The year 2024 marks an important milestone in space history – the 55th anniversary of the first humans setting foot on the Moon during the pioneering Apollo 11 mission in 1969. As the anniversary approaches, the United States has passed legislation aimed at preserving this legacy by protecting historical artifacts and sites on the lunar surface. Specifically, the “One Small Step to Protect Human Heritage in Space Act” designates the Apollo 11 landing site, as well as those of Apollo 12 through 17, as having “outstanding universal value to humanity.”
The act does not claim national ownership over these areas. Rather, it recognizes their historical significance and directs NASA to make recommendations to safeguard these sites from future interference as countries and private companies increase activities on the Moon. Supporters compare it to international agreements that protect important sites on Earth, such as UNESCO World Heritage sites. However, the inability for any nation to make sovereignty claims over lunar territory as per the Outer Space Treaty raises complex questions. Could protecting heritage sites in this manner set a precedence for countries to claim ownership over areas of interests on the Moon and other celestial bodies in the future?
The Outer Space Treaty Forms the Basis for Space Law
The 1967 Outer Space Treaty has served as the foundation for international space law for over 50 years. Ratified by over 100 nations including all major space powers, Article II states 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.” This principle of non-appropriation reinforces outer space as a global commons, ensuring freedom of access and exploration as humanity ventures farther out into the solar system. It aims to prevent a colonial scramble for territory. The treaty also designates countries as responsible for all national activities conducted by both governmental and non-governmental entities. They must authorize and continually supervise such activities.
Ambiguities Remain Regarding Resource Extraction
While the non-appropriation clauses prohibit nations from claiming sovereignty over areas of outer space, there are ambiguities around resource extraction by private companies. Can private entities claim possession over resources extracted from celestial bodies? The Artemis Accords, signed by over a dozen countries including the U.S. and key partners, reinforces that taking resources does not constitute national appropriation but calls for extraction to be conducted in a transparent, sustainable manner adhering to best practices. However, the Accords are non-binding and debate continues around developing a clear international framework.
Protecting Space Heritage Sites
The U.S. legislation focuses on protecting lunar artifacts and sites, rather than claiming national ownership over territories or extracted resources. It recognizes the sites have outstanding value for all of humanity. While the sites are not subject to any national jurisdiction, the law calls for future missions to be aware of the sites and avoid harmful interference. Supporters argue that not having clear protections risks irreversible damage from future activities as space exploration increases.
However, opponents state that protecting sites could enable a form of de facto claim, since countries would have authority over restricting access. The U.S. does not have jurisdiction over these areas as per the Outer Space Treaty, so the practical enforcement of protection remains unclear. Critics also argue the move unilaterally imposes American space heritage while neglecting sites meaningful to international partners and future generations. This could set an unhealthy precedent.
The Need for Multilateral Frameworks
As lunar activity expands, the international community recognizes the need to balance development with preserving historic and scientific artifacts. The UNCOPUOS Legal Subcommittee has begun discussions over possibly expanding heritage protections through a multilateral framework similar to UNESCO sites, as advocated by organizations like For All Moonkind. The Artemis Accords also call for the development of “safety zones” to preserve Apollo artifacts and sites of outstanding scientific value. However, opponents state that safety zones should be created through a multilateral consensus process, rather than unilaterally by single nations.
Overall the U.S. legislation represents an important step in prioritizing space heritage. But realizing protections requires effective international coordination aligning with principles of non-appropriation. The Moon and other celestial bodies belong to all humanity. While the sites may have outstanding universal value, unilateral moves to enforce authority over access should be avoided. Constructing a multilateral governance regime building on the Outer Space Treaty will help ensure the continued peaceful, sustainable development of space for generations to come.
