Trump's Lunar Dreams: More Than Just Greenland

Yet the absurd idea that aliens possessing the technological wherewithal to travel across the cosmos would leave a pile of stones and a mysterious language behind as proof of their presence never seemed to bother the believers. Nor did the fact that space exploration is infinitely less likely than thousands of Egyptians using ropes and sleds to drag massive stone blocks into position on the Great Pyramid, however remarkable that endeavour may look to us today. Only in science fiction is it possible to travel even to the closest star. In 2012, the Voyager 1 space probe became the first man-made object to leave the Solar System. It was launched almost 50 years ago; yet on November 15 this year it will be just one light-day away from Earth. The nearest star with an orbiting planet that might sustain life is more than four light-years away. So it will be many millennia before any being that might share this universe with us will hear the strains of Bach’s second Brandenburg Concerto or try to figure out the meaning of the drawings contained on the so-called Golden Record carried by the probe. You might have thought that, confronted with the unfeasibility of space travel, we would give up our dreams and accept that we are not going anywhere. It is, after all, 53 years since the last manned moon landing by Apollo 17, an era that we over-optimistically saw as the beginning of the Space Age when it turned out to be its end. But the lure remains powerful, especially for someone desperately seeking a legacy, namely Donald J Trump. Before Christmas, he issued an executive order directing Nasa to put a man on the Moon by 2028 – before he ends his second term. Over the weekend, the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and the Orion space capsule were moved from Nasa’s Kennedy Space Center to the launch pad. It was reminiscent of those heady days in the late 1960s and early 1970s when the great Saturn rockets were inched into position. Artemis II is due to take off next month with four crew members on board heading for the Moon, though not to land. It will instead lay the ground for a lunar touch-down by astronauts with the Artemis III mission possibly next year. After that, eight more landings are planned to establish a permanent base on the Moon for scientific experimentation and to be used as a stepping stone to Mars. Is there any point to this and can it be afforded? The viability of the project was marginally improved by the development of reusable launch vehicles which led US Congress to fund the missions under Trump’s One Beautiful Bill Act last year. But it will still cost billions. And while it will be extraordinary to see man once again walking on the surface of our nearest celestial neighbour, can it really be justified? Looking back, the Apollo programme may today be seen as a great adventure but it was deeply unpopular among many Americans because of the cost. It was motivated as much by Cold War politics as by the quest for scientific advancement. In 1962, President John F Kennedy set out the goal to put a man on the Moon by the decade’s end, principally to show the Soviet Union that the capitalist West could do what a sclerotic communist state would find impossible to achieve. Trump’s support for Artemis is also political since he wants to steal a march on China which is also planning manned missions, though not until 2030. Whatever the rationale – and even if we might be better off spending the money on a cure for Alzheimer’s – the yearning to break free of Earth remains strong. As yet there is not the same sense of excitement around Artemis that I remember as a child with Apollo. When it launches next month (assuming that it does, given the many technical glitches with the spacecraft) President Trump is sure to exploit it for all he is worth. Yet is it a springboard to the stars, or just one man’s vainglorious dream? “Look upon my works, ye mighty, and despair.”