Who will make the laws on human presence on the Moon? Which ones will be needed? And how will they be applied?
Space agencies and private missions have reaching the Moon as one of their main objectives establish a permanent human presence over there. Before this becomes reality, space ethicists are questioning the possible political consequences of exploring lunar territory.
- Who owns the Moon? No one but this man claims to own any part of it
- 5 important things the Moon can teach us
There are many competitors in the current space race who dream of landing in the most promising lunar regions for exploration. These areas include the vicinity of the Moon’s south pole, where there is an abundance of frozen water, and even the historic sites where the Moon’s astronauts lived. NASA landed decades ago.
A perspective on the future on the Moon
With the advent of the space economy and private initiatives in space missions, exploration is becoming less and less a strictly scientific matter. To name a few examples, some companies plan to participate in the next one era of lunar space tourismwith tours around the Earth’s natural satellite.
It would not be an exaggeration to think that, after the first camps are set up on the Moon, companies will try to offer a tour of the surface there too. If there are already concrete plans to build space hotels in Earth orbit, perhaps in the middle of this century we will see the first hotels on the Moon.
Other peculiar initiatives are already a reality: the Astrobotics company has tried to send samples of the remains of deceased actors from the Star Trek series, even if he failed to reach the moon with the Peregrine spacecraft. Israeli Beresheet sent thousands of tardigrades to the Moonscattering Earth’s hardiest animals to the surface after the ship crashes.
Perhaps most worrying is the interest of government agencies of major space powers in exploiting lunar resources. Craters that sunlight has never reached are rich sources of water ice, important for refueling astronauts and even launching rockets to destinations like Mars.
Could it be that, in the near future, when government space agencies establish themselves on the Moon, they will have to divide the territories? In the long term, could this lead to conflicts between the “owners” of the land? How can we avoid using weapons to intimidate any unfair, unfair or criminal action on the Moon?
What can (and cannot) be done on the Moon?
Since the Moon is completely uninhabited and ownerless, it is difficult to determine what can or cannot be done there. Even more difficult is to answer who can determine these rules. For space ethicists it is important to listen to humanity as a whole: after all, the conquest of space is, and must continue to be, an achievement of humanity itself.
This means that even the least represented voices must be heard, including those of indigenous peoples who care about their customs and beliefs. The Navajo nation, for example, formally protested the launch of the Peregrine mission because for them the Moon is sacred and placing human remains there would be a desecration.
This is not the only culture to consider the Moon sacred; Far from it, there are also Hindus, Shintos, Inuit, to name a few. Together, these people represent a large portion of the human population and must be respected if we are to treat the conquest of the Moon as humanity’s heritage.
Issues such as the division of territories are just the tip of the iceberg of a series of problems that could arise as humanity thrives on the lunar surface. Can a nation take over the most favored regions, with the most natural resources?
If the answer to the previous question is yes, how ethical would that be? And last but not least, how would property be protected, given that there is an international treaty banning the use of weapons in space?
The problems don’t end there, according to groups like For All Moonkind, which advocates for the preservation of historic sites, such as the “one small step” by Neil Armstrong. Other problems can become big long-term problems, such as waste disposal and basic sanitation.
It is impossible to talk about human settlements anywhere without addressing the issue of natural impacts: let our planet tell you! NASA is already preparing excavate the lunar surfacewhile Russia and China want it install a nuclear power plant on the Moon by 2035.
But who will dictate the rules? And how will these people ensure that the rules are respected? The Outer Space Treaty already bans claims to territories in space and stipulates that the Moon should only be used for peaceful purposes. However, there is no regulation on issues such as the presence of advertising on the lunar landscape or the shipping of human remains.
Who will dictate the rules?
It is difficult to know who will have the most say in the creation of future international agreements, considering that each nation has its own interests in lunar exploration. Historically, states have not cared about ethical issues when establishing colonies on foreign lands right here on our home planet.
Even a country’s ethnic minorities, or even workers in general, are historically forgotten when their rulers take over decisions that could affect them in some way. The space race could involve “shortcuts” that put astronauts’ safety at risk or even subject them to precarious jobs.
However, it is possible that the leading countries in the race – the United States, China, India and Russia – will become the main ones influencing decisions on the use and protection of the lunar environment. The problem is that, in addition to these nations having their own political differences, other nations could be harmed if they joined the space adventure.
A possible model
Astrophysicist and space ethicist Erika Nesvold argues that perhaps the 1959 Antarctic Treaty can serve as an example. Through it, to this day, Antarctica remains reserved only for scientific and peaceful use, prohibiting commercial mining.
Countries that have signed the treaty are responsible for issuing licenses for activities in the region to interested parties. They also regulate the type of activity allowed and the number of people at the same time, aiming at both environmental protection and safety.
While not perfect – countries that claimed territory in Antarctica before the treaty can still maintain their claims even if the agreement prohibits new claims from being made – the Antarctic Treaty’s success in preventing conflict and protecting the polar environment can be used as a template for a space adjustment.
Source: Reverse
Trends on Canaltech:
- Science defines at what age a person is “old”
- The human life expectancy record will be broken in 2060
- 13 Beta apps to install on Android and iOS
- Rock paintings reveal the ancient history of occupation in the Amazon
- IRPF Schedule 2024 is now available; see how to download
- Discovery could double your PC performance
Source: Terra
Rose James is a Gossipify movie and series reviewer known for her in-depth analysis and unique perspective on the latest releases. With a background in film studies, she provides engaging and informative reviews, and keeps readers up to date with industry trends and emerging talents.
