Introduction: Planetary Defense as the Unique Historical Opportunity to Shape Our Shared Destiny
This introductory chapter aims to attune the reader to the topic of planetary defense through the lens of political science. The entire volume proposes an ambitious approach, a multipurpose lunar base, but the key condition for humankind’s peaceful expansion into space is based on cosmopolitan global governance, which we argue will not emerge easily. This chapter considers several political science problems in relation to cosmopolitan thinking, from development aid criticism to perceptions of influence by individuals in global politics and the claim that the anarchy we allegedly live in is caused by states themselves. As the authors progress through discussions of political science and theoretical concepts, several questions arise as to how we can discern moral from immoral behavior in political science theory. Finally, as our requirements are constantly changing, cosmopolitan thinking shows that humanity faces three sets of problems: sharing the planet, sustaining life and developing a rulebook. This chapter lays the foundation for further theoretical argumentation throughout the whole volume, which considers these three sets of problems using a multidisciplinary lens.
KeywordsMorality Cosmopolitanism Planetary defense International relations theory Global governance
This study was supported by the grant awarded by the Technological Agency of the Czech Republic, project TL01000181: “A multidisciplinary analysis of planetary defense from asteroids as the key national policy ensuring further flourishing and prosperity of humankind both on Earth and in Space,” and co-funded by the Institute of Political Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University in Prague.
- Axelrod, R., & Keohane, R. O. (1985). Achieving cooperation under anarchy: Strategies and institutions. World Politics, 38(1), 226–254. http://journals.cambridge.org/production/action/cjoGetFulltext?fulltextid=7631716. Accessed 5 March 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Axworthy, L. (2001). Human security and global governance: Putting people first. Global Governance, 7(1), 19–23.Google Scholar
- Barber, W. F., & Bartlett, R. V. (2009). Global Democracy and Sustainable Jurisprudence: Deliberative Environmental Law. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling (Vol. 53). Cambridge, Massachusetts and London, England: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Bonnete, D. (1972). Aquinas’ proofs of God’s Existence. Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
- Burgess, M. (2000). Federalism and European Union: The Building of Europe, 1950-2000. Taylor & Francis. https://books.google.com/books?id=Ha99UY2cBtUC&pgis=1. Accessed 18 February 2016.
- Chandler, D. (2002). Rethinking human rights: critical approaches to international politics. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Coates, T. (2000). Neither cosmopolitanism nor realism: a response to Danilo Zolo. In Global Democracy, Key Debates (pp. 87–102). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Ditrych, O. (2014). Tracing the Discourses of Terrorism : Identity, Genealogy and State. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Easterly, W. (2006). The white man’s burden: why the West’s efforts to aid the rest have done so much ill and so little good. Penguin Press. http://books.google.cz/books?id=5Iw5IZCTh-kC.
- Evans, G., & Sahnoun, M. (2001). The Responsibility to Protect. Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. Ottawa, Kanada: International Development Research Centre.Google Scholar
- Fearon, J. (1998). Domestic politics, foreign policy, and theories of international relations. Annual Review of Political Science, 289–313. http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.polisci.1.1.289. Accessed 5 March 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Friedman, T. L. (2007). The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century. Picador.Google Scholar
- Garan, A. R., & Yunus, M. (2015). The Orbital Perspective: Lessons in Seeing the Big Picture from a Journey of 71 Million Miles. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.Google Scholar
- Ghemawat, P. (2009). Why the World Isn’t Flat. Foreign Policy. http://foreignpolicy.com/2009/10/14/why-the-world-isnt-flat/.
- Gourevitch, P. (1978). The second image reversed: the international sources of domestic politics. International Organization, 32(4), 881–912. http://journals.cambridge.org/production/action/cjoGetFulltext?fulltextid=4305592. Accessed 5 March 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Granoff, J. (2000). Nuclear Weapons, Ethics, Morals, and Law. BYU Law Review, 2000(4), 1413–1442.Google Scholar
- Habermas, J. (2006). The Divided West (Vol. 1). Polity Press.Google Scholar
- Hale, T., Held, D., & Young, K. (2013). GRIDLOCK: Why Global Cooperation is Failing when we Need it Most. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
- Held, D. (2006). Models of Democracy. Polity.Google Scholar
- Held, D. (2010). Cosmopolitanism: Ideals and Realities. Polity.Google Scholar
- Held, D., & McGrew, A. (Eds.). (2003). The Global Transformations Reader: An Introduction to the Globalization Debate. Polity.Google Scholar
- Jackson, R. (2006). Genealogy, Ideology, and Counter-Terrorism : Writing wars on terrorism from Ronald Reagan to George W. Bush Jr 1. Studies in Language and Capitalism, 1(1), 163–193. doi:ideologie; terrorismus; reagan; bush; krieg.Google Scholar
- Johnson-Freese, J. (2013). Space as a Strategic Asset. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
- Lea, H. C. (2015). A History of the Inquisition of Spain, Volume 1. BiblioLife.Google Scholar
- Listner, M. (2015). The International Code of Conduct: Comments on changes in the latest draft and post-mortem thoughts. The Space Review. http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2851/1. Accessed 10 January 2016.
- Manzione, L. L. (2002). Multinational Investment in the Space Station : An Outer Space Model for International Cooperation ? American University International Law Review, 18(2), 507–535.Google Scholar
- Merton, R. K. (1968). Social Theory and Social Structure. Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
- Paris, R. (2004). At war’s end: building peace after civil conflict. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Pollack, M. A. (2008). The New Institutionalism and European Integration. Webpapers on Constitutionalism and Governance beyond the State, 1.Google Scholar
- Rischard, J. F. (2002). High Noon. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- Thangavelu, M., Wilson, T., Hussein, A., Aliaj, B., Entrena, C., Lee, C., et al. (2015). READI - Roadmap of Earth Defense Initiatives. Athens (OH). https://isulibrary.isunet.edu/opac/doc_num.php?explnum_id=722.
- UN. (1945). Charter of the United Nations. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=21212379&lang=cs&site=ehost-live.
- UN. (2015). Adoption of the Paris agreement (Vol. FCCC/CP/20). Paris. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09.pdf.
- Wendt, A. (1987). The agent-structure problem in international relations theory. International organization, 41(3), 335–370. http://journals.cambridge.org/production/action/cjoGetFulltext?fulltextid=4309572. Accessed 5 March 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Zolo, D. (2000). The lords of peace: from the Holy Alliance to the new international criminal tribunals. In B. Holden (Ed.), Global Democracy, Key Debate (pp. 73–86). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar