Context
Recently, the global discourse on lunar governance has intensified following the 65th session of the Legal Subcommittee of the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UNCOPUOS) held in April 2026. The session focused on the urgent need for a transparent and sustainable framework to manage accelerating lunar activities, particularly concerning the extraction of resources like water ice in the Moon’s South Pole.
1. The International Legal Framework
Lunar governance is primarily anchored in the “Five UN Treaties on Outer Space,” with the following being most relevant:
- Outer Space Treaty (1967): Considered the “Magna Carta” of space law. It stipulates that space is the “province of all mankind” and prohibits national appropriation by claim of sovereignty. It forbids the placement of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) on the Moon.
- The Rescue Agreement (1968): Mandates the rescue and return of astronauts (envoys of mankind) in distress.
- Liability Convention (1972): Established that launching states are “absolutely liable” to pay compensation for damage caused by their space objects.
- Registration Convention (1975): Requires states to maintain a registry of objects launched into space.
- The Moon Agreement (1979): Declares the Moon and its resources as the “Common Heritage of Mankind.” It is controversial because it restricts commercial exploitation. India has signed but not ratified this agreement, while major powers like the USA, Russia, and China have not signed it at all.
2. Emerging Blocs: Artemis vs. ILRS
The modern “Space Race” has led to two distinct governance models:
- Artemis Accords (US-led): A non-binding set of principles for civil space exploration. India became a signatory in 2023. Key features include “Safety Zones” (to prevent harmful interference) and the affirmation that extracting lunar resources does not constitute national appropriation.
- International Lunar Research Station (ILRS) (China-Russia led): A rival mission aimed at building a permanent lunar base. It emphasizes a “multipolar” governance model and invites global partners, primarily from the Global South.
3. Key Governance Concepts for Prelims
- In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU): The practice of collecting, processing, and using materials found on the Moon (like water ice for oxygen/fuel) to support missions. Legal ambiguity exists whether ISRU violates the “non-appropriation” principle of the 1967 Treaty.
- Safety Zones: Areas established around lunar bases to prevent “harmful interference” from other nations’ activities. Critics argue these could become “de facto” territorial claims.
- Space Situational Awareness (SSA): The monitoring of space debris and traffic. With the Moon becoming crowded, SSA is vital for “Lunar Traffic Management.”
4. India’s Lunar Roadmap
- Indian Space Policy 2023: Encourages Non-Government Entities (NGEs) to participate in end-to-end space activities, including lunar exploration.
- Space Vision 2047:
- Bharatiya Antariksh Station (BAS): India’s own space station by 2035.
- Crewed Moon Landing: Targeted for 2040.
- Chandrayaan-4: A mission designed to demonstrate docking/undocking and lunar sample return capabilities.
Q. With reference to International Lunar Governance, consider the following statements:
1. The Outer Space Treaty of 1967 explicitly permits nations to claim sovereignty over lunar regions rich in water ice.
2. India is a signatory to the Artemis Accords but has not ratified the Moon Agreement of 1979.
3. The "Safety Zones" concept under the Artemis Accords is a legally binding provision under the UN Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA).
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 only
(c) 2 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2, and 3
Correct Answer: B
Solution:
• STATEMENT 1 IS INCORRECT: The Outer Space Treaty (1967) prohibits national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, occupation, or any other means. No nation can claim ownership of the Moon or its regions.
• STATEMENT 2 IS CORRECT: India signed the Artemis Accords in June 2023. While India is a signatory to the Moon Agreement (1979), it has never ratified it, which allows India more flexibility regarding future lunar resource utilization.
• STATEMENT 3 IS INCORRECT: The Artemis Accords are a non-binding political commitment, not a legally binding treaty under UNOOSA. While they aim to implement OST principles, they do not have the status of international law.
