios. Will the UN allow off world governments? Will US Marshals be stationed on Mars? Will the US Space Force have to send in troops if the settlement rebels? Why can't we all just get along?

[Yggdrasill]

Also, if people are permanently settling there, they would no longer be US citizens.. they are Mars citizens. The US would have no jurisdiction over them.

They would retain their US citizenships from Earth. And if there are children, they would likely become US citizens as their parents are US citizens.

But at some point in the future, when multiple nations are able to launch huge rockets with hundreds of tons of supplies, and the settlement has gotten to a point of some degree of self-reliance, you could envision a Martian rebellion. They could say no to US involvement, and instead opt to get their supplies from China, Russia, the EU or someone else. Whether they would accept becoming part of another nation, or whether they would claim independence, and trade things like access to the martian settlement for supplies remains to be seen.

The US achieved independence as a result of rebellion, and that's always an option for colonies where the colonizing nation is incapable of projecting sufficient force. If there were a martian rebellion, the question is if the US would accept that, or whether they would send troops.

[capoman]

Article VI of the OST specifically states "the activities of non-governmental entities in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, shall require authorization and continuing supervision by the appropriate State Party to the Treaty."

So, at first, any SpaceX operations on Mars will be under U.S. jurisdiction.

As the refueling depot becomes a research base and later a settlement, the question is when does it stop being a company activity and becomes a local government? Can't be run like a U.S. territory because that's not allowed under the OST. Looks like the OST will need to be amended for off world settlements.

This leads to interesting science fiction type scenarios. Will the UN allow off world governments? Will US Marshals be stationed on Mars? Will the US Space Force have to send in troops if the settlement rebels? Why can't we all just get along?

I suggest that any permanent residents are independent of any Earth government if they so choose. Remember that governments are only governments when the people accept them as government. If permanent residents of Mars determine to be self-governing, they will be free. I can't see the US creating a war with a Mars colony to control it. I only see them accepting US government control, if they still require resources from the US. I don't see the UN as having any jurisdiction on Mars past the initial exploration. Mars is it's own planet.

[capoman]

One thing about a technocracy. Decisions will be made on hard data, which is something politicians are averse to do. It is not based on ideology, pork or vote getting. That's not a bad thing.

[Wudizzle]

#4thWorldProblems

[RonM]

Article VI of the OST specifically states "the activities of non-governmental entities in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, shall require authorization and continuing supervision by the appropriate State Party to the Treaty."

So, at first, any SpaceX operations on Mars will be under U.S. jurisdiction.

As the refueling depot becomes a research base and later a settlement, the question is when does it stop being a company activity and becomes a local government? Can't be run like a U.S. territory because that's not allowed under the OST. Looks like the OST will need to be amended for off world settlements.

This leads to interesting science fiction type scenarios. Will the UN allow off world governments? Will US Marshals be stationed on Mars? Will the US Space Force have to send in troops if the settlement rebels? Why can't we all just get along?

I suggest that any permanent residents are independent of any Earth government if they so choose. Remember that governments are only governments when the people accept them as government. If permanent residents of Mars determine to be self-governing, they will be free. I can't see the US creating a war with a Mars colony to control it. I only see them accepting US government control, if they still require resources from the US. I don't see the UN as having any jurisdiction on Mars past the initial exploration. Mars is it's own planet.

That's wishful thinking. There's a small movement in the US that believes US law doesn't apply to them because they don't approve of it. If they break a law they get arrested just like everyone else.

Even if the US government doesn't care what happens at a Mars settlement, the US signed the OST and is responsible under international law. Best move would be to amend the OST to allow for autonomy, at least at some level.