Artemis II is about exploration, but a space program is more than what the public watched. The US uses all facets of its space program to build the future it wants in space.
What is the value of a space program? This is the perennial question anytime space is in the public eye. Artemis II is America’s answer. Space is not just about sending four astronauts beyond low Earth orbit for the first time since 1972, but it is also about what the United States means when it says it is the preeminent space power. Yet, Artemis II is a political statement unto itself, not all of which is controlled by the Trump Administration’s narrative.
The US has shifted its ways of working with its international partners, often focusing on a transactional foreign policy. Domestically, the Trump Administration has rejected initiatives which celebrate diversity and inclusion, but in watching NASA’s coverage of the mission, you would see an endorsement of the value these initiatives bring to the table. The crew included the first woman, the first person of colour, and the first non-American to leave Earth’s orbit. They were unabashed in their joy for the Moon and their passion for the mission. They were religious and not religious. They declared they were a mirror reflecting humanity, and the world watched.
In Australia, according to YouGov, 54 per cent of adults watched coverage of the Artemis II launch, 16 per cent of whom watched it live. These numbers were not a surprise; we know that Australians pay more attention to NASA than their own space agency. This is not a coincidence; NASA is careful about its brand and its image. They are also intentional about the benefit it brings to its constituencies – NASA is often referred to as a “jobs program” – and while some see that negatively, it is an effective way to ensure ongoing Congressional support.
The Artemis program demonstrates the bipartisan commitment the US space sector enjoys in Congress as well as the path-dependent nature of the future of space exploration. The broad strokes of the deep space exploration goals set in 2005 by President George W. Bush with the Constellation program, along with its crew vehicle, Orion, carry through in today’s Artemis program. In this way, Congress acts as a caretaker of US space policy priorities once set.
The Artemis program is a reflection of the United States’ priorities in space beyond civil space exploration. Returning to the surface of the Moon is not just about recapturing the glory of the Apollo days, but about ensuring the United States remains in control of the space domain. While the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 prevents territorial claims in space, the US, through the Artemis Accords, seeks to clarify and operationalise the Outer Space Treaty and how its language allows for “exclusion zones” around active activities, experiments, or equipment. The US could use a permanent scientific lunar outpost to leverage this concept and ensure continued access to lunar resources in a race to the Moon with China.
A space race is not a bad thing. The first race to the Moon yielded incredible benefits back on Earth. Our human endeavours in space are inherently political, so we must consider politics in our exploration calculus. While the US views itself as the unqualified leader in space, it considers international cooperation non-negotiable in its deep-space exploration goals. Space is hard and expensive; we cannot go beyond low Earth orbit without international support. Australia has been a valued partner to the US in deep space exploration since the very beginning, ensuring the world could see astronaut Neil Armstrong’s giant leap.
Another benefit of international cooperation is the consensus built around norms in space, which establish the rules of the road for an increasingly competitive and congested domain. Soon after the launch of Sputnik 1 in 1957, President Eisenhower recognised the importance of space as a military domain. The US has relied on space for its military operations for decades, and it is not alone. China, maintaining the same peaceful rhetoric the US employs around its military uses of space, has built its own arsenal of space weapons. Conflict in space has its own unique set of problems; debris is one of them. It is estimated that destructive anti-satellite tests have resulted in approximately 4,300 trackable debris and an unknown amount of debris less than 10cm, which cannot be tracked.
Earth needs responsible actors in space, and Australia is in a unique position to help shape humanity’s use of it. Australians are concerned about the environment and the lack of oversight when it comes to space. Not only are we party to the Moon Agreement, but we are a partner in Moon exploration through the Artemis program. Australia can use this unique position to push for clear governance and regulation of activities on the Moon as we provide support to missions there.
The success and international recognition of the Artemis II mission should be a message to the Australian government. While we will never have the space budget that the US does, we do have an interested public who wants to see more sovereign capabilities in space. The 2026 National Defence Strategy includes $9-12 billion over the next decade for space capabilities. Our commercial sector is ready to partner with the government. Yet, we lack a national space policy to unite efforts across the sector.
The US has maintained its superiority in space not only because of its investment in the sector but because it has a clear vision of where it wants to be. From President John F. Kennedy, Jr. declaring “We choose to go to the Moon” to Artemis taking humanity farther away from Earth than it has ever been, the US knows its place in space.
Artemis II is home, but Australia is still on the launch pad. It is time we took off.
Dr Kathryn Robison is a Lecturer at the United States Studies Centre and a Senior Research Fellow at the Australasian Centre for Space Governance (ACSG). She holds a PhD in Political Science and specialises in the role of political communication in the formation and dissemination of US space policy at both domestic and international levels. Dr Robison’s research spans political communication, behaviour, and public opinion, and she co-authored the first comprehensive survey of Australian public opinion on space. She is currently writing a book on political communication in space and continuing her public opinion research on space.
This article is published under a Creative Commons License and may be republished with attribution.
