In the early hours of July 20, 1969, when Neil Armstrong set foot on the Moon and famously declared, “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind,” he was not merely taking a personal step or even a national triumph; he was also treading on legally uncharted territory. As humanity’s technological capabilities have advanced, the question of who owns space—particularly the Moon and other celestial bodies—has evolved from theoretical speculation to an urgent legal dilemma.
The Outer Space Treaty: Foundations of Space Law
The cornerstone of international space law is the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, commonly known as the Outer Space Treaty (OST) of 1967. Over 110 countries, including major spacefaring nations such as the United States, Russia, and China, are parties to it. The OST laid down a few foundational principles:
1. Non-appropriation: Article II of the Treaty provides that “Outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.” In other words, no country can own the Moon or any part of outer space.
2. Common heritage: Space is considered the province of all mankind. This means that exploration and use must benefit all countries, irrespective of their economic or scientific development.
3. Peaceful purposes: The Treaty prohibits placing nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit or on celestial bodies.
These provisions appear comprehensive, but they leave several practical and philosophical questions unresolved.
Private Actors and the Emergence of Space Commerce
When the OST was drafted during the Cold War, space exploration was the exclusive domain of nation-states. However, in the 21st century, private companies such as SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Moon Express have become major players. Their objectives include not only launching satellites but also extracting resources—like mining the Moon for helium-3 or asteroids for precious metals.
This raises a critical question: If no nation can appropriate the Moon, can a private company do so under the jurisdiction of its home country?
Some nations have passed domestic laws seeking to clarify this ambiguity. For example, the U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act of 2015 explicitly recognizes the right of American citizens to own resources they obtain from celestial bodies. Luxembourg has enacted similar legislation. These laws claim that while outer space cannot be owned, extracted resources can. Critics argue that this interpretation contradicts the OST’s spirit and the non-appropriation principle.
The Moon Agreement and Its Limited Reach
In 1979, the United Nations adopted the Moon Agreement, which attempted to address some of the OST’s gaps. It declares the Moon and its resources to be the common heritage of mankind and requires an international regime to govern exploitation. Notably, the Moon Agreement provides that any benefits derived from such activities should be shared equitably.
However, the Moon Agreement has failed to gain traction. Major space powers—including the U.S., Russia, and China—have neither signed nor ratified it. Consequently, its practical impact is minimal. This leaves the international community without a universally accepted framework for resource utilization.
Artemis Accords: A New Era of Bilateral Consensus
Recognizing the inadequacy of the existing treaties, the United States has led the formation of the Artemis Accords, a set of bilateral agreements with partner nations to establish norms for responsible behavior in space exploration, especially the Moon. Among other things, the Accords provide for:
• Transparency in activities
• Registration of space objects
• Emergency assistance
• Deconfliction of operations through “safety zones”
While the Accords reinforce the OST’s principles, critics caution that they could entrench inequalities, as only select countries participate, effectively creating a club of spacefaring nations with disproportionate control over lunar activities.
Ethical and Philosophical Considerations
Beyond legal texts, there are profound ethical considerations:
• Should humanity treat the Moon and other celestial bodies as mere commodities to exploit?
• If resources are extracted, how will benefits be distributed among all nations, particularly developing countries that lack space capabilities?
• Could unregulated commercialization of space lead to environmental degradation beyond Earth?
These questions remind us that space is not just a new frontier for profit but a shared domain that demands collective stewardship.
Towards a Balanced Framework
Experts have proposed several approaches to balance innovation and equity:
1. International Licensing Authority: Creating a global body under the UN to issue licenses for space resource extraction and ensure compliance with environmental and equity standards.
2. Resource Royalties: Requiring companies to pay royalties into an international fund supporting space infrastructure and scientific research for all.
3. Environmental Safeguards: Developing clear rules on planetary protection to prevent contamination and preserve celestial bodies’ integrity.
While these proposals are aspirational, they underline the necessity of updating space law to reflect current realities.
Conclusion
The question “Who owns the Moon?” does not have a simple answer. Under current international law, no state or private actor can claim sovereignty over the Moon or other celestial bodies. Yet, the legal regime governing space resources is fragmented and outdated, unable to keep pace with rapid technological advancements and commercial ambitions.
As the race to return to the Moon intensifies—with NASA’s Artemis missions, China’s lunar plans, and private companies eyeing extraterrestrial mining—there is an urgent need for a robust, fair, and forward-looking legal framework. Without it, humanity risks turning the Moon and beyond into arenas of conflict and exploitation rather than exploration and cooperation.
Ultimately, the Moon belongs not to any one nation or corporation but to all humankind—and generations yet unborn. It is our collective responsibility to ensure that this shared heritage is governed by principles of equity, sustainability, and peace.
contributed by : Aastha Shrivastav (Intern)