You are the VP/Operations of a company that manufactures and supplies space probes and satellite equipment to Government space agencies. The company has been in the business for over four decades and has built considerable expertise in producing and delivering high-quality products. The business was good. As VP of Operations, it was your responsibility to ensure the completion of projects and deliverables on time. A critical deliverable was running behind schedule due to the non-availability of a specific raw material. The material in question was an environmentally hazardous chemical that the Environmental Ministry was planning to allow controlled use in about three weeks. You and the company management had three weeks to address the issue. Further, there was severe pressure from the Department of Space to complete the deliverable on time as a lot was riding politically on the project. After internal discussions, you met with Space Department officials to expedite the material's predicament and request a deadline extension. When the meeting happened, you were shocked by the attitude of the Department officials. They refused to accept any delay and suggested circumventing the environmental ministry's prohibition and procuring and using the chemical. They justified it by saying the ministry would allow controlled use in a few weeks. So, why can't? Besides, they pointed out that every country ignores space priorities and their intricacies. They pointed out that everything is justified in the name of national interest. 1. What are the key issues involved in the above case? 2. What are the options available to you? 3. Discuss the merits and demerits of each option and select your chosen course of action. 4. Do you think it is ethically justified for a nation to prioritise security and economics over above special justice and social development priorities?