To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no
This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.
Article said:
Although open skies was never directly implemented, the designation of space as international territory from which reconnaissance was permitted, allowed for the survelliance and confidence building which are originally envisoned by the open skies treaty.
AFAIK, the designation of space as "international territory from which reconnaissance was permitted" predates the Open Skies Treaty by a fair bit, and dates back to the 1960s. It really had nothing to do with OST AFAIK. -- SJK
Yes, and as the article says, Open Skies was first proposed in 1955. It wasn't implemented then, and as spysats became more common, it became unnecessary. By the bye, I copied this article verbatim from a (public domain) USAF site. The opinions expressed are those of the Junior Birdmen themselves -- I am not making this stuff up. I've put the line back in.
Fine, but where you had that sentence located, you gave the impression you were talking about the actual Treaty itself, instead of the proposal for it. The Treaty may have been a proposal since the 1950s, but the Treaty itself was not signed until 1992. And anyway, the treaty (legally at least, if not in practice) has been implemented now, long after the origination of spysats... -- SJK
Is the entire territory really accessible?
The treaty specifies that the entire territory of a State Party is open to observation.
Does this mean that the Russians are able to conduct surveillance of Area 51? And we can do the same with other top-secret installations in their territory? Or does this treaty use "kid gloves" on strategic assets? And does it allow aircraft to operate independently of air traffic control or just use ATC flight following? More clarification is needed. -Rolypolyman (talk) 16:58, 21 July 2008 (UTC)