Who owns the Moon: one state or all mankind?

There are not many territories on Earth that do not belong to any particular state. However, their use is quite clearly regulated by international law. Things are much more complicated with the only satellite of the Earth – the Moon. Michelle Hanlon, an expert in space law at the University of Mississippi School of Law, notes:

All in all, it’s not a very urgent problem. However, we must be very — I emphasize, very — careful with her.

There are no clear laws in space – so far only recommendations from “extraterrestrial” departments. They are rather ambiguous, not fully thought out and not mandatory. That is why there may be a lot of controversy over the territory of the Moon in the future – especially if it eventually turns out to be interesting in terms of resources or for any other reason.

Today on the territory of the moon “developing” two flags

→ but they don’t say anything about satellite ownership

There is no wind on the moon, so the flags set on its surface do not “evolve”. They are just stretched over the wire to create the appropriate effect. The first – with stars and stripes in the national traditions of the United States; the second is red in the traditional style of China. Nevertheless, if you could ask someone from the leadership of these countries, any of them would probably answer that these flags do not represent any territorial claims. By and large, both can be considered nothing more than objects of “modern art”, which, however, appeared on the moon in the last century.

According to the “laws” of the country can not claim space

→ but today they cannot be called mandatory

The first questions about space legislation appeared in October 1957. Then the Soviet shuttle “Sputnik-1” swept through the sky and opened up a completely new world that was not available to mankind before. Earthly minds immediately had not only scientific, but also legal interest. The latter was the reason for the development of a space treaty lasting ten years. In 1967, the first legal document concerning space was adopted. It still remains one of the most important in extraterrestrial legislation. However, it is not obligatory for observance at all. Hanlon:

These are just guidelines and principles.

Be that as it may, the second article of the document expressly excludes the possibility of claiming the capture or possession of some parts of the cosmos in general or celestial bodies in particular. Michelle confirms this unequivocally:

No state can claim the moon.

It seems that the answer to the title of this material has been given, so the discussion can be curtailed. But it is not.

Buildings on the moon can be treated differently in general

→ they are supposed to be considered private property

The fundamental right to property is enshrined in the international legal field with the help of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In her third article, it is emphasized that the possession of something is the most unshakable concept. Then what if someone decides to build a house on the moon and actually becomes its owner? Under the structure will be the territory, which will also belong to a specific person, organization or state.

It turns out, purely hypothetically, that there are still options for the peaceful capture of the territory of the only satellite of the Earth? Not really. “Treaty on the principles of the activities of states in the exploration and use of outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies” – this is the full title of the document described in the previous paragraph – in its 12th article emphasizes that human structures in space should be available for public visiting.

There is also the “Agreement on the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies” of 1979. It could well become a link between the conflicting articles of the two previous documents. However, the main space states – the United States, China and Russia – have not yet ratified it, so there is simply no special legal meaning in this “piece of paper”. It is possible that in the future, when lunar missions become something commonplace, the document will still gain strength. However, its signing, in the end, may cause a lot of problems, which will not be so easy to resolve.

▶︎ Fact: several individuals at various times have already claimed to own a square on the moon. This is the case, for example, of Robert R. Coles, former chairman of New York’s Hayden Planetarium at the American Museum of Natural History. In 1955, he deftly tried to sell satellite land for a US dollar an acre.

Some places on the moon are protected as world heritage

→ but countries are not obliged to support this initiative at all

NASA is one of the most interested parties in space law. To get rid of the gaps – “black holes” – within its framework, the US Department has created another agreement. This is the 2022 Artemis Accords, a document intended to facilitate future space exploration, including the Moon and other celestial bodies. However, the implementation of these rules again turned out to be optional. However, there are interesting nuances in the agreement regarding the universal heritage, which should be protected by everyone without exception. For example, they included the landing site of the Russian Luna probe, as well as the footprints of Neil Armstrong.

Absolutely everyone can explore and use the moon

→ this also applies to mining on the surface of the satellite

The document described above, among other things, assumes the possibility of extracting any extraterrestrial resources – this also applies to the surface of the moon. So far, none of the states has seen anything useful in this. However, the representatives of Russia did not ratify the said “paper” precisely because of this clause – they believe that American companies in this case have much more advantages, which can hardly be called a fair decision. Moreover, in this case, another embarrassment appears:

If someone mines something on the moon, does this mean that he becomes the owner of a certain part of the satellite?

The moon will definitely become a stumbling block in the near future

→ humanity will explode if the satellite is useful

At the moment, the benefits of the moon can only be called indirect. When scientists conduct fundamental research in the study of space flights and the satellite itself, a lot of spin-off technologies are born that go to the masses and bring in billions of dollars. However, when something really useful is found on the Moon, it will definitely become the subject of a heated debate among the world’s leading states. Even now, research equipment on the same moon is private property and is zealously guarded by the state-owner. Will it become a cause for conflict? Good question…