Silence in Outer Space? NASA’s Leap to Protecting Neil Armstrong's Boot Print on the Moon

Fifty years ago, the United States (US) astronauts, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin took humanity’s first steps off of planet Earth, marking the advancement of civilization’s scientific capabilities. With six manned moon landings, two manned orbital missions, over a dozen robotic landings and more than a dozen crash sites, the Moon today commands a truly multinational presence. In the five decades succeeding the Apollo 11 Mission, little attention has been paid to protecting lunar artefacts on the Moon due to the inaccessibility of the Moon and the vacuum of space in which the artefacts lay. However, the renewal of sophisticated lunar exploration by several public and private entities characterises the beginning of a New Space Race legitimised by not only the presence of new space-faring actors, including India and Israel, but also by President Trump’s ambitions for a US Space Force. With the impending reality of a more crowded Moon, building an international consensus for the protection and preservation of lunar artefacts on the Moon is critical. ¹

Despite the US Government’s attempts to develop protections for the Apollo Mission sites, two key legal issues persist: to resolve what constitutes an artefact and their occupied territory on the Moon. Central to this will be determining whether specific indicators of human and human-robotic lunar presence, such as Neil Armstrong’s boot print, are property and whether States can successfully own and protect human or robotic markers on the lunar surface without making a claim to the territory beneath them. The question arises, how does a State own a human presence indicator like Neil Armstrong’s boot print without owning the soil?

Under the existing international law, States are given jurisdiction and control over their space objects in space or on other celestial bodies; ² but, there are prohibitions for ‘national appropriation’ of space and celestial bodies ‘by any means’. ³ Existing space treaties, however, remain silent on the preservation of property that nations have left behind. One might look to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) to oversee the protection of sites on the Moon, given its existing mandate within the international community to oversee heritage protection on Earth. However, the World Heritage Convention precludes this by maintaining that sites must be within the jurisdiction of a State before they are eligible for inscription.

The US Government have attempted to extend their jurisdiction to the territory surrounding their property on the Moon, specifically the Apollo Mission sites.⁴ In 2013, a bill was proposed to create a national park on the Moon surrounding the six Apollo Mission sites. Due to the US Government’s existing ecosystem of national parks which have been inscribed on UNESCO’s World Heritage List, it was argued that as a national park identified under domestic law, the proposed national park on the Moon would qualify for inscription onto the World Heritage List, thus gaining it international recognition and legal protection under international law. The proposed bill was inconsistent with the prohibition of national appropriation in existing space law and was never passed.

The US, therefore, needs to gain international recognition for the sites on which their artefacts rest. In July 2019, a proposed bill ‘One Small Step for the Protection of Human Heritage in Space Act’, was introduced and passed by the US Senate. The bill would require all US-licensed space-faring entities to ‘respect’ a set of lunar artefacts listed by NASA,⁵ including Tranquility Base and other Apollo Mission landing sites. While the practical application of this bill is limited to US licensees, it defines the lunar artefacts as ones of ‘Outstanding Universal Value’ to humanity. The US Government’s adoption of this treaty language aligns with NASA’s recommendations on lunar artefact protection. NASA’s recommendations suggest that the Apollo 11 and 17 Mission sites require greater protection through larger exclusion zones (75 metres) due to their historical and anthropological significance while limiting the exclusion zones (1 metre) for Apollo 12, 14-16 sites. This distinction challenges the assumption that making a claim on all lunar artefacts on the Moon would stifle freedom of exploration by public and private space-faring entities. Yet, with the US Government’s withdrawal from UNESCO and their ineligibility to sit on the World Heritage Committee, some States could potentially see a US-led attempt to protect lunar artefacts as a broader attempt to secure rights to lunar territory. By looking at Earth’s standards, however, not all lunar artefacts would be preserved based on UNESCO’s criteria determining ‘Outstanding Universal Value’.

With a New Space Race underway, the international community needs to determine what constitutes legal protection for lunar artefacts and who will be responsible for protecting those artefacts. Until then, the small number of States to have left property on the Moon, should co-design guidelines which will result in a small, yet positive leap forward in protecting lunar artefacts left on the Moon.

References

Tamara Richardson Member since January 2, 2020

Tamara Richardson is an Associate of the UNESCO Chair in Intercultural & Interreligious Relations, Asia Pacific. Through her directorship of regional cultural organisation, PACE 48, she has worked across the Asia Pacific region in culture and cultural education initiatives, with her work being featured by a number of multilateral organisations including the United Nations, UNESCO, the G20, and the Commonwealth. She holds a Bachelor of Science from the University of Queensland and is completing a Master of Public and International Law from Melbourne Law School.

Contributor

‘Protecting and Preserving Apollo Program Landing Sites & Artefacts’ (Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President of United States 2018) <https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Protecting-and-Preserving-Apollo-Program-Lunar-Landing-Sites-and-Artifacts.pdf> accessed 8 December 2019.
Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and other Celestial Bodies 1967 (Outer Space Treaty 1967) art 8.
Outer Space Treaty 1967, art 2.
Apollo Lunar Landing Legacy Act 113 Congress (2013-14) [H.R. 2617].
‘NASA’s Recommendations to Space-Faring Entities: How to Protect and Preserve the Historic and Scientific Value of US Government Lunar Artifacts’ (Strategic Analysis and Integration Division, National Aeronautics and Space Administration2011).