It was a simple pledge made amid the excitement of a landmark moment in space exploration: “We go together,” Bill Nelson, the head of Nasa, promised the world as the agency prepared to launch Artemis 1, its first moon-capable rocket in more than half a century.
Now, nearly two years on from that successful uncrewed mission, and as the US – despite delays – edges ever closer to placing humans on the lunar surface for the first time since 1972, the resonance of Nelson’s message has become clear.
Nasa has matched its giant leaps in space with less prominent, but equally significant, smaller steps on the ground, signing up almost a quarter of the world’s nations to the Artemis Accords, a global alliance setting guiding principles for the peaceful future exploration of deep space.
The expansion of its diplomatic reach has quickened significantly in recent months, with 12 of the now 45 signatories joining since January. Estonia became the most recent this week, at the International Astronautical Congress, the world’s largest space conference in Milan, and Nelson is spending his weekend in Bulgaria and Romania, two more members of what he calls the Artemis generation, talking with space and government officials.
A diverse range of partners will be crucial, experts say, to Nasa’s plans to land a crew, including the first woman and first person of color on the moon, in 2026, and its longer-range ambitions for reaching Mars. Prior collaboration between nations spawned the international space station, but the scale of the Artemis project is unprecedented.
“This is the US facilitating a global effort to ensure that, with Artemis, we’re not just building better technology, but building a better future,” said Michael Gold, a former Nasa associate administrator for space policy and partnerships and who led its office of international and interagency relations.
“At their core, the Artemis Accords are a preemptive strike against conflict and to ensure we have a peaceful future. As we crafted them, we wanted to ensure they were as inclusive as possible, that any nation which wanted to support responsible, safe and sustainable exploration could do so.
“It’s important that we not only take our astronauts to space, but we launch our values of peace, respect for the rule of law, of open science, of sustainable activities. That’s what the accords represent, and that’s something the US, or any one nation, cannot conduct or succeed in on their own.”
Notably absent from the list of signatories are China and Russia, who are working together on a proposed international lunar research station (ILRS) for the moon’s south pole by 2035. Nelson has warned China is masking its military ambitions in space through a civilian program, and many observers see the country’s call for 50 countries, including western nations, to join the ILRS project, as a direct challenge to the Artemis Accords.
Gold, now chief growth officer at Redwire, a Florida-based leading supplier of infrastructure for the commercial space industry, sees more subtle messaging in the Nasa approach.
“Space is inherently global. There is more that unites us than separates us, for signatories and non-signatories of the accords alike,” he said.
“Remember the accords were designed to be a beginning of a discussion, not an ending. They have been tremendously effective in creating momentum for the dialog and norms of behavior in venues like the United Nations involving China and Russia.
“And because the accords have been signed by 45 nations, if any nation acts in a fashion that is counter to their values, you’ve at least created a context where those kinds of activities would be condemned and viewed as breaking what is quickly becoming traditional international law.
“So even for nations that haven’t signed, the accords are having a substantive and real effect. You can’t force any country to sign, but what we can do is lead by example, show what good looks like, and I believe that has a non-trivial impact.”
Giovanni Zanalda, director of Duke University’s Rethinking Diplomacy Program and co-founder of its Space Diplomacy Lab, said Nasa has been particularly successful in attracting smaller countries with no previously apparent interest in space.
“Some don’t have space capabilities yet but are interested and excited about joining, to be part of a dialog,” he said.
“Even small countries realize they depend on assets in space, satellite data and images for different reasons, agriculture, weather related issues, checking on deforestation trends. So even countries you would not have thought two years ago were so interested in space and the moon, it’s a different situation, it’s a very different world.”
Zanalda said the growth of the private space industry, from large players such as SpaceX to smaller start-ups vying for a share, has made the market more global, which, he believes, has fueled the urgency for internationally accepted principles.
“Certain governments are investing more and more in these activities, which makes sense because so much of our daily lives, whether we’re in the US, Italy, Rwanda or the Philippines, depends on assets in space. That’s why some of the discussions now are about future rules and regulations for certain activities,” he said.
“The goal of getting back to the moon is close, and the technology, the scientific knowledge, the training, is there, in terms of both astronauts and in terms of private companies that are able to deliver whatever they need to deliver on the moon.
“So the urgency is there. The rapid increase in the number of countries joining the accords, as well as the geographical spread, are the result of the steady diplomatic leg work done by Nasa, the state department and other US government agencies over the last couple of years.
“Personally, I see the accords, as well as other diplomatic initiatives, as a practical approach to tackle present and future global challenges. [There’s a] need for flexible diplomacy.”