the moon agreement

In 1979, the Moon Agreement was signed with the intention of providing “the necessary legal principles for governing the behaviour of states, international organizations, and individuals who explore celestial bodies other than Earth, as well as administration of the resources that exploration may yield.”

The Agreement was intended to subject all activities involving the Moon to international law, including the United Nations Charter. The Agreement also notably explicitly banned the commercial exploitation of space resources (at least in our solar system), including the Moon’s resources.

However, only 18 countries are party to the Moon Agreement; the United States, Russia, and China are all notably absent. This makes it difficult to enforce the provisions of the Moon Agreement as a matter of international law, having never been signed by the major spacefaring nations of our time.

Compounding problems are the more recent Artemis Accords. The Moon Agreement’s provisions regarding ownership of space resources, and its stated commitment to creating “an international regime…to govern the exploitation of the natural resources of the moon,” are directly in conflict with the Accords. Legal scholars believe the Moon Agreement and the Artemis Accords cannot be reconciled, and the existence of one will depend on the success (or demise) of the other.

Currently, only one state party has signed onto both of these international agreements: Australia. Some speculate Australia cannot uphold its obligations under both the Artemis Accords and the Moon Agreement because of their inconsistencies. This being the case, it may simply need to withdraw from one agreement in the future. 

How does the law regard lunar settlements? ->