Selene, hold, mēness, kuu, qamar, Luna. Despite being known by many names, the moon is the midnight sentinel that stands high above us all. As CEOs and States turn spaceward, looking avariciously upon the moon’s abundance of mineral wealth, as Europe’s own ESA announces its intention to establish a permanent presence on our celestial guardian, and with the recent Russo-Luxemburgish declaration of intent to begin lunar mining, many questions arise. First among them, is it time for Europe to act and stake its claim on our natural satellite? Could the Moon be Europe’s?
In short, probably not quite; but maybe. To give a less maddeningly useless answer and explain the apparent contradiction, we must address three barriers to possible European Lunar hegemony: the practical, the legal, and the socio-political.
Practical Considerations
Perhaps surprisingly, the practical obstacles to European Lunar expansion are in fact the weakest. The technology to reach the moon has been around for over half a century, and the technology for establishing a permanent base in hostile non-terrestrial environments has been operating since 2000. No serious claims remain that humanity does not have the capability for long term lunar colonisation, as we have had the capability for decades.
How much would it cost to return to the moon and establish a permanent base? Far less than you would expect. Projections based on current technology estimate that it would cost as little as €8.8 billion. To put that in perspective, it’s just over the standing European Space Agency’s operational budget for two years, or less than the budget surplus of Germany for one year. This, remember, is a projection based on existing technology.
Therefore, with a budget of €10 billion (to round out the edges a little) Europe, via the ESA or a different body, could begin a mission to establish a permanent lunar outpost and realistically aim to complete it before the end of the 20s. Establishing a permanent settlement, not just a moon base, would obviously require an intense increase in both monetary backing and material support. Estimations of the budgetary expansion to realise this vary between €22 and €44 billion, and that is assuming there are no setbacks or disasters in the process.
The benefits of a colony on the Moon
For Europe to have anything more than a passing influence on humanity’s future on the moon, this transition from permanent outpost to fully fledged settlement is necessary, and this large increase in budget appears to pose a threat to the plan, but this need not be the case. This larger budget would be spread out over a much larger expanse of time, and it would therefore be possible to ramp up spending much slower than the initial investment of ~€10 billion required to get the project off the ground (pardon the pun).
Additionally, these estimations don’t take into account the possibility of moon-based industries growing to take over the majority of the burden of construction and expansion. The moon would be able to meet its own energy requirements easily, a longer exposure to sunlight and an absence of atmosphere to dilute the suns energy would provide a Lunar colony with ample power.
What’s more, the resources for construction are plentiful on the moon; its mineral composition is very similar to Earth’s, owing to their historical nature as one single celestial body. With power and material resources aplenty, a lunar colony could begin its own expansion with minimal additional input. Therefore, it is very possible to affordably fund the development of not only a permanent moon base, fit for research and staging, but also a self-sufficient lunar colony within the next few decades.
The practical opportunities this would afford not only Europe, but mankind generally, are astounding. Due to the moons near insignificant gravity (compared to Earth), a lunar settlement would be the perfect staging ground for further expansion into the solar system. Ships could be constructed and launched from the moon with far greater ease than from the surface of the Earth. Moon based materials could be broken down into fuel for these ships, further minimising the cost as fuel won’t need to be shipped from earth, and less will be expended leaving the gravity well of the moon. This ease of departure will also make viable the future exploitation of the moon’s resources for transport to Earth.
In conclusion then, the cost and practical capabilities barriers to a European Lunar base or even fully-fledged colony are realistically surmountable; and the possible advantages innumerable. For a manageable initial and scaling further investment, Europe could be the first power to truly establish a presence on the moon, but it must act quickly if that is to be the case. Why then have no plans to that effect been put in motion? For an answer, one must look to the two other barriers to lunar colonisation, the legal and the socio-political.
Legal Considerations
Whether Europe practically can make it to the moon and establish a presence there and whether it legally can are very different issues. While eminently possible practically, there are legal obstacles. The first is the question of if it is legally possible for a State, or a group of States, to claim territory on the moon. Unfortunately, the law in this area is contested, and the answer depends on the recognition of treaty law.
Established space law is centred around the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, or Outer Space Treaty for short. 109 nations are party to the Outer Space Treaty, including all major space operating nations and members of the ESA, and it is binding international treaty law. Its central obligations prohibit the use, development, or deployment of Weapons of Mass Destruction, such as nuclear weapons, in Space.
Regarding the moon, Article IV ensures that States make use of it and other celestial bodies only for peaceful purposes, and prohibits weapons testing, establishing military facilities or defences, or conducting military exercises. So far so simple, Europe can establish a territorial claim on the moon for colonisation, it just can’t turn it into an orbiting battle station or nuclear-armed Death Star, right? No, this is where it gets a bit muddier.
There is another essential international treaty that relates directly to the use and ownership of the moon, known eloquently as the Moon Treaty, verbosely as the Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. This treaty prohibits any State from making claims of sovereignty upon the surface of the moon or any other celestial body and establishes international jurisdiction over them. This does not mean that the EU or ESA could not make territorial claims however. The Moon treaty may be law, but it is failed law. Only 18 states are party to it – none of them major powers with a history of unilateral space launches or manned space missions, nor are the majority of ESA members party to it.
This does not mean, however, that European Lunar plans can simply disregard the treaty. The Netherlands, Austria, and Belgium are parties to the treaty, and France and Romania are signatories. How can a European mission lay claim to lunar territory when a quarter of ESA members support the Moon Treaty’s prohibition of such claims, and the ESA’s primary launch facility is in French territory? Claiming lunar territory would also doubtless spur other space powers to do the same, and encourage a scramble for lunar territory.
What could be a way around this is the construction of facilities without claiming the territory upon which the facilities stand. The treaties only prevent individuals or corporate entities from owning property on celestial bodies, not States or intergovernmental organisations. By claiming ownership of the facility itself, of the rooms, landing pads, launch facilities, or even the oxygen-nitrogen mix that fills its corridors, Europe would not be in violation of treaties against territorial claims.
If Europe were the first entity to truly throw its weight into the lunar colonisation effort, then a European colony would no doubt be an essential staging point for minor powers or companies that intend to establish a presence on the moon. The profit from leasing out access to European built Lunar facilities could be an invaluable way of helping fund European colonisation efforts. The Moon Treaty’s prohibition of exclusive exploitation of celestial bodies by individual states could be circumvented this way too.
Minerals from the Moon used to construct a base that is open for use by all would not be in contravention of the Common Heritage of Mankind Principle, which holds that extra-terrestrial advances should be for all of humanity, not just for national gain. In this way, Europe can establish itself on the Moon, begin exploration, research and local construction, all without alienating members of the ESA, violating any international law, or exacerbating tensions with rival space powers. All that is left then, is to establish the political will to make this step.
Socio-Political Considerations
Spending money isn’t that popular right now, in fact it’s very much frowned upon. As Europeans struggle to feed their families or find jobs, investing tens of billions of euros into extra-terrestrial colonisation may seem a waste of money, and an out-of-touch political move.
This is one of the main reasons why space programmes have been scaled back everywhere in the world: a lack of public appetite. It is this same lack of appetite that is one of the largest obstacles to European lunar colonisation. The public don’t always appreciate long-term investments for the boons they are, and politicians tend not to like spending vast sums on political projects when they or their party might not be in power to oversee their completion. This lack of ability to plan long term is one of the advantages that autocratic regimes such as China have over Europe in this regard, they can just power ahead regardless of public support or lack thereof.
Therefore, if Europe is serious about actualising its extra-terrestrial ambitions, there must be a concerted effort made to unite the people of Europe behind such a move. Public information campaigns about the long-term benefits, monetary and otherwise, must be launched. Schoolchildren must be taught of the benefits and curriculums must in part be space-oriented and future-considering. Perhaps even more so, the move to the stars should be utilised to create pan-European sentiment, and a pride in concrete achievements in the present rather than claims to glory in the past.
If this is not done, then few politicians would ever bother championing such a cause, and national or left-populist politicians could claim that lunar colonisation is nothing more than a vainglorious vanity project of EU officials, and a waste of money that should go to either their people or “the” people – a situation that would be dangerous to more than just European lunar ambitions.
Geopolitical Considerations
One cannot ignore the inevitable geopolitical considerations that come with this move too. European expansion on the moon beyond a small scientific outpost would doubtless lead to tensions with other aspirant extra-terrestrial coloniser States or groups, and this would be especially true if the European lunar effort were to make illegal territorial claims on its surface. While no major independently spacefaring States support the Moon Treaty and its prohibition of territorial claims on the Moon, were they to be beaten to the punch in the race to colonise the Moon they would be highly incentivised to sign and ratify it to impede European headway.
Colonial tensions arising from competing claims on the Moon could spill over into trade conflict or diplomatic disputes on Earth as well; there is ample historical evidence for the argument that colonial competition elsewhere can cause conflict even war at home. Wanting to avoid such a series of conflicts, be they diplomatic, legal, economic, or military, could lead European leaders to put Lunar ambitions on hold indefinitely.
This is an issue that could be avoided by following the idea presented earlier to forego territorial claims in favour of establishing an outpost on land held in common for all humanity. Rival colonial powers would have little incentive to act against European actions if they were able to take advantage of European facilities, and would have no legitimacy in their contesting of European action. Europe therefore could maintain high legal standards, and keep other space-powers on side, reducing political reluctance to begin colonial expansion.
Finally, and not at all least, there is also the sting of the word ‘colonisation’, and Europe’s, to put it gently, unfortunate history with it. Every Western European country had a colonial enterprise of one size or another, and grave atrocities were committed in the name of European colonialism. While there are no Lunar natives that would be killed or exploited, there are still ethical issues around how it is we would conduct ourselves beyond Earth. Some have critiqued for-profit colonisation of the Moon or Mars, or opposed extra-terrestrial colonisation entirely, arguing that colonisation could perpetuate humanity’s worst traits of exploitation of colonial labour, destruction of natural environment, and result in, with time, large numbers of disenfranchised, democratically unrepresented colonial people.
However, this cautionary attitude should be seen as a boon not an obstacle. Mindful of our collective previous shame, we Europeans can ensure that we hold ourselves to a higher standard. Colonists would not be sent off to die in the hopes that enough survive long enough for the colony to stick, they would be cared for and supported in recognition of the momentous task and sacrifice they have undertaken. Democratic rights could be granted to colonial entities from the very outset, either enfranchising them back on Earth or establishing power-holding democratic organs in the colony. By learning from our previous mistakes, a European colonisation effort could in fact be a model for good governance, respect for rights, and democracy. A bastion of Europe not only physically, but morally and ideologically too.
The Shortish Answer
So, could the moon be Europe’s? Not really, not exclusively, no. Practically speaking, efforts to establish a European presence on the moon would be entirely possible within the next couple of decades. There are legal obstacles, but not totally prohibitive ones. There are socio-political barriers, but not insurmountable ones. All that is needed is the political will to accept the challenge, and the rest is possible. Furthermore, the effort to make it so, the enterprise of settling her surface together as Europeans, taming the harshest environment humans ever have with each other, fighting for a true pan-European future not just on Earth but throughout our solar system, could just give us a Europe finally and truly united in a purpose. That alone would be reason enough to try.
