Astropolitics is Impacting the US Presidential Election

With Elon Musk actively supporting Donald Trump’s campaign, one implication of a Trump victory in the 2024 US presidential election is greater integration of space-based politics (astropolitics) into state interactions and competition. Furthermore, Musk’s involvement is likely to bring non-state actors such as SpaceX into geopolitical relevancy.
The world’s richest person, Elon Musk, is a disruptor. His career and companies have irreverently altered the financial transactions industry, car industry, space industry, telecommunications industry, social media, and now potentially US politics, and, subsequently, international relations—and perchance the future of humanity. He is forcibly implanting astropolitics—the utilisation of outer space by state and non-state actors informed by theories of geopolitics and international relations—into the US presidential race by appealing directly to voters via his X platform and Trump-campaign-endorsing Pennsylvania Town Hall meetings. In addition, Musk has contributed more than US$75 million to political entities that endorse Trump. He has pledged to provide US$47 to every registered voter who endorses his US Constitution-supporting petition, and gift US$1 million per day for one lucky signatory until the election.
This new dynamic of a space promoting billionaire campaigning in a US presidential election requires re-evaluating the relationship between astropolitics and domestic politics, the role of state and non-state space actors, and the potential shift of US policy back to a more realist approach with space being seen as competitive, and hence to be governed through military strength. Correspondingly, Musk’s proposed role as head of the Department of Government Efficiency in a possible Trump administration could impact US governance and space exploration. This may intensify US competitiveness and emphasise the nation’s space supremacy and military capabilities. Thus this election may have consequences for how the US as a major power in space interacts with non-state actors by developing new forms of collaboration, potentially enhancing its own power and denuding liberal governance foundations such as the United Nations Outer Space Treaty of 1967.
Musk’s involvement may also shorten the timelines that traditional state actors have put on space becoming a major geopolitical instrument. The US Air Force Space Command, for example, predicted outer space would only emerge as a crucial domain by 2060. Musk, by contrast, is proposing to launch his Starships to Mars in two years. Other outlandish goals include cities on Mars and a space civilisation. Trump has responded—“Get ready, Elon, get ready”—by promising to put a US astronaut on Mars quickly.
Musk’s Town Hall meetings have a stated core political task: to encourage people to register and then vote early for Trump. Musk’s rationale as to why, however, is unique. Much like John F. Kennedy’s popularised, “We choose to go to the Moon” speech of 12 September 1962, the symbolism is high. Though this time, the message is being delivered by an entrepreneur and business owner. Kennedy’s address, made deep during the Cold War, ignited the 20th-century space race and propelled humanity to the Moon. Musk, seen by many young people—primarily men—as a hero, could play a key role in igniting and accelerating a second space race, particularly against state actors like China. Thus, over 60 years after Kennedy’s presidency, astropolitics is once again playing a role in US politics—with broader implications for international politics—which could sway some younger voters toward Trump. Given how close this election is, it could make a crucial difference.
A politicised Musk has also startled astropolitics theorists. Present theory does not predict or account for the influence of non-state actors over national space policies or their direct involvement in US elections. Realist approaches (like Dolman’s), don’t consider the potential impact of non-state entities such as SpaceX at all. Deudney’s liberal Astropolitik, and the Critical Astropolitics frameworks of Duvall and Havercroft—anchored in liberalism and social constructivism, respectively—recognise the possible influences of non-state actors, although they both lack the capacity to predict the expanded role of non-state actors now being demonstrated by Musk and SpaceX. Recent accomplishments by SpaceX that confound these theoretical approaches include facilitating billionaire entrepreneur Jared Isaacman’s private space mission, and most recently the innovative capture of a Starship rocket booster using mechanical arms—a feat impossible for government agencies such as NASA. As remarkable as these are, they are ultimately underpinned by the corporate requirement to be profitable and indicate that non-state entities such as SpaceX have a vested interest in the outcome of the US presidential election.
From an economic perspective, the World Economic Forum and McKinsey have highlighted the increasing involvement of non-state actors in the space industry, projecting the global space market to attain a US$1.8 trillion value by 2035. This rapidly growing new economy, currently estimated at $630 billion, comparable to the semiconductor industry, hints as to why, beyond the cities on Mars narrative, Musk has such a vested interest in a second Trump presidency. A Trump victory may place SpaceX in an advantageous position within the emerging global space economy and accelerate the human space flight program to Mars. SpaceX would directly benefit through contracts to fulfil Trump’s policies.
Musk clearly prefers a Trump presidency, believing the Democratic Party administration and bureaucracy have prevented flight tests, and arguing that ongoing delays would destroy the Mars program and doom humanity. Thus Musk, once a Democrat supporter, has several reasons to prefer Trump’s space policies. Similarly, Trump has been mending past grievances with Musk and showing admiration, stating: “I respect Elon a lot. He respects me.” For Trump, in a tight presidential race, a one percent swing in the battleground states (including Pennsylvania) delivered by Musk, may be enough to capture the White House and stump democrat candidate Vice-President Kamala Harris.
Thus, a Trump–Musk-led astropolitics future heralds a nationalistic entrepreneurial vision for space with market share and short-term profits assured through bold statements and long-term objectives, such as the exploitation and colonisation of celestial bodies like Mars and Europa. Musk’s stated reasons for becoming politically active also include rationales such as the “fate of Western civilisation” that folds astropolitics into the nationalistic great power contest between the US and China. A Kamala Harris presidency may adopt a more collaborative, liberal Astropolitik, drawing upon the legacies of the Obama and Biden administrations which prioritised collaboration with international partners while striving to uphold US leadership in outer space and expanding state-led programs such as NASA’s Artemis.
Elon Musk becoming politically active, speaking at Town Hall meetings, and providing funding and a space narrative to the Trump campaign shows that for the first time astropolitics is impacting a US presidential election and entering US politics in a way unseen since the space race between the Soviet Union and the US. A Trump–Musk result may change how state actors interact, the role and power of non-state actors, and position a US company, SpaceX, as the dominant global space actor. For theorists and observers, this eventuality would place astropolitics as an indispensable political component of domestic US politics, lift the non-state actor SpaceX, and become part of the contemporary US–China great power competition.
Jonathan Ping is an associate professor of political economy at Bond University and the director of the East Asia Security Centre @DrJHPing
Heaven Elishav is a Master of International Relations student at Bond University.
This article is published under a Creative Commons License and may be republished with attribution.