Who owns the moon? Direct information

Editing: Sally Ismail

"Astronaut Bez Aldern is next to the first American flag on the moon," he said. "It's probably the most famous photo of all sciences.

For those who know the history of the world, it has also sounded the alarm about the property of the moon, according to an analytical point of view published by the World Economic Forum.

Less than a century ago, the development of a national flag in another part of the world still claims ownership of this land.

The question is whether American science on the moon is a statement of American colony.

"When people first learn that I am a lawyer, I work and study a project called space law," said Von der Dunk, author of the analysis. "The frequently asked question, often accompanied by a big smile, tells me who owns the moon."

Of course, the claim for a new national territory was largely European and applied to parts of the non-European world, where the Portuguese, Spanish, Dutch, French and British had created vast colonial empires.

Influenced by the European model, the legal idea that the status of science as a declaration of sovereignty has quickly become a reality and is universally accepted as part of the law of nations.

It is clear that astronauts have more important things in their mind than the situation and the consequences of science, but fortunately this question has been addressed in advance.

Since the beginning of the space race, the United States has learned that a vision of American science on the moon would raise important political issues and that any suggestion that the moon could legally be part of isolated areas United States could create fears and international conflicts that are harmful to each program. The US space and the interests of the whole United States.

In 1969, decolonization had probably destroyed any idea that the non-European regions of the inhabited world were not civilized and could therefore be justified if they submitted to European sovereignty, but there was also no one there. living on the moon, even life itself was absent.

However, the simple answer to the question of whether Neil Armstrong and Baz Aldern, by their ceremony, transformed the moon or at least a small part of it into American territory turned out to be "no".

NASA and the US government did not aim to raise the American flag to achieve this result.

First Treaty on Outer Space

More importantly, this response was made in the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, in which the United States and the Soviet Union, as well as all other emerging states, became parties.

The two great powers agreed that colonialism on the ground was responsible for the great human suffering and armed conflict that had occurred in past centuries.

There was a desire not to repeat this mistake of the old European colonial powers when it came to determining the legal position of the moon.

In this sense, the moon has become a kind of global common good to which all countries have legal access, two years before the first human landing on the moon.

Thus, American science was not a declaration of sovereignty, but a tribute to American taxpayers and engineers who helped make Armstrong, Aldern and a third astronaut, Michael Collins, possible.

Both men wore a sign that they had gone to the world. The famous "Neil" of course repeated the same feeling: "A small step for the man, but a leap for the man."

In addition, the United States and NASA are committed to sharing lunar rocks and other lunar soil samples with other countries, either by granting them to foreign governments or by authorizing scientists from all over the world to access for scientific analyzes and discussions.

So, the case seems to be over and there is no need for a space lawyer to solve the problems and conflicts on the moon, is it? not?

No need for space lawyers?

Not so fast: while the legal position of the Moon as a "universal common good" accessible to all states met with no challenge or resistance, the Outer Space Treaty left the other details uncompromising.

Contrary to the most optimistic assumptions of this period, humans have not returned to the moon since 1972, making lunar land rights largely theoretical.

This is the situation just a few years ago when many new plans were put in place to return to the moon.

In addition, at least two US companies, Planetary Resources and Deep Space Industries, which are receiving significant financial support, have begun targeting asteroids to extract their mineral resources.

Here is an important observation, under the above-mentioned Outer Space Treaty, that the Moon and other celestial bodies, such as asteroids, legally belong to the same basket, none of which can become the land of the Earth. a sovereign or other state.

The basic ban, under the Outer Space Treaty, of acquiring a new territory by placing a flag or other means on the moon did not allow to fight against the enemy. commercial exploitation of natural resources on the Moon and on other celestial bodies.

So, would you like to exploit an asteroid?

Countries such as the United States and Luxembourg have agreed that "the moon and asteroids are global commons, which means that each country allows private landowners, to the extent that they are licensed in accordance with the law." other relevant rules of space law, to exploit what is possible.Gain money.

It is like a law on the high seas that is not under the control of a state, but is fully accessible to licensed fishing operations of nationals of any state and its societies.

Osiris-Rex, who went to a nearby asteroid called Pino, has to bring a small specimen to Earth for study.

The mission began on September 8, 2016 from the Cape Canaveral Air Base.

As expected, the Pino Space Shuttle will arrive in 2018 and return a sample to Earth in 2023.

On the other hand, countries such as Russia, Brazil and Belgium adhere to the idea that the moon and asteroids belong to all humanity, so that the potential benefits of commercial exploitation are supposed to permeate the whole of humanity, or at least be subject to a strict international order supposed to guarantee universal benefits for humanity.

This approach is similar to the system originally put in place to collect deep seabed mineral resources.

In this case, an international licensing system has been put in place, in addition to an international project to exploit these resources and to share the benefits in general between all States.

Meanwhile, attention on the moon has also been renewed, at least China, India and Japan have serious plans to return there.

In the end, it is up to the Group of States to determine whether it is possible to reach a common agreement on one or the other of the positions, or even between the two.

Such activities developed without applicable law and acceptance in general would be the worst case scenario.

Although it is no longer a question of colonization, it can have the same negative consequences.