On a purely personal note, this is a particularly awful proposal. The below is a series of excerpts and reasons the approach is entirely misguided:
i. preform cosmos research and development.
Such research, while beneficial, has no means of dissemination or even ownership. As such, nations can miss out on serious benefits through discriminatory sharing or even instances where ownership of data is claimed by third parties, as the WA fails entirely to determine the ownership domain of that data.
ii. build cosmic spacecraft(s).
The World Assembly building spacecraft out of WA funds, which are collected through payments to the WA General Fund, would mean that your nation, which funds all the WA projects, would have to fund the construction of spacecraft your nation will never own or benefit from! This significant moneypit would bankrupt all but the strongest economies.
iii. Train cosmonauts to explore and promote WA ideals through the cosmos.
WA ideals simply don’t exist. There are no certified ideals that the WA endorses, simply a measure of legal principles. This is meaningless fluff at best, and at worst requires you fund training of astronauts that might someday be employed to work against the interests of your nation!
iv. Preform missions of exploration through the cosmos.
To the benefit of whom, exactly? What way will those discoveries be distributed among nations? Can a nation claim ownership of an entire resource after the WA discovered it, or will all resources be split 20,000 ways so all nation get an equal pittance? The vagueness of the clause is terrifying.
v. Create cosmos travel bylaws and policies.
Again, this is entirely vague. By passing such a clause, the WA would be able to ban all interspace travel for any reason, as the actual bylaws and policies are not mentioned! If space is to be regulated for travel, a system of actual policies needs to be laid out, otherwise nations surrender their sovereignty with no actual say over what those policies will be.
vi. Regulate all WA member states cosmos travel.
This has the exact same problem as the above clause.
