image source, Getty Images
We are in the middle of the month rush. A growing number of countries and companies have their sights set on the lunar surface in the race for resources and space dominance. So are we ready for this new era of lunar exploration?
Images of the Chinese flag unfurled on the moon were beamed back to Earth this week. It’s Earth’s fourth landing — and the first ever mission to return samples from the far side of the moon. In the past 12 months, India and Japan have also landed spacecraft on the lunar surface. In February, US firm Intuitive Machines became the first private company to place a lander on the moon, with many more to follow.
Meanwhile, NASA wants to send people back to the moon, with its Artemis astronauts aiming to land in 2026. China says it will send people to the moon by 2030. And instead of fly-by visits, the plan is to build permanent bases.
But in an age of renewed great power politics, this new space race could lead to the export of tensions on Earth to the lunar surface.
“Our relationship with the Moon will change very soon,” warns Justin Holcomb, a geologist at the University of Kansas. The speed of space exploration is now “exceeding our laws,” he says.
A 1967 UN agreement says no country can own the moon. Instead, the fantastically named space treaty says that it belongs to everyone and that any exploration must be done for the benefit of all humanity and the interests of all nations.
While this sounds very peaceful and collaborative – and it is – the driving force behind the Outer Space Treaty was not cooperation, but Cold War politics.
As tensions rose between the US and the Soviet Union after World War II, there was concern that space could become a military battlefield, so a key part of the treaty was that no nuclear weapons could be sent into space. More than 100 nations have signed up.
But this new space age looks different from the one back then.
image source, Getty Images
One of the main changes is that modern missions to the moon are not just projects of nations – they are competitions and companies.
In January, a US commercial mission called Peregrine announced it would take human ashes, DNA samples and a sports drink, complete with branding, to the moon. A fuel leak meant it never got there, but it sparked debate about how the delivery of this eclectic inventory fit into the treaty’s principle that exploration should benefit all of humanity.
“We’re starting to send stuff there just because we can.” There’s no rhyme or reason anymore,” says Michelle Hanlon, a space lawyer and founder of For All Moonkind, an organization that seeks to protect the Apollo landing sites. “Our Moon is within reach and now we are starting to exploit it,” he says.
But even as lunar private enterprise is on the rise, nation-states ultimately remain the key players in it all. Sa’id Mostehsar, director of the London-based Institute for Space Policy and Law, says any company must have permission to fly into space from a state, which will be limited by international treaties.
There is still a lot of prestige to be gained by joining the elite moon landing aircraft club. After their successful missions, India and Japan could very well claim to be global space players.
And a nation with a successful space industry can bring a big boost to the economy through jobs and innovation.
But the moon race offers an even greater prize: its resources.
Although the lunar terrain looks rather barren, it contains minerals, including rare earths, metals like iron and titanium – as well as helium, which is used in everything from superconductors to medical equipment.
Estimates of the value of it all vary wildly, from billions to quadrillion. So it’s easy to see why some see the Moon as a place to make a lot of money. However, it’s also important to note that this would be a very long-term investment – and the technology needed to mine and recover these lunar resources is some way off.
In 1979, an international treaty declared that no state or organization could claim to own the resources there. But it wasn’t popular – only 17 countries participate, and that doesn’t include any countries that have been to the moon, including the US.
In fact, the US passed a law in 2015 that allows its citizens and industry to mine, use and sell any space material.
“This caused a huge consternation in the international community,” Michelle Hanlon told me. “But they slowly followed suit with similar national laws. These included Luxembourg, the United Arab Emirates, Japan and India.
The resource that might be most in demand is surprising: water.
“When the first moon rocks brought back by the Apollo astronauts were analyzed, they were thought to be completely dry,” explains Sara Russell, professor of planetary sciences at the Natural History Museum.
“But then about 10 years ago there was a kind of revolution and we found that they have little traces of water in them trapped in phosphate crystals.”
And there’s even more at the moon’s poles, she says – stores of water ice are frozen inside permanently shadowed craters.
Future visitors could use the water for drinking, it could be used to make oxygen, and astronauts could even use it to make rocket fuel by splitting it into hydrogen and oxygen, allowing them to travel from the moon to Mars and beyond.
The US is now trying to establish a new set of guiding principles around lunar exploration – and lunar exploitation. The so-called Artemis Agreements state that mining and exploitation of the Moon’s resources should be done in a manner consistent with the Outer Space Treaty, although they say some new rules may be needed.
More than 40 countries have signed up to these non-binding agreements so far, but China is notably absent from the list. And some argue that the new rules for lunar exploration should not be driven by an individual nation.
“This should really be done through the United Nations because it affects all countries,” Sa’id Moshetar tells me.
But access to resources could also create another conflict.
Although there is plenty of space on the Moon, the regions near the icy craters are prime lunar real estate. So what happens when they all want the same place for their future base? And once a country sets one up, what’s to stop another nation from setting up a base too close?
“I think there’s an interesting analogy with Antarctica,” says Jill Stuart, a researcher in space policy and law at the London School of Economics. “We will probably see research bases being established on the moon like on the continent.”
However, specific decisions about a new lunar base, such as whether it covers a few square kilometers or a few hundred, may come down to whoever gets there first.
“It will definitely have a first-mover advantage,” says Jill Stuart.
“So if you can get there first and set up camp, then you can figure out the size of your exclusion zone. It doesn’t mean you own the land, but you can sit on that space.”
Right now, the first settlers are most likely to be either the US or China, adding a new layer of rivalry to an already strained relationship. And it’s likely to set the standard—the rules set by whoever gets there first can become the rules that stick over time.
If this all sounds a bit ad hoc, some of the space experts I spoke to think we’re unlikely to see another major international space treaty. The dos and don’ts of lunar exploration are more likely to be established through memorandums of understanding or new codes of conduct.
The stakes are high. The moon is our constant companion as we watch it wax and wane in different phases, shining brightly in the sky.
But as this new space race takes off, we need to start thinking about what kind of place we want it to be—and whether it risks becoming a setting for very earthly rivalries.
BBC InDepth is the new web and app home for the best analysis and expertise from our top journalists. Under a distinctive new brand, we’ll bring you fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and in-depth reporting on the biggest issues to help you make sense of a complex world. And we’ll also feature thought-provoking content from BBC Sounds and iPlayer. We start small but think big and we want to know what you think – you can send us your opinion by clicking the button below.
InDepth is the new home for the best analysis from across BBC News. Tell us what you think.