Trump’s Provocative Claims About the Moon
This Sunday, former President Donald Trump took to his Truth Social account to share a series of AI-generated posts that ranged from the absurd to the offensive. These included renaming New Mexico as “New America” and suggesting uniforms for the Space Force inspired by the Galactic Empire from Star Wars, alongside various historical references. However, one particular image caught considerable attention: a depiction of the Moon with the caption, “The Moon is ours,” accompanied by an American flag icon. This raises the question—could he possibly be serious? After all, the United States does not own the Moon… or does it?
For many of his supporters, such postings are dismissed as irreverent jokes that shouldn’t be taken too seriously. They contend that Trump is merely “trolling” the public, given his unique sense of humour. Yet, recent events suggest that what may appear as light-hearted banter could be indicative of a deeper belief. His previous remarks about annexing Greenland, renaming the Gulf of Mexico as the “Gulf of America,” persistent jabs at Canada, and plans to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the United States with a mixed martial arts event all hint at a troubling trend. While people may chuckle at his quirky comments on social media, it’s worth noting that he has already initiated the demolition of half the White House. Thus, there is reason to suspect that Trump genuinely believes the Moon is—or should be—a territory of the United States, akin to a “space Puerto Rico.”
The Reality of Lunar Ownership
But is there a valid argument for such a claim? Some in the United States assert that it should be seen this way, particularly because Americans were the first—and thus far, the only—nation to set foot on the lunar surface. When Neil Armstrong planted the American flag in 1969, it was undeniably a powerful symbolic gesture during the height of the space race with the Soviet Union. However, it was merely that: a symbolic act.
According to Article II of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, use, occupation, or any other means. The United States, alongside the Soviet Union and numerous other nations, signed and ratified this treaty. The primary goal of this international agreement was to prevent the Cold War space race from morphing into a new form of colonialism, establishing that space and celestial bodies are the “heritage of all mankind” and should be utilised for the benefit of all countries, irrespective of their scientific or technological capabilities. Therefore, the Moon does not belong to the United States, regardless of Trump’s whimsical assertions.
The Complexities of Lunar Resources
It can be assumed that Washington may be regretting its decision to sign this treaty, particularly now that NASA is looking to return to the Moon with objectives of establishing a sustained presence on its surface through the construction of lunar bases and the creation of a lunar economy. This may necessitate the utilisation of resources available on the Moon, such as frozen water, helium-3, or various minerals. However, the discourse surrounding lunar resources is more ambiguous and contested than the issue of territorial claims.
While the Outer Space Treaty prohibits the appropriation of the Moon as territory, it does not explicitly address whether a country or corporation can extract and own resources harvested from it. This has resulted in a legal grey area that various stakeholders interpret to their advantage. In 2015, the United States enacted the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, which allows its citizens and companies to own and sell resources extracted from space, arguing that this does not equate to claiming sovereignty over the celestial body itself, but rather over materials once separated from it—a distinction reminiscent of fishing in international waters.
Future Implications of Lunar Claims
The United States has also pushed for the Artemis Accords, a non-binding framework signed by over 40 countries aimed at establishing guidelines for the extraction of space resources. However, nations such as Russia and China have refrained from signing, asserting that initiatives like this violate the spirit of the original 1967 treaty.
Is it possible for the United States to withdraw from the Outer Space Treaty of 1967? Technically, yes, as the treaty provides for such a mechanism in its Article XVI. However, in practice, this would be exceedingly complex and unlikely for several reasons. Firstly, it would incur significant diplomatic and reputational costs, as the U.S. was a key proponent of the treaty during a time when the Soviets were leading the space race, and retracting would undermine its moral authority in demanding compliance from other nations like China and Russia regarding space militarisation. Secondly, many provisions of the treaty (such as the prohibition of nuclear weapons in orbit) are regarded as part of customary international law, meaning that a formal withdrawal would not entirely absolve the U.S. of these obligations under international law. Lastly, a unilateral withdrawal could trigger an unregulated and perilous space race, encouraging other powers to make territorial or military claims, particularly in low Earth orbit, counter to the long-term strategic and security interests of the United States.
America’s Unique Position in Space Exploration
There are indeed many arguments both for and against this potential course of action. Much will depend on the success of NASA’s Artemis programme in determining the future trajectory of U.S. policy regarding the treaty.
What the United States does possess is what is colloquially referred to as “bragging rights.” While it may not own the Moon, it can proudly claim to be the first and only nation to have set foot on the lunar surface—a historic achievement celebrated and parodied across numerous films, television series, songs, artwork, cartoons, and more. Furthermore, the U.S. has undertaken the most lunar research projects and appears the most committed to the mission of returning astronauts to the Moon, a necessary step if it hopes to reach Mars. Its closest competitor, China, also seems interested in achieving both objectives, yet thus far has not demonstrated the same level of progress as NASA and its commercial partners. Thus, while there may be no official title deed for the Moon, in practical terms, under the rationale that “possession is nine-tenths of the law,” Trump’s assertion that the Moon belongs to the United States is not entirely without merit.
Perhaps he simply wishes to give it a new name.