We Are Going Back to the Moon to Stay

Landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely was a clear and compelling demonstration of U.S. technological prowess and might in an era of strategic competition with the Soviet Union. The United States went to the Moon during the Cold War precisely for that reason—to demonstrate to the world the supremacy of capitalism over communism and democracy over autocracy. President John F. Kennedy chose this goal in 1961 because it was the one NASA was most confident it could achieve before the Soviets, and before the decade was out. The United States went to the Moon to win.

And the United States did win. People around the world were captivated by the Moon landing. An estimated one in five people across the planet watched live when Neil Armstrong took his one small step on July 20, 1969. It was a turning point in the Cold War.

Unfortunately, it was also a turning point in the U.S. space program. Instead of building on the United States’ giant leap for all mankind, winning was the end. Apollo missions 18, 19, and 20 were canceled due to declining public interest and shifting political priorities—and no human (let alone American)—has traveled further than low Earth orbit since.

The Artemis program offers an opportunity to change that—beginning with Artemis II, when NASA sends the first humans to lunar orbit since 1972. But the Artemis program is notable not for its repetition of Apollo-era missions, but for its explicit goal of establishing a sustained human presence on another celestial body.

Rather than chasing flags and footprints, NASA is planning to build a Moon base, a feat that will again demonstrate the technological might of the United States—but this time in an enduring way. Establishing a permanent presence on the Moon will push the space economy into cislunar space, creating business opportunities for a new generation of American dreamers and entrepreneurs. It will provide experience in long-duration surface missions, laying the groundwork for humanity’s next giant leap–to Mars. And most importantly, it will extend Western values and democracy to a new foothold in the solar system.

Today, the United States is again in an era of strategic competition, not with the Soviets but with the People’s Republic of China. There is a strong bipartisan consensus in Washington that the United States must return to the Moon before China lands its first taikonauts on the lunar surface. This element of competition helps create the urgency and drive that energizes the nation’s space program and excites the American people with demonstrations of new and novel feats.

But the United States should not recreate a competition it has already won. China almost certainly has a long-term plan to establish a permanent presence on the Moon—one that is oriented around its priorities, its economy, and its values. So yes, the United States should compete with China as a key strategic rationale for the U.S. space program. But the United States should not mistake the sprint to be first with the marathon to stay.

It is time to return to the Moon, and this time, the United States needs to be in it for the long game.

Audrey M. Schaffer is a senior associate (non-resident) at the Aerospace Security Project of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. She is a space policy expert with experience across the civil, commercial, and national security space sectors. She previously served in the U.S. government for over 15 years, including on the National Security Council staff, at the Departments of Defense and State, and at NASA.