impact on the positions and strategies of the space-resource States. An assessment of the support likely to be gathered for such claims from other States, and the political costs to the space-resource States in responding to such claims will have to be investigated. In this connection, the lack of present success on Moon treaty negotiations and law of the sea negotiations hinges in a very substantial degree on varying viewpoints relating to the use of natural resources. A careful study ought to be undertaken in which common perspectives and policies are identified. A good bit of attention has been given to the respective positions of States participating in the law of the sea negotiations, and there is an abundance of literature. The same amount of attention has not been given to the COPUOS-based discussions on Moon resources. It would be a worthwhile undertaking to determine if consistent positions have been taken in both forums. In weighing the capacity of COPUOS to deal with the problem of the spectrum/orbit it must be recalled that COPUOS is currently engaged in long-continuing discussions on sensing, direct broadcast satellites, the Moon treaty, and the issue of the definition or delimitation of the space environment. The last two mentioned issues would certainly be a major factor in the success of the projected Conference on Space Law or Applications. It would seem to be prudent to examine the bearing of these issues on the proposed conference in order to forecast possible positions of States and the likelihood of success in such a conference. As previously noted, some of the UN-sponsored conferences have become heavily enmeshed in political discussions having no relationship to the purpose of the conference. The possibility that this might have an impact on the proposed conferences should cause some
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==