The UN's Lunar Treaty is still unsigned by the space powers, leaving the moon unprotected by law
LAST week, NASA bombed the moon. Or rather, it crashed its Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite into the moon's south pole in a bid to discover reserves of water and other resources.
This was the latest in a veritable flurry of moon missions: between 2007 and 2011 there will have been eight: one from Japan, two from China, one from India, one from Russia and three from the US.
The race back to the moon has been prompted by the realisation that exploiting it may now be within reach. And it poses the question: who gets to use the moon's recoverable resources, such as oxygen or water?
This could be resolved through negotiation, as space scientists happily lodging their instruments in foreign spacecraft hope. But the Lunar Treaty drafted by the United Nations in the 1990s has still not been signed by the space powers. Since this leaves the moon unprotected by law - the ultimate terra nullius - we may now see a scramble for territory.
History shows that the first step is colonisation and - the pressing issue - staking a claim. Thanks to the explorers Amundsen, Scott and the early sealers, the UK and Norway now claim about one-sixth of Antarctica each. So we may be witnessing a slow-motion reworking of the Antarctica story in which lunar exploration lays the ground for claims.
We are already witnessing the same mix of challenge, bravado, inquiry and national enthusiasm, suffused with dreams of empire and wealth that spurred the Antarctic race. Plus, there's fear. "Whoever first conquers the moon will benefit first," as Ouyang Ziyuan, chief scientist of China's moon exploration programme, once told the BBC.
This potent cocktail can be used by scientists to win support for bigger, more aggressive national programmes. It is a long, expensive game but that never prevented it from being played out in the Antarctic for almost a century, and there are potential rewards to match.
When I put these ideas to David Parker, head of space science and exploration at the British National Space Centre, he called them Machiavellian. Perhaps he should recall that Machiavelli's Prince is the ultimate guide to realpolitik.
Source: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20427306.000-the-moon-belongs-to-no-one--yet.html
