Abstract
In 2020 NASA announced a bold plan to return humans to the Moon by 2024 and to use the Moon as a base for crewed missions to Mars. The vision and scope underpinning that plan represents a challenge not only to technological and scientific capability but also to existing understandings of international space law and invites a more detailed examination of key provisions of the UN Space Treaties. The Artemis project will rely significantly upon the involvement of commercial space operators and other states are invited through their respective space agencies to become part of the project. Involvement is however, contingent upon acceptance of and adherence to the ‘Artemis Accords’ reflecting ‘a shared vision for principles, grounded in the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, to create a safe and transparent environment which facilitates exploration, science, and commercial activities for all of humanity to enjoy’. This chapter will consider the principles underpinning the Artemis Accords in the context of international space law and address the particular points of tension generated by their terms, notably the rules applicable to space resource utilisation and questions of territoriality, through the application of the contested principle of ‘zones’. It concludes that merely tabling the Artemis Accords for consideration makes a valuable contribution to a much needed step forward in international space law.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
See further, Trepczynski ‘Rules of the Domain: The Impact of Law on the Evolution of Space Activities and Technologies’ in this volume.
- 2.
UNGA Resolution 1148 (XII) 14 November 1957.
- 3.
UNGA Resolution 1348 (XIII) 13 December 1958.
- 4.
UNGA Resolution 1472 (XIV) 12 December 1959.
- 5.
United States Chapter 509- Commercial Space Launch Activities Act, §50902.
References
Agreement among the Government of Canada, Governments of Member States of the European Space Agency, the Government of Japan, the Government of the Russian Federation, and the Government of the United States of America concerning Cooperation on the Civil International Space Station, 29 January 1998 (entered into force 28 March 2001) (IGA)
Agreement among the Government of the United States of America, Governments of Member States of the European Space Agency, the Government of Japan, and the Government of Canada on Cooperation in the Detailed Design, Development, Operation, and Utilization of the permanently Manned Civil Space Station, 29 September 1988) (entered into force 30 January 1992)
Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, opened for signature 18 December 1979, 1363 UNTS 3 (entered into force 11 July 1984) (‘Moon Agreement’)
Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space, opened for signature 22 April 1968, 672 UNTS 119 (entered into force 3 December 1968) (‘Rescue and Return Agreement’)
Beard, J. (2017). Soft Law’s Failure on the Horizon: The International Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities. University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law, 38(2), 335.
Borgen, C. (2020, May 8). ‘The Artemis Accords: One Small Step for Space Law?’. Opinio Juris (Online). http://opiniojuris.org/2020/05/08/the-artemis-accords-one-small-step-for-space-law/
Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS): Legal Subcommittee. (2020, January 1). Status of International Agreements relating to activities in outer space. https://www.unoosa.org/documents/pdf/spacelaw/treatystatus/TreatiesStatus-2020E.pdf
Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, opened for signature 29 March 1972, 961 UNTS 187 (entered into force 1 September 1972) (‘Liability Convention’)
Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space, opened for signature 14 January 1975, 1023 UNTS 15 (entered into force 15 September 1976) (‘Registration Convention’)
David, L. (2019 October 21). ‘Moon Dust Could Be a Problem for Future Lunar Explorers’. Space.com (online). https://www.space.com/moon-dust-problem-lunar-exploration.html
de Zwart, M. (2019). Outer Space. In W. H. Boothby (Ed.), New technologies and the law in war and Peace (p. 337). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
de Zwart, M. (2020). Intellectual property, innovation and new space technology. In G. Austin, A. Christie, A. Kenyon, & M. Richardson (Eds.), Across intellectual property: Essays in honour of Sam Ricketson, Cambridge Intellectual Property and Information Law (pp. 144–157). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108750066.014.
Fidler, D. P. (2020, June 2). The Artemis Accords and the next generation of outer space governance. Council on Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/blog/artemis-accords-and-next-generation-outer-space-governance
For All Moonkind. https://www.forallmoonkind.org/
Foust, J. (2020, July 13). What’s in name when it comes to an “accord”?. The Space Review (online). https://www.thespacereview.com/article/3987/1
Gold. (2020 May 15). Artemis Accords enabling international partnerships for lunar exploration. US Department of State Foreign Press Centers Briefing. https://www.state.gov/briefings-foreign-press-centers/artemis-accords-enabling-international-partnerships-for-lunar-exploration/
Hague International Space Resources Governance Working Group. (2019, November). Building Blocks for the Development of an International Framework on Space Resource Activities.
He, Q. (1997). The Outer Space Treaty in Perspective. 40 Proceedings on the Law of Outer Space, 51, 53.
Johnson, C. (2020). SpaceWatchGL feature: The space law context of the Artemis Accords: Part II. SpaceWacth Global. https://spacewatch.global/2020/05/spacewatchgl-feature-the-space-law-context-of-the-artemis-accords-part-2/
Meyer, P. (2016). Dark forces awaken: The prospects for comparative space security. Nonproliferation Review, 23(3–4), 495.
Meyer, P. (2018, December 11). Washington Starts a Space Spat at the United Nations. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
National Astronautics and Space Administration. (2011, July 20). NASA’s recommendations to space-faring entities: How to protect and preserve the historic and scientific value of U.S. Government Lunar Artifacts.
Oberhaus, D. (2019, May 8). A Crashed Israeli Lunar Lander Spilled Tardigrades on the Moon. https://www.wired.com/story/a-crashed-israeli-lunar-lander-spilled-tardigrades-on-the-moon/.
O’Brien, D. (2020, 29 June). The Artemis Accords: repeating the mistakes of the Age of Exploration. The Space Review (online). https://www.thespacereview.com/article/3975/1
Roulette, J. (2020, May 6). Trump administration drafting 'Artemis Accords' pact for moon mining. Science News(online). https://www.reuters.com/article/us-space-exploration-moon-mining-exclusi/exclusive-trump-administration-drafting-artemis-accords-pact-for-moon-mining-sources-idUSKBN22H2SB.
Schingler, J.K. (2020 June 8). Imagining safety zones: Implications and open questions. The Space Review (online). https://www.thespacereview.com/article/3962/1.
Schmitt, M. (2006). International law and military operations in space. In A. von Bogdandy & R. Wolfrum (Eds.), Max Planck yearbook of United Nations law (Vol. 10, p. 99).
Schrogl, K. U., & Neumann, J. (2009). [Outer Space Treaty] Article IV. In S. Hobe, B. Schmidt-Tedd, & K.-U. Schrogl (Eds.), Cologne commentary on space law volume 1: Outer space treaty. Carl Heymanns: Cologne.
Sheldon, J. B. (2020) Lunapolitics: Russia’s Roscosmos Signals Openness to US-proposed Artemis Accords. Spacewatch Global. https://spacewatch.global/2020/05/lunapolitics-russias-roscosmos-signals-openness-to-us-proposed-artemis-accords/.
Stimers, P. (2020, April 20). The President’s space resources executive order: A step in the right direction. The Space Review. https://www.thespacereview.com/article/3925/1
Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space,including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. (1967, January 27). 18 U.S.T. 2410,610 U.N.T.S. 205 (entered into force 10 October 1967) (‘Outer Space Treaty’).
von der Dunk, F. (2017). Asteroid mining: International and national legal aspects. Michigan State International Law Review, 26(1), 83.
von der Dunk, F. (2020, June 2). The Artemis Accords and the law: Is the Moon “back in business”? University of Auckland Blog. https://www.thebigq.org/2020/06/02/the-artemis-accords-and-the-law-is-the-moon-back-in-business/
Whittington, M. (2020, April 26). How the United States plans to make space exploration pay. The Hill.
Yakovenko, A. (1999). The intergovernmental agreement on the International Space Station. Space Policy, 15(2), 79–86. ISSN 0265-9646. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0265-9646(99)00011-9.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
de Zwart, M. (2021). To the Moon and Beyond: The Artemis Accords and the Evolution of Space Law. In: de Zwart, M., Henderson, S. (eds) Commercial and Military Uses of Outer Space. Issues in Space. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8924-9_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8924-9_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-15-8923-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-15-8924-9
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)