Comments on: Limited hope for ITAR reform? http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/12/02/limited-hope-for-itar-reform/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=limited-hope-for-itar-reform Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway... Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38 By: Jim Muncy http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/12/02/limited-hope-for-itar-reform/#comment-150068 Wed, 03 Dec 2008 23:01:13 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=1824#comment-150068 Jeff, et al.

While I agree that it’s harder than some might think, I don’t believe that’s a reason to not use this shift in Administration — and today’s economic duress — as a justification for a complete rethinking of how we achieve the goal of national security through export restrictions.

Too often I have seen people protecting the status quo for a completely unstated — and not publicly approved/supported — reason, which I call “turning u.s. exporters into foreign policy tools”.

I don’t think there’s any reason to expect or “believe” in a reform breakthrough, there are good arguments for pursuing it, and we in the NewSpace community especially need to coalesce around those arguments.

]]> By: Kevin Parkin http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/12/02/limited-hope-for-itar-reform/#comment-149981 Wed, 03 Dec 2008 19:46:23 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=1824#comment-149981 Given the olympics are over with and there’s an economic downturn that threatens China’s internal stability, it’s much more likely to pull the lever on the Taiwan scenario in the next 4 years that it was even at the time of the ASAT test.

And if the US space response is sloppy, and half its tenuous incoming stream of aerospace engineers is foreign, in the process of applying for H1B visas and unable to work with ITAR related technologies as currently defined, will the public understand?

]]>