Additionally, the lunar surface holds abundant Helium-3, while the polar regions contain significant amounts of ice that can be processed into rocket fuel. Ultimately, the drive to harvest these invaluable resources lies at the heart of the space mineral race. Currently, alongside government agencies like NASA and CNSA , private entities such as SpaceX, Blue Origin, and various startups are the primary drivers of this competition. Under the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, no nation can claim exclusive ownership of any planet or satellite in space. However, countries like the United States, China, and Luxembourg have enacted laws granting their domestic companies ownership and sales rights over resources retrieved from space. This has sparked geopolitical tensions and legal disputes on the international stage, particularly concerning the Moon and its orbit. The Moon is Earth's only natural satellite and our closest celestial neighbor in space; it possesses no light of its own. It appears bright by reflecting sunlight. The Moon completes one orbit around the Earth in approximately 27.3 days, rotating once on its own axis during the same period. Meanwhile, a lunar orbit refers to the specific elliptical path in space along which an object such as the Moon itself, or an artificial satellite or spacecraft sent towards it travels while circling the Moon, held by its gravitational pull. Collectively, the Moon and its orbit are referred to as the lunar system. The issue of "legal ambiguity" regarding resource ownership in the lunar system primarily stems from a lack of clear space laws; this has sparked intense international debate over whether a nation or private company can claim personal ownership of lunar minerals or other resources. When current international space laws were drafted, humanity lacked the technology to conduct mining operations or commercially extract resources on the Moon. Consequently, a significant disconnect has emerged between these outdated laws and the realities of the modern-day space race. Several factors contribute to this legal ambiguity, notably the vagueness of the "Outer Space Treaty of 1967" and the failure of the "Moon Agreement of 1979." While these treaties prohibit the appropriation of lunar territory, they fail to clearly specify who owns resources such as gold, water, or Helium-3 extracted from the lunar surface. Another agreement posits that lunar resources are the heritage of all humanity and should be shared equally among nations; however, major powers like the United States, Russia, and China have not signed it. China and Russia argue that the concept of "safety zones" is essentially an indirect method of seizing lunar land, which violates the spirit of the agreement; as a result, it has not yet come into force internationally. In 2015, the United States enacted the "U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act," which grants U.S. citizens the legal right to own and sell resources extracted from the Moon or asteroids. Unchecked competition to claim resources on the Moon and in lunar orbit could have severe negative consequences for humanity and the space environment. It is crucial to formulate a new, rigorous, and universal international policy to prevent any single nation or company from monopolizing lunar resources. The United Nations is currently taking active and pragmatic steps to resolve the legal ambiguities surrounding the appropriation and utilization of lunar resources. The primary UN body addressing this issue is the "Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space." Furthermore, the international community needs to take urgent measures to clarify resource ownership rights and avert potential conflicts. Formulating a global space resource treaty that includes clear definitions is essential. Additionally, establishing an international licensing and oversight body, gaining international recognition for "safety zones," and creating specific policies for benefit-sharing could play a pivotal role in resolving these issues.
