In this chapter Germany’s position on Antarctica, the law of the sea, as well as air and space law will be examined. Concerning the law of the sea, Germany’s critical position on China’s maritime claims in the South China Sea, expressed on many different occasions, will be addressed. Besides that, it will be addressed that Turkey accused Germany of illegally boarding its merchant vessel on the high seas in the Mediterranean. Yet, it will be concluded the boarding and search of the vessel even against the expressed will of Turkey was not illegal under international law. Regarding Turkey’s conduct of seismic surveys in the eastern Mediterranean, Germany’s calls on Turkey to respect international law will be criticised as lacking a legal basis. That Germany joined the UK-led Global Ocean Alliance, will be evaluated as a way for Germany to lobby for greater parts of the ocean being assigned Marine Protected Area status. In the last part, Germany opposing Russian initiatives on the prevention of the placement of weapons in outer space will be assessed a sign of its increasing frustration with the double standards displayed by Russia and the other major space powers.

In this chapter Germany’s positions on Antarctica, the law of the sea and on air and space law are examined. Concerning the law of the sea, Germany’s response to the Turkey-Libya memorandum of understanding is criticised as one-sided. Further, Germany’s position on migrant rescue operations in the Mediterranean are addressed and criticised as often vague or inexistent. Regarding the South China Sea dispute, it is asserted that Germany takes a more outspoken and active position while avoiding an open and direct confrontation with China. In light of the increasing importance of the Arctic region, Germany developed new policy guidelines in which more restrictive regulation is advocated. In the last part, air and space law, Germany’s activities in preventing an arms race in outer space are addressed, paying particular attention to United Nations negotiations. Moreover, Germany’s criticism of India over an anti-satellite missile test is evaluated as a call for a legally binding instrument prohibiting the destruction of space objects.

This chapter examines the evolution of the legal regime governing outer space and how resurgent national interests are challenging the peaceful use of the final frontier, including the expanding capacity to launch cyber attacks on satellite infrastructure and the potential environmental and security effects of such attacks. Using the same approach as Chapters 3 and 4, this chapter begins by briefly investigating the impact of advancing technology (that in some cases has been accelerated by cyberspace), multipolar politics, and resource scarcity on space governance. It then discusses the evolution of space law from the Outer Space Treaty to the present, and analyzes the extent to which the governance structure of space is changing due to increasing national regulation and private activity, as well as to the expansion of Internet access and its associated demands. Next, this chapter investigates whether the emerging space regime complex is mitigating the collective action problems of space weaponization and junk proliferation, and how the international community may perform better by using regime effectiveness findings from the literature on institutional analysis. Finally, governance best practices, such as those stemming from the International Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities, are applied to cybersecurity and Internet governance.