Greetings and welcome to this special broadcast. Tonight we will discuss the recent treaty between the Federation and her allies, and with us in the studio is none other than our Federal President, Umeki Sae. President, thank you so much for joining us.
Thank you, Mr Hanada, it is a pleasure to be here.
The news of the joint ownership of Mars has given us much cause for celebration, but aside from all the positive reactions, we have also heard some reports of discontent abroad. If I may ask, how do you view the legitimacy of our claim?
My fellow ministers and I have never made a secret of the fact that we believe very strongly in the human right of private ownership. People should enjoy the fruits of their own labour, not have them all taken away and given to others. This fundamental principle is just as valid in space as it is on Earth, and it is also completely in agreement with the official stance of the United Nations, which, as we recall, recently dismissed the notions of socialist-styled global colonisation and universal ownership of TN-elements.
In regards to Mars, the European Union was first to land on the planet and our own Federation was first to colonise it. With extensive help from the Russian Federation and the European Union, we have expanded our operations rapidly. The three of us are the only global powers to maintain bases, mines, factories and garrisons on the planet. Mars, as such, is entirely East Asian, European and Russian.
It is also worth mentioning that all of our efforts so far have been funded solely by the tax-paying citizens and corporations of our respective blocs. Naturally, we owe it to our people to protect their sound investments. I hope that this answers your question.
Thank you, President, it most certainly does. To continue, there has been some speculation that the Zürich Treaty could be perceived in a negative light by some of the other powers on Earth, for example the United States of America, the South-East Asian Alliance and the Commonwealth. What is your view on the matter?
I would be very surprised if they would react negatively to us protecting that which is rightfully ours. Our treaty partners would never allow foreign powers to settle within their boundaries, nor would they stand idly by if said powers sought to occupy their lands with troops, or otherwise attempt to violate their sovereignty. The same naturally applies to our colonies on Mars.
That certainly makes sense. However, is it really warranted to prevent the other powers from simply visiting the planet, even for tourism or purely scientific missions?
It might seem excessive, but we must remember that we, as defenders of freedom, are constantly under attack from its enemies. As the Lima atrocity so clearly demonstrated, the threat of terrorism is ever so present. While we seriously doubt that most of the major powers would ever consider engaging in such criminal activities, they could still be infiltrated by those who would, and if so, we would be unable to properly ensure the safety of our people.
Thank you for the clarification. On a related note, are the terms of the treaty permanent or subject to change? In particular, could the planet eventually be opened for colonisation by other friendly powers?
While I cannot speak for the Russian Federation or the European Union, the ministers and I, as well as our Imperial Majesty, are definitely open to the possibility. However, the development and exploration of Mars is currently at a very critical stage, both for reasons already mentioned and also due to matters of national security which I cannot presently discuss in greater depth. As such, any potential relaxation of the terms would not be possible in the immediate future.
Still, we are not opposed to the concept of eventually allowing more powers to settle the planet, far from it.
Some have asked whether or not the treaty also applies to the satellites of the planet, that is, Phobos and Deimos.
Not currently, no. Our geological survey teams report that both moons are rather insignificant in terms of TN-elements, and we have therefore opted not to develop them at this stage. Of course, we might eventually establish bases there, but it would most likely be for purely defensive purposes.
In regards to the practice of claiming celestial bodies, do you think that our Federation will expand its position in the solar system further?
We do not currently plan to claim any other planets, but we have discovered certain asteroids and a couple of moons which we consider to be prime candidates for further expansion. In general, we do not believe it sound to claim bodies we do not currently control or maintain a sizable presence on. Doing so would be unwarranted and frankly, quite greedy.
Are there any celestial bodies you believe should be exempt from inclusion in national spheres of interest?
The gas giants, first and foremost. Both Jupiter and Saturn can be harnessed for sorium-fuel, the lifeline of our operations in space. Denying other powers access to such important planets would only be detrimental to the well-being of the world community. The only valid reason to do so would be if said power engaged in hostilities against our people.
Furthermore, Mercury is of strategic interest to all powers as it contains vital resources for industrial expansion, and Luna ought to be developed jointly, due to its close proximity to Earth.
Now that we have set a precedence for expansion in space, how would you react to news of other powers claiming celestial bodies of their own?
A very good question. Naturally, it would depend upon whether or not we would have any special interests in said acquisitions, and how well-established their rights to the objects in question would be. If the claims would hold up to scrutiny, we would certainly support said powers as they stake their claims in the solar system.
That concludes our interview. Again, thank you very much for answering our questions.