On September 6, 2026, U.S. President Trump posted an image on Truth Social showing the Moon and an American flag, with a caption declaring "The Moon is ours." A copy of the image has also been preserved in a third-party archive. The Outer Space Treaty, to which the United States is a party, prohibits claims of national sovereignty over the Moon, so the post does not make the Moon U.S. territory. But being unable to claim the Moon is a separate matter from owning equipment brought to the lunar surface or using its resources. To think about scientific exploration and future mining, it is necessary to distinguish exactly which rights are at issue.
The post and the Apollo flag
![FireShot Capture 581 - Truth Details - Truth Social - [truthsocial.com].webp](https://media.xenospectrum.com/Fire_Shot_Capture_581_Truth_Details_Truth_Social_truthsocial_com_d870af2cf8.webp)
The archived image shows the words "THE MOON IS OURS" and an American flag against a lunar backdrop. The archive records the post as dated September 6, Eastern Daylight Time, but nothing in the image reveals any specific procedure for claiming territory or any policy change. A political message should be kept distinct from the legal documents that define what rights are recognized in space.
Planting an American flag on the Moon recalls the Apollo program. According to NASA, astronauts on Apollo 11 placed a U.S. flag on the lunar surface on July 20, 1969. The flag was recommended by a committee that examined symbolic activities to accompany the first Moon landing.
The Outer Space Treaty was already in force by then. It took effect on October 10, 1967, and Article II states that outer space, including the Moon, "is not subject to national appropriation" by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means. A country cannot turn a site into its territory simply by planting a flag there.
Different rights for land and equipment
Article VIII of the Outer Space Treaty provides that ownership of objects launched into space, and of their component parts, is not affected by their presence on a celestial body. Rovers and instruments carried to the Moon do not become items anyone can take. The state of registry also retains jurisdiction and control over the space object and its personnel. Rights over such equipment are distinct from ownership of the ground where it sits.
The following table sorts the objects one might expect on the lunar surface according to the wording of the Outer Space Treaty and the Artemis Accords. The Artemis Accords are a political commitment by signatories regarding civil space activities, and differ in nature from the treaty itself.
| Subject | Treatment in the documents | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Lunar land | Cannot be appropriated by a state through claims of sovereignty, use or occupation | Outer Space Treaty, Article II |
| Rovers and instruments brought to the Moon | Ownership is not affected by their presence on a celestial body | Outer Space Treaty, Article VIII |
| Resources extracted from the Moon | Signatories' position that extraction does not inherently constitute national appropriation | Artemis Accords, Section 10 |
| Safety zones around activities | Temporary zones, lasting until activities end, within which notification and coordination are used to avoid harmful interference | Artemis Accords, Section 11 |
The table classifies the Outer Space Treaty and the 2020 Artemis Accords by subject. The resource row reflects the interpretation of Accords signatories and does not establish mining rights for any individual project. Calling equipment ownership, resource extraction and coordination of surrounding activities all "ownership of the Moon" erases these distinctions.
Private-sector activity also faces treaty conditions. Article VI requires that the space activities of non-governmental entities be authorized and continuously supervised by the state concerned. The rule banning national appropriation does not support the conclusion that private companies may develop the Moon without conditions.
U.S. support for resource use
During his first term, on April 6, 2020, Trump signed an executive order encouraging international support for the recovery and use of space resources. The order said that retrieving and using resources such as water and certain minerals requires cooperation with commercial entities, and it supported commercial exploration and use of resources in accordance with applicable law. The latest image is therefore not the first time resource development has been endorsed.
The order also records the position that the United States does not view outer space as a global commons. However, it concerns policy supporting the recovery and use of resources, and it contains no provision treating the lunar surface as U.S. territory. It further distinguishes between the Outer Space Treaty, to which the U.S. is a party, and the 1979 Moon Agreement, to which it is not. Not being party to the Moon Agreement does not mean the U.S. is not bound by the Outer Space Treaty.
The Artemis Accords, also adopted in 2020, call for resource extraction to be carried out in a manner consistent with the Outer Space Treaty, and signatories affirm that extraction does not inherently constitute national appropriation. This is a stance that separates using resources from claiming a celestial body, in order to advance exploration. The Accords do not show that every country shares this interpretation.
Coordination required for scientific activity
Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty requires states to avoid harmful contamination of the Moon and other bodies, and to hold prior international consultations if they have reason to believe an activity could cause harmful interference with other states' activities. These conditions apply to scientific exploration as well. Citing research purposes does not allow a state to act without regard to the effects on other countries' observations or exploration.
The safety zones described in the Artemis Accords are areas in which activities are notified and coordinated to avoid such interference. Their size and scope are to be set reasonably, based on scientific and engineering principles, and a zone ends when the activity ends. The Accords also include a commitment to respect free access to all areas of celestial bodies, which sets them apart from a system that draws permanent borders.
The release of scientific data has limits as well. Section 8 of the Accords commits signatories to making the scientific results of cooperative activities public, but says there is no intention to apply this commitment to private-sector operations except when they are conducted on behalf of a signatory. This does not mean private companies have no obligation to provide information; it indicates how far the Accords' data-sharing commitment extends.
When concrete plans for lunar surface activity are presented, the key factors for judgment will be where operations take place, the size and duration of any safety zones, and what consultations are held with other countries. If these are made clear and the protection of equipment can be balanced with other countries' access for exploration, the conditions can be set for scientific research and resource use without turning the Moon into national territory.