Is NASA going back to the moon to stay?
Or planting a flag for President Donald Trump?
The Artemis II Heavy Lift System this week boosted the crewed Orion space module dubbed “Integrity” on its fly-by of the Lunar orb.
It’s more than a rare success. It’s a rare event.
But that’s about to change.
The on-again, off-again United States moon program underwent yet another major shake-up last week.
The second NASA administrator of the Trump administration’s second term in office, Jared Isaacman, has outlined its rapid-paced “Ignition” vision for the future.
Its fully-financed flagship project is once again to put US boots on the lunar ground.
And the Artemis IV mission is on a tight schedule.
It must get there in 2028.
Just before Donald Trump reaches the end of his constitutionally-limited second term as President of the United States.
“NASA is committed to achieving the near‑impossible once again, to return to the moon before the end of President Trump’s term, build a moon base, establish an enduring presence, and do the other things needed to ensure American leadership in space,” administrator Isaacman proclaimed at a March 24 press event.
Artemis IV is touted to be just one small step towards building a permanent presence on the moon’s dusty surface. But everything else depends on whether or not it can be completed within a total cut-price $US26 billion budget. And find extra funding elsewhere.
It depends on private-sector investment.
It’s dependent on rapid technological development and efficiencies.
It’s dependent on the ongoing goodwill of partner nations.
“If this can be achieved, then the legacy of Artemis might well be the realisation of that long-held dream of a permanent home on the moon,” says Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) aerospace analyst Alexander MacDonald.
“Or, to paraphrase Benjamin Franklin, Artemis is a commitment to humanity’s first moonbase – if you can keep it.”
Golden achievements
The Trump administration’s National Space Policy project recharts NASA’s course to the moon.
It outlines a three-phased objective.
The first is to deliver a human crew to its surface. Then deploy dozens of robotic vehicles and experimental systems to assess their performance.
The second phase is to land the infrastructure needed to build an exploration hut to temporarily house more visitors. As well as components for power production, communications, and life support.
The third and final phase is to upscale it all into a permanent lunar base.
For now, the race is against the clock.
Both to beat China’s planned 2030 mission. And to succeed before the 47th President of the United States must hand over the keys to the White House to the 48th in February 2029.
To speed things up, NASA has added extra missions for 2027 and committed funding for at least one mission to the moon’s surface for several years after that.
It has also abandoned several key components of the previous Moon-to-Mars plan. Most notably, the almost complete first module of what was to be the Lunar Gateway Station.
This orbital “rest stop” was supposed to be a beacon of international co-operation.
It was a joint investment with Europe, Canada, Japan and the United Arab Emirates.
It was supposed to host rotating crews of international astronauts to pave the way for deep-space operations and to study the impact of life beyond earth’s magnetic field on the human body.
NASA now says it will explore repurposing Gateway’s completed core components for other missions.
Phase two depends on universities, private corporations and international partners to supply many of the 30 experimental rovers NASA wants to explore the moon’s south pole. It hopes that Elon Musk’s SpaceX and other ambitious (though yet-to-launch) rocket start-ups will begin a Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) delivery service.
Most of the freed-up funds will be sunk into getting Artemis IV to the moon by the end of 2028.
But there’s more.
Administrator Isaacman also announced a whole new project: “Space Reactor‑1 Freedom”.
This is a new type of spacecraft. It is designed around an advanced nuclear-electric propulsion system. And it will test the technology in a mission to drop experimental payloads and launch robotic mini-helicopters to explore the surface of Mars.
The design isn’t yet finalised. Construction is yet to begin.
It’s already scheduled to launch in October 2028.
That’s one month before the next US presidential elections.
NASA “doesn’t have a top-line problem; this is just where we choose to concentrate our resources,” administrator Isaacman stated.
“This suggests that NASA may propose to shift funding away from existing activities and reallocate it toward these new initiatives, an activity that would require approval by Congress,” the Planetary Society assessed in a follow-up statement.
Phases two and three remain very far away.
A long shot
Visiting space is hard. Living in space infinitely more so.
And the Trump administration’s short-term plans are ambitious.
NASA has been struggling with serious delays for decades.
Artemis III was first supposed to land on the moon in 2024.
It’s April 2026. And Artemis II has only just launched.
But administrator Isaacman has laid down the law.
“The difference between success and failure will be measured in months, not years,” he said during the Ignition launch.
“They may be early, and recent history suggests we might be late.”
Revisiting the moon would be a soaring political achievement.
Establishing a settlement there would lay the groundwork for an interplanetary future.
“The United States should not mistake the sprint to be first with the marathon to stay,” warns CSIS aerospace analyst Audrey Schaffer.
Competition creates an energising sense of urgency.
Planning and commitment get the job done.
“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,” Schaffer writes.
Getting there first will imprint US aspirations on this second space race.
“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,” Schaffer envisages.
“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.”
But all evidence suggests commitment to moon projects doesn’t last beyond a single administration.
President George H.W. Bush launched his Space Exploration Initiative in 1989. Going back to the moon was its $US500 billion goal.
It was cancelled by President Bill Clinton in 1993.
President George W Bush revived his father’s dream in 2004 with a new Vision for Space Exploration.
This was put on hiatus by the Obama Administration in 2010.
But its Orion crewed module and enormous Space Launch System (SLS) were reactivated by US President Donald Trump in 2017 for his Artemis Program.
“The United States and its partners, both in the private sector and internationally, should make sure that this effort is both successful and sustainable,” says CSIS’s MacDonald.
Grounded realities
There is no profit in space.
At least, not beyond satellite communications and surveillance.
That’s why NASA’s hopes that commercial companies would build a replacement for the International Space Station (ISS) have failed to come to fruition.
ISS Program Manager Dana Weigel has conceded that dreams of manufacturing specialist products in weightlessness remain unrealised, that there is no real tourism demand, and that few other governments are willing to pitch in substantially to cover the costs.
Maintaining a permanent (non-Chinese) presence in orbit may now depend on NASA building a new module to add to the existing ISS. And to detach it as a tiny stand-alone station when the increasingly dilapidated 27-year-old structure is scrapped.
Meanwhile, the moon remains a lofty challenge.
“Not only is there no breathable air, no farmable soil, nor anyone there to trade with, but human missions to the moon have thus far been very expensive,” explains MacDonald.
“For all of the Apollo program’s incredible achievements, it was ultimately cancelled by President Richard Nixon in part because those footing the bill for the effort — the American taxpayers – had signalled that they did not believe that the benefits … were worth the cost.”
This is unlikely to change anytime soon.
“Incentivising continued private investment and maintaining commercial competition will be another vital element,” MacDonald concedes.
“Although there is a significant increase in private investment in space, there have yet to be significant nongovernmental revenues for lunar activities, and economic assessments suggest we should not be expecting this to change anytime too soon either.”
But University of Mississippi space law expert Professor Michelle Hanlon says the new Ignition vision sets things right.
“Space exploration is moving away from a race to achieve milestones and toward a system built on repeated operations, a sustained presence and lunar infrastructure that could become part of the technology networks we rely on here on earth,” Professor Hanlon writes.
Communications. Navigation. Logistics networks. Scientific data.
All are dependent on space-based assets.
“As activity expands to the moon, facilities there, from energy systems to communications relay systems that transmit data and signals back to earth, will become integrated into those networks,” she explains.
“What is built on the moon will not sit apart from life on earth, but increasingly function as an extension of it.
“The message? Humans have already normalised travel to space. The next step is normalising living beyond earth.”
