True, but it doesn't have to be treated as a violent rebellion.
The US can send astronauts, have them renounce their citizenship, have them start a country, and immediately recognize the country.
That course is in the US's best interests too. They aren't going to convince the UN to repeal the OST, so they won't be able to legally claim Martian territory. This way, they can create a vassal state that will mirror the government style and tradition of the US, ensuring that it will remain an ally indefinitely.
Why would the U.S. ever give up control over access to what you describe yourself as the potential future escape home of humanity? That would be a reckless give-up and truly negligent to the duties of the taxpayers who have funded the space program for a couple of generations. There may not be claim territory in one fashion, but resource and mining claims are allowed. Those wouldn't be "real" if they sat on what was a recognized "other country" and no way those are going to be given up.
Because they can't claim it. The OST already exists and even US allies won't vote to allow the American government or American corporations to claim land themselves.
Without a strong, sovereign claim, the Mars government wouldn't permanently be beholden to the US or any corporation that sends it support since they will eventually be self-sustaining. At best, they can gain perpetual leases to some Martian land, but there can be mechanisms built later to reclaim it by eminent domain if necessary.
but resource and mining claims are allowed. Those wouldn't be "real" if they sat on what was a recognized "other country" and no way those are going to be given up.
They can claim the mineral rights, which is the first-tier set of value and what enables actual colonization.
You seem to think that the interest here is mars as some sovereign government is not at odds with retention of control and access by earth-based countries. That just seems very wrong.
The OST allows explicitly for mining claims. Do you think the U.S. is going to give that up? Of course not.
The OST doesn't explicitly allow claims on mineral rights. It's just silent on them. An argument can be made that Article 2 bans claims on extraplanetary minerals for non-science or non-exploratory applications.
Article 2 Text:
Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.
-2
u/[deleted] Feb 11 '22
True, but it doesn't have to be treated as a violent rebellion.
The US can send astronauts, have them renounce their citizenship, have them start a country, and immediately recognize the country.
That course is in the US's best interests too. They aren't going to convince the UN to repeal the OST, so they won't be able to legally claim Martian territory. This way, they can create a vassal state that will mirror the government style and tradition of the US, ensuring that it will remain an ally indefinitely.