Who Owns the Moon? The New Space Race Heats Up
This week, striking images of China’s flag proudly unfurled on the Moon were transmitted back to Earth. This marks China’s fourth lunar landing and the first mission to return samples from the Moon’s far side. In the past year, India and Japan have also successfully landed spacecraft on the lunar surface. Meanwhile, in February, the US company Intuitive Machines became the first private firm to land on the Moon, with many more private missions in the pipeline.
NASA is also gearing up to send humans back to the Moon, with the Artemis astronauts targeting a 2026 landing. China aims to land humans on the Moon by 2030. Unlike past missions, these new endeavors aim to establish permanent bases on the lunar surface.
Justin Holcomb, a geologist from the University of Kansas, warns that our relationship with the Moon is about to undergo a fundamental change. He notes that the pace of space exploration is now surpassing our legal frameworks.
The 1967 United Nations Outer Space Treaty stipulates that no nation can claim ownership of the Moon. Instead, it belongs to all of humanity, and any exploration must benefit all nations. While this treaty sounds cooperative, its origins lie in the Cold War, when the US and Soviet Union sought to prevent space from becoming a military battleground. Over 100 nations signed the treaty, which prohibits the deployment of nuclear weapons in space.
However, the new era of space exploration differs significantly from the past. Modern Moon missions are not only national projects but also involve commercial entities. For instance, in January, a US commercial mission named Peregrine announced it would carry human ashes, DNA samples, and a branded sports drink to the Moon. Although a fuel leak prevented the mission’s success, it sparked debate about whether such endeavors align with the treaty’s principle that exploration should benefit all humanity.
“We’re starting to send stuff up there just because we can,” says Michelle Hanlon, a space lawyer and founder of For All Moonkind, an organization dedicated to protecting the Apollo landing sites. “Our Moon is within reach, and now we’re starting to abuse it.”
Despite the increase in private lunar enterprises, nation-states remain the primary players. Sa’id Mostehsar, director of the London Institute of Space Policy and Law, points out that any company must be authorized by a state to go into space, and states are bound by international treaties.
Joining the elite club of Moon landers brings significant prestige. Successful missions by India and Japan have positioned them as global space players. A thriving space industry can boost a nation’s economy through job creation and innovation.
The ultimate prize in the Moon race, however, lies in its resources. The lunar surface contains minerals, including rare earth elements, metals like iron and titanium, and helium, which is used in superconductors and medical equipment. Estimates of the Moon’s resource value range from billions to quadrillions of dollars. Although exploiting these resources is a long-term investment requiring advanced technology, the potential for profit is significant.
A 1979 international treaty declared that no state or organization could claim lunar resources, but it was unpopular and only signed by 17 countries, none of which have been to the Moon. In contrast, the US passed a law in 2015 allowing its citizens and industries to extract, use, and sell space materials. This move caused consternation in the international community, but other countries, including Luxembourg, the UAE, Japan, and India, have since enacted similar laws.
One of the most sought-after resources on the Moon is water. Initially, Apollo mission samples were thought to be dry, but a revolution in analysis techniques about a decade ago revealed traces of water in phosphate crystals. Significant reserves of water ice are also believed to exist in permanently shadowed craters at the Moon’s poles. This water could be used for drinking, oxygen generation, and even rocket fuel production, enabling further space exploration to Mars and beyond.
The US is now advocating for new guiding principles for lunar exploration and resource use, known as the Artemis Accords. These principles aim to ensure compliance with the Outer Space Treaty, though they acknowledge the need for new rules. Over 40 countries have signed these non-binding agreements, but China is notably absent. Some argue that new lunar exploration rules should be developed through the United Nations, as they affect all countries.
Competition for lunar resources could lead to conflicts. While the Moon has ample space, areas near ice-filled craters are prime real estate. What happens if multiple entities target the same location for their bases? Jill Stuart, a space policy and law researcher at the London School of Economics, draws an analogy to Antarctica, suggesting we might see research bases on the Moon similar to those on the southern continent.
Decisions about the size and location of lunar bases may ultimately depend on who gets there first. “There will definitely be a first-mover advantage,” says Stuart. Early settlers could establish zones of exclusion, setting de facto standards for future missions.
As the new space race accelerates, it’s crucial to consider what kind of place we want the Moon to be. Will it become a new arena for earthly rivalries, or a site for international cooperation and scientific advancement? The future of our celestial neighbor hangs in the balance.
