Can the United States succeed in landing on the moon "enclosure"?
[Global Times reporter Cheng Xiaoran Aoki Qupei Li Sikun] Last week, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) announced the signing of agreements with the space agencies of seven countries including Australia, Canada, and Japan. These countries will participate in the new moon landing program of the United States. Themis".
Earlier, the United States had declared that it planned to work with "like-minded" countries to formulate a space legal framework that regulates lunar mining. Now it can be regarded as an important step.
Many commentators claimed that the United States set a new course for setting rules for the moon landing, which is a naked hegemonic act. It set aside the "small circle" created by the United Nations and caused "space NATO" concerns. The agreement contains the content of "safe zone" and the use of space resources. It makes the outside world worry that the United States is trying to "enclose" the moon first-the United States has a tradition in engaging in foreign expansion.
Data map: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) released a photo showing that the core components of the US moon rocket, the Space Launch System (SLS), were moved to Building 110 of the Michod Assembly Plant in New Orleans, Louisiana.
Why don't a group of key countries join?
"Why do so many countries refuse to sign this moon exploration agreement?" The Australian "Dialogue" website published an article on the 19th, saying that the US "Artemis Agreement" has been signed by 8 countries, and the goal of related plans is to achieve manned moon landing by 2024. , Build a lunar base in 2030.
"This sounds like an improvement. For many years, countries have been struggling with how to deal with human settlement on the moon and resource management. However, a number of key countries have serious concerns about the agreement and have refused to sign it so far."
The name of this agreement is taken from the moon goddess Artemis in Greek mythology.
The agreement has 10 principles, including peaceful purposes, transparent behavior, emergency assistance, sharing scientific data, and avoiding conflicts in activities.
The United States claims that the agreement "consolidates and implements" the principles of the Outer Space Treaty (also known as the "Space Constitution") that came into effect in 1967, but the latter explicitly prohibits countries from claiming sovereignty over other planets, the "Artemis Agreement" It allows countries or companies to create exclusive "safe zones" on the moon base.
In addition, although the agreement does not clearly stipulate that countries and companies can own materials obtained from other planets, NASA announced on September 10 this year that it is looking for companies to collect rocks and soil from the surface of the moon.
NASA Administrator Bridenstine wrote on Twitter that the agency "will purchase lunar soil through commercial companies! Now is the time to establish regulatory certainty to mine and trade space resources."
NASA expects to pay between $15,000 and $25,000 for 50 to 500 grams of raw materials, but not to pay for the company's arrival on the moon.
In fact, the United States has been taking action to promote companies and countries to exploit and occupy space resources.
In 2015, U.S. President Obama signed the "U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competition Act" to clarify the private property rights of space resources and encourage U.S. companies to develop asteroid resources.
In April of this year, US President Trump signed an executive order "Encouraging International Support for the Extraction and Utilization of Space Resources", stating that outer space is a "unique area of human activity" whether "legally or physically" and the United States does not regard it as "Global Public Domain".
But for other countries, the US actions are selfish and very destructive.
Many media clearly mentioned that China and Russia are not in the small circle dominated by the United States.
Rogozin, president of the Russian National Aerospace Corporation, recently stated bluntly that the "Artemis" plan is "too centered on the United States" and Russia will not participate.
As for China, as the US Congress banned NASA from cooperating with China, it was naturally excluded.
It is worth noting that Germany, France and other countries did not participate.
Some media said that they oppose the U.S. method of setting space rules without the United Nations.
The 2015 U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competition Act of the United States once caused negative effects among allies.
"We will review the US agreement verbatim." Jan Werner, the head of the German European Space Agency, said recently.
Many years ago, he proposed the concept of "International Moon Village" that "should be open to all countries."
The German weekly "Focus" also published an article that raised several questions. For example, the agreement conflicts with international law, especially the concept of "safe zone"; the US space force is not restricted by the agreement, and the so-called cooperative activities are all under the leadership of the United States; the agreement is with If the United States signs, if there is a disagreement, the signatories will have no independent institutions to seek help.
Chinese aerospace technology expert Huang Zhicheng said in an interview with the "Global Times" reporter that by comparing the "Artemis Agreement" with the existing space law provisions, and then judging the ideas embodied and possible impact, there are reasons to believe that, The agreement may intensify a new round of space races focusing on the development of the moon and celestial bodies, intensify the game of interpretation and formulation of international rules for space resources, and the international community’s divergence of positions on existing and due international space laws.
The advantages and variables of the U.S. plan
A few days ago, NASA announced that it had signed contracts worth more than 370 million U.S. dollars with 14 companies to seek potentially revolutionary space technologies, including space testing of cryogenic technology and lunar 4GLTE networks.
Among them, Lockheed Martin won the largest contract ($89.7 million).
On the 19th, Nokia said that the company has won a NASA contract to build the first wireless communication system in space.
According to reports, the contract value is 14.1 million US dollars.
NASA chose to cooperate with Nokia to deploy a wireless 4G network on the surface of the moon. The latter will cooperate with the US private spacecraft design company "Intuition Machine" to transport equipment to the moon.
If all goes well, the network will be completed by the end of 2022.
According to NASA's plan, sending astronauts to the moon in 4 years is only a short-term plan. The long-term goal of the "Artemis Project" is to establish a permanent base in the lunar orbit and the lunar surface and prepare for Mars missions.
So, how feasible is the plan?
Sufficient funds, advanced technical support and good international cooperation are indispensable elements.
It is estimated that the new moon landing plan in the United States will require a total of 27.97 billion US dollars from fiscal year 2021 to fiscal year 2025.
Bridenstine said at the end of September that NASA must ensure that the lunar lander and giant rocket are in place next year.
He asked Congress to secure $3.2 billion in the 2021 budget for lunar lander development, but currently the House of Representatives has only approved a $600 million budget.
At the end of April this year, NASA announced that it had selected Bezos' "Blue Origin", Musk's "SpaceX" and "Power Systems" to jointly develop a manned lunar lander system, and signed a contract with a total value of US$967 million.
On June 1, SpaceX’s spacecraft successfully sent NASA astronauts to the International Space Station, changing the dependence on the Russian Soyuz spacecraft for the previous nine years.
In terms of international cooperation, NASA emphasized through the agreement that the cooperating countries must ensure that spacecraft construction meets international interoperability standards and provide reusable components.
Currently, among the partners, the Canadian Space Agency will provide advanced robots, the European Space Agency will deliver the international housing module and the ESPRIT module that can provide additional communication capabilities, and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency plans to provide housing components and logistics supplies.
Huang Zhicheng said that technically speaking, the United States has certain advantages, and the United States has sent astronauts to the moon.
During the Bush era, he proposed a "return to the moon" plan. After Obama took office, he thought he had been to the moon, so he focused his goal on Mars.
The Trump administration has also aimed at the development of the moon, but this time in preparation for further exploration and development of Mars.
At present, the United States has made the necessary technical preparations.
However, the current US new crown epidemic is serious and the economy is greatly affected. There is uncertainty about whether the financial support for NASA can be maintained.
Huang Zhicheng said that the United States has spent a lot of money and manpower to "return to the moon." After more than ten years, it is still difficult to reach the level of the "Apollo Project" that year.
It stands to reason that cooperation with Russia and China is an effective way to reduce technological risks and concentrate funds. However, the United States excludes China and Russia, especially China, which will intensify the space race.
Li Haidong, a professor at the Institute of International Relations of the China Foreign Affairs University, mentioned to a reporter from the Global Times that if the United States wants to "enclose" on the moon, it will inevitably spend a lot of money. Where does the money come from?
Under the American system, it is very difficult for the president to allocate funds in a word. If a large amount of funds are not used at home, but behaved overseas, or even used for lunar enclosures, they may eventually face backlash from domestic dissatisfaction. .
Some analysts say that another variable in the US's new moon landing plan is the US election. Compared with Trump’s eagerness to see Americans landing on the moon in 2024, his opponent Biden’s policy propositions are still unclear, and Biden may not be clear. 2024 will be regarded as the deadline for the moon landing.
Should space activities reflect "American values"?
"This time we will not just leave the flags and footprints, and then wait until 50 years later and then go back." NASA Administrator Bridentins said last year, "We will continue, landers, robots, space rover and people will Stay.” After signing the Artemis Agreement this time, he talked about a “peaceful and conflict-free future”, but not many people would agree.
Li Haidong told the "Global Times" reporter that the United States' foreign behavior has a strong ideological color, and those countries whose ideology and values are inconsistent with the United States will be naturally identified as opponents or enemies.
The US presupposes rules and divides exclusive areas in some new areas of the "global commons", which firstly reflects its expansion.
Since independence, the United States has expanded from land expansion to ocean expansion, and then to space expansion. It has also given different labels and meanings at different stages: when the land expansion was carried out in the 19th century, the "destiny theory" was popular; at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century During the expansion, the so-called "new destiny" was advocated; during the expansion of outer space in the 20th century, the "high frontier" strategy was also proposed.
Ironically, the American hawks conjecture that China "occupies the moon."
According to a report in the US National Defense Monthly, in February this year, US Congressman Doug Lamberney claimed that although China stated that it will build a base on the moon for civilian purposes, they undoubtedly have military ideas and intend to occupy the moon.
American scholar Brian Vuitton said that many experts and officials in the United States have long advocated that the United States should be more ambitious in the field of space. "Now they are trying to say:'Look, China is doing this. Therefore, we have to do it first. ."
In fact, as the chief executive of Trump’s space policy, Scott Pace, the executive secretary of the National Space Council, made it clear that he has always opposed treating outer space as a “global public domain” and has repeatedly stated that the United States’ Space activities should reflect "our values and not just technology."
Now, the key is how to respond.
The Russian "Izvestia" stated that it is not feasible to stop acting after the protest, and the problem of commercial development of the moon and other celestial bodies has become very acute.
The problem with Russia is that there is neither strong international support nor celestial projects available.
Therefore, either recognize the "right of the strong" and join the trend of commercialization of space, or make some suggestions to balance the competition with the United States.
Russia prefers the latter.
Rogozin jokingly stated on the 14th, "There is an "Artemis Agreement". As we all know, Artemis is a Greek goddess. We are now preparing for the "Zeus Amendment." Rogozin criticized the United States for "not looking at their projects." The work is an international project, but a project similar to NATO."
He also said that Chinese and Russian scientists have maintained close communication on the lunar exploration project, and that China and Russia may establish a joint base on the moon in the future.
The European side has its own plan.
The European Space Agency approved a "highest in history" budget of 14.4 billion euros last year, which aims to ensure that Europe can independently enter and use space in the 1920s and make breakthrough discoveries in space exploration.
In addition, the major EU countries also have separate budgets, with Germany spending extra 285 million euros and France spending 726 million euros.
Many commercial organizations in Europe are also participating in the space program, including Airbus and the German OHB satellite manufacturing company.
Huang Zhicheng told the "Global Times" reporter that the "Artemis Agreement" lacks necessary international community participation and discussion, and some of its views will bring challenges to the follow-up international community, especially discussions within the UN framework.
"The signing of the agreement by the eight countries this time highlights the ambition of the United States to dominate outer space. We must both be vigilant and make necessary legal preparations."
In Li Haidong's view, it is undoubtedly necessary to maintain proper vigilance with regard to the United States' lunar exploration program, because in the competition between major powers, if another country takes the lead in a certain field, it will be very difficult to catch up from behind.
On the other hand, he believes that we should also be alert to some so-called strategists in the United States trying to use this to draw China and Russia into the space arms race with the United States.
"What we need to do next is to vigorously advocate the international community's rejection of this American-style, antagonistic sphere of influence practice in the international commons, and form an international consensus in public opinion that the global commons is formulated by the United Nations-led rules.