Artemis Missions: Unpacking Lunar Extraction, Geopolitical Rivalry, and Cosmic Knowledge Gaps in 21st-Century Space Race

Indigenous lunar cosmologies universally frame the moon as a living entity deserving of respect, not a commodity to be exploited. These traditions often encode sophisticated astronomical knowledge (e.g., the Dogon’s Sirius system observations) that could inform sustainable lunar science. Western space agencies have historically dismissed such knowledge as 'unscientific,' yet it offers critical insights into long-term cosmic stewardship. The Artemis missions’ extractive focus ignores these perspectives, risking the erasure of millennia-old wisdom systems.

The Artemis missions echo 19th-century colonial expeditions, where 'discovery' justified resource extraction and geopolitical control. The Outer Space Treaty (1967) and Artemis Accords (2020) replicate terrestrial power imbalances, with the US and allies asserting unilateral rights to lunar resources. Historical parallels include the 1884 Berlin Conference, where European powers carved up Africa, suggesting Artemis could become a 'Berlin Conference in space.' The lack of binding international frameworks for lunar governance mirrors the failures of colonial-era treaties.

Cross-cultural comparisons reveal diverse lunar epistemologies: from the Māori moon deity Rona to the Hindu lunar deity Chandra, who governs time and fertility. In China, the Chang’e missions are framed within a narrative of cultural renaissance, contrasting with Artemis’ militarised 'space race' framing. These differences highlight the need for pluralistic lunar governance models that integrate Indigenous and non-Western knowledge. The absence of such models in Artemis risks imposing a single, extractive paradigm globally.

Scientifically, Artemis aims to validate lunar water ice as a resource for fuel and life support, but the methodology prioritises short-term utility over long-term planetary science. The missions’ focus on the lunar south pole—rich in volatiles—risks contaminating pristine lunar regolith, a critical archive of solar system history. Peer-reviewed studies warn that unregulated mining could destroy evidence of early solar system conditions, undermining the missions’ stated scientific goals. The lack of peer-reviewed impact assessments for Artemis’ activities is a glaring omission.

Artistic and spiritual traditions across cultures depict the moon as a mirror of human consciousness, from the Islamic 'Moon of Guidance' to the Buddhist lunar deities of enlightenment. These traditions often frame cosmic exploration as a spiritual journey, not merely a technical feat. Contemporary artists like Trevor Paglen critique the militarisation of space, while Indigenous poets like Linda Hogan invoke lunar reciprocity. The Artemis narrative’s silence on these dimensions reflects a broader devaluation of non-rational ways of knowing in space exploration.

Future modelling suggests Artemis could trigger a 'Great Space Stampede,' where lunar resource extraction accelerates geopolitical tensions and ecological collapse. Scenario planning by the Secure World Foundation warns that unregulated mining could lead to 'space resource wars' by 2040. Alternative models, such as the Moon Village Association’s collaborative framework, remain underfunded and marginalised. The missions’ focus on national prestige over sustainability risks locking humanity into a path-dependent, extractive future.

Marginalised voices—including Global South nations, Indigenous communities, and women in STEM—are systematically excluded from Artemis decision-making. The Artemis Accords, signed by 40+ nations, lack representation from Africa, Latin America, and the Pacific, despite their historical ties to celestial navigation. Women, who comprise only 10% of NASA’s Artemis team, face systemic barriers in a field dominated by patriarchal militarised science. The missions’ 'first woman and person of colour' framing obscures these deeper inequities.