Back to the Moon while space governance falls behind

Paul Budde writes that space around the Earth is being transformed, with low Earth orbit filled with thousands of satellites, and space turning from an empty frontier into a crowded, contested and rapidly evolving space.

I VIBRANTLY REMEMBER landing on the moon. 1969. I’ve been watching lately Artemis II As the capsule splashed down, it felt like a deja vu moment, the same visuals – albeit now of better quality – of the same ocean recovery, virtually unchanged more than half a century later. From this perspective, it may be tempting to conclude that space itself is only slowly evolving.

However, this impression is extremely misleading. While human spaceflight still follows familiar patterns, the space around Earth has been transformed. In the decades since Apollo, and especially in the last decade, low Earth orbit (leo) has been filled with thousands of satellites, transforming space from an empty frontier into a crowded, contested, and rapidly evolving domain.

It is precisely this disconnect between what we see and what is actually happening that lies at the heart of today’s political problems. For decades, space policy was shaped around a simple assumption: Access to orbit was rare, expensive, and tightly controlled. This assumption has shaped everything from international agreements to spectrum coordination and national licensing regimes. This is now wrong.

Over the past decade, space has undergone quiet but profound change. transformation. Launch has become cheaper, faster and more accessible. Satellites are smaller, smarter and deployed in greater numbers. What was once in the hands of superpowers and defense contractors is now within the reach of universities, start-ups and non-traditional actors.

The problem is not that this transformation takes place. The problem is that management can’t keep up.

From scarcity to abundance in low Earth orbit

Ten years ago, launching even a small satellite required big money and years of planning. Costs were prohibitive, launch windows were short, and regulatory coordination was slow by design. This is the discipline imposed by the environment.

Today, launch costs crashed into low Earth orbit. reusable rocketscommercial launch competition and faster launch tempos have fundamentally changed the economics. At the same time, access methods have also diversified. Air launch systems, responsive launch platforms and experimental approaches Who can reach orbit and how fast they can do it is expanding.

The result is a transition from scarcity to abundance. Thousands of satellites are currently active in LEO, and many more are planned. Deployment timelines that once spanned years are now measured in months or even weeks.

This speed is economically attractive. This also disrupts political stability.

Editing built for a slower world

International space coordination still relies largely on frameworks designed in an era of slow-moving, state-dominated activities. ITU’s spectrum coordination process assumes advance notice, good faith compliance and manageable satellite volumes.

In practice, this system is under pressure.

Commercial operators are increasingly treating regulatory filings as parallel processes rather than difficult prerequisites. National regulators are forced to balance the pressure to innovate against coordination obligations. Enforcement is uneven and penalties are often symbolic compared to commercial incentives.

Even more disturbing is the behavior of states. Orbital maneuvers Uncertain satellite missions without timely notification and deliberate activities that create debris All of these point to the weakening of common norms. When major powers signal that strategic priorities outweigh collective constraints, smaller actors take notice.

This is how rules erode; not through formal abandonment, but through selective disregard.

Space is no longer neutral, it is a security area

Space systems support modern economies and militaries. Navigation, communications, surveillance, weather forecasting, financial scheduling, and logistics all depend on orbital infrastructure. Distortion in space is no longer abstract; This has direct terrestrial consequences.

At the same time, the line between civilian and military space assets is increasingly blurred. Dual-use satellites, commercial imagery, and privately operated constellations complicate traditional distinctions between peaceful and hostile activities.

Lower barriers to entry mean that capabilities once limited to a handful of states are now available to many more actors – including those with limited responsibility. There doesn’t have to be a dramatic rearmament for this to be destabilizing. Intervention, proximity operations and debris generation are sufficient.

Strategic risk lies in miscalculation rather than deliberate escalation in an overcrowded and poorly managed environment.

Governance gap is the real threat

The real issue is not technology. This is an institutional delay.

Space governance still assumes that coordination can be slow, consensual, and largely voluntary. This assumption is incompatible with rapid launch cycles, commercial competition, and geopolitical competition.

History offers a warning. The Internet followed a similar path: early openness, explosive growth, delayed governance, and eventually the weaponization of loopholes. Space is now on the same path, but with fewer fix options when damage occurs.

The challenge for policymakers is to recognize that maintaining sustainability on orbit no longer requires passive norm-setting but active management. Transparency, enforcement and accountability must scale with operational reality.

In conclusion

Cheap and fast access to space has outstripped the rules designed to govern it. Unless governance frameworks evolve as rapidly as launch technology, space will not only become congested but also contested in ways that are harder to reverse. The world has already changed. The only question is whether the policy will catch up with the results.