Efforts to extend via interpretation the coverage of the "exclusively for peaceful purposes" concept contained in Article 4 to outer space per se, thereby imposing duties beyond the terms of the Article, which limits the peaceful purposes requirement to the Moon and other celestial bodies, have urged the relevance of Articles 9 and 11. It has also been argued that Article 4, paragraph 2, should be read in conjunction with the provisions of Article 1, paragraph 1, which requires that the exploration and use of the totality of the space environment "shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries." While it is possible to be sympathetic to the efforts to extend the spatial coverage of the exclusively peaceful purposes concept to an area more extensive than the Moon and other celestial bodies, the words of the agreement and the negotiations of the agreement seem to preclude such a conclusion. Since by any valid characterization the gathering of solar energy at geostationary orbital level is a peaceful use of outer space, the limited applicability of the peaceful purposes provisions in Article 4, paragraph 2, of the Principles Treaty imposes no constraints on the capture or use of the solar energy resource. The general meaning assigned to "peaceful purposes" both in the Treaty and by the practice of States For example, M. Markoff, "Disarmament and 'Peaceful Purposes' Provisions in the 1967 Outer Space Treaty," 4 Journal of Space Law 3 (1976). Ambassador Goldberg told the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations that the coverage of Article 4, paragraph 2, "relates only to the moon and other celestial bodies. . . ." Op. cit., p. 22. C. Q. Christol, "Article Four of the 1967 Principles Treaty: Its Meaning and Prospects for its Clarification," Proceedings of the 21st Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space of the International Astronautical Federation (1978).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==