The New Space Race and Its Rulebook: Outer Space Treaty, COPUOS, ATLAC, Moon Missions, Lagrange Points & Space Debris

Two hundred years ago, humans had no concept of "space law." A hundred years ago, space was still a subject of science fiction. Sixty years ago, only two countries could launch anything into orbit. Today, dozens of countries operate satellites, private companies land rockets back on Earth, and multiple nations are racing to build permanent stations on the Moon.

The problem — space is not a place. It has no ground, no borders, no police, no courts. Yet it has become a hotbed of activity — communication satellites, GPS constellations, military reconnaissance, deep-space telescopes, lunar landings, planned Mars missions, and increasingly, commercial mining ambitions. Who decides what is allowed? Who cleans up when things go wrong? Who owns what?

This article walks through the entire architecture — layer by layer, in story form.

Here is what we will cover:

1. The Core Problem — why space needed rules of its own
2. The Outer Space Treaty, 1967 — the foundational document of space law
3. The Extended Framework — Rescue Agreement, Liability Convention, Registration Convention, and the Moon Agreement
4. COPUOS — the United Nations forum that runs space diplomacy
5. The Water Discoveries — from Chandrayaan-1 to NASA's LCROSS to Chandrayaan-3
6. Shiv Shakti Point — how a place on the Moon gets named
7. Lunar Geography — near side, far side, and the strange case of Einstein Crater
8. ATLAC — the newest layer of lunar governance
9. Lagrange Points and the James Webb Space Telescope — why some spacecraft "park" in specific spots
10. Space Debris and the Kessler Syndrome — the growing junkyard above our heads
11. The Bigger Picture — how India fits into this evolving order

By the end, you will understand not just what each term means, but why it exists, how it works, and what debates surround it today.

Think about how law usually develops. Something happens — a dispute, a crime, a new technology — and then societies write rules to handle it. Fire brought fire laws. Cars brought traffic laws. The internet brought cyber laws. Rules almost always run behind reality.

Space was different. In October 1957, the Soviet Union launched Sputnik-1, the first artificial satellite. Suddenly, an object built by humans was orbiting Earth above every country — flying over sovereign airspace of every nation without permission, and without any legal framework to say whether this was allowed.

By 1961, humans were flying in space. By the mid-1960s, both superpowers were racing to the Moon. Rockets could now be used to carry not just scientific instruments but also nuclear weapons. Suddenly space was not a scientific curiosity — it was potentially the next battlefield.

The world realised something urgent. If we did not write the rules before the technology matured, we would end up with an unregulated arms race in orbit. Nuclear weapons might be parked in space. Countries might claim ownership of the Moon. Satellites of one nation might interfere with another's. There would be no legal category to even describe these disputes.

So this time, the world tried to write the law before the problem exploded. That extraordinary effort produced the Outer Space Treaty — the foundational document of modern space law.

The question in 1967 was simple — if space belongs to no one, how do we make sure everyone can use it peacefully?

The Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies — mercifully shortened to the Outer Space Treaty (OST), 1967 — was signed on 27 January 1967 and entered into force on 10 October 1967.

It was negotiated at the United Nations at the height of the Cold War, when the US and USSR agreed on very little. That they could agree on this shows how seriously both sides feared an unregulated space race.

The Core Principles — In Simple Language

The Treaty rests on a few foundational ideas, each of which continues to shape space law today.

First — No sovereignty in outer space. Article II is the philosophical heart of the treaty. Outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by use, by occupation, or by any other means. In simple language — no country can plant a flag on the Moon and say "this is mine." No matter how many astronauts you land, no matter how much of the surface you explore, the Moon does not become your territory. The 1969 US flag on the Moon is a symbol, not a claim.

Second — Space is the province of all mankind. Article I says the exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries, irrespective of their level of economic or scientific development. This means space is not just for the rich and powerful — even countries without space programmes have a stake in how it is used.

Third — Peaceful use only, no weapons of mass destruction in orbit. Article IV bans placing nuclear weapons or any other weapons of mass destruction in orbit, on the Moon, or on any celestial body. Military bases, weapons testing, and military manoeuvres on the Moon are prohibited. Importantly, the treaty does not prohibit conventional military satellites — reconnaissance and communication satellites for defence purposes are allowed. This grey area is a source of ongoing debate.

Fourth — States are responsible for their private actors. Article VI is crucial in today's era of private space companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin. It says states are internationally responsible for national activities in outer space, whether carried out by governmental agencies or by non-governmental entities. If SpaceX causes damage to another country's satellite, the United States government is legally responsible — not just the company. This is a departure from usual international law, where states are usually not held liable for private actions.

Fifth — Liability for damage. Article VII lays down that a launching state is internationally liable for damage caused by its space objects. This principle was later fleshed out into a separate treaty in 1972.

Sixth — Astronauts as envoys of mankind. Article V treats astronauts as envoys of mankind — meaning, if an astronaut of one country is in distress or lands in another country's territory, that country has a duty to help and return them safely.

The Big Picture

The Outer Space Treaty is often called the Magna Carta of space law. It laid down the principles that all subsequent treaties would elaborate. It is signed and ratified by more than 110 countries, including all major spacefaring nations — the US, Russia, China, India, France, UK, and Japan.

But like any old constitution, it has limits. It was written when only two countries could launch anything, before commercial space, before Moon mining, before mega-constellations of satellites like Starlink. The core principles still hold, but modern activities keep raising questions the drafters never imagined.

The Outer Space Treaty laid the principles. But principles alone are not enough. Real situations needed specific rules. Over the next twelve years, four more treaties were negotiated to fill the gaps.

The Rescue Agreement, 1968

Full name — Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space.

This agreement elaborates Article V of the OST. If an astronaut lands in your country because of an emergency, or a space object crashes in your territory, you have specific obligations. You must rescue the astronaut, provide safe return to the launching state, and return the space object as well.

The Liability Convention, 1972

Full name — Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects.

This convention explains what happens when a space object causes damage. It creates two different liability standards:

• If the damage happens on the surface of the Earth or to an aircraft in flight, the launching state is absolutely liable — meaning liable no matter whose fault it is. No need to prove negligence.
• If the damage happens in space (one satellite hitting another), the launching state is liable only if fault can be established.

The Convention was actually invoked in one famous case — the 1978 crash of the Soviet Kosmos 954 nuclear-powered satellite in Canada, which spread radioactive debris. Canada claimed damages, and the USSR eventually paid a partial settlement.

The Registration Convention, 1975

Full name — Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space.

Every space object launched into orbit must be registered with the United Nations. The launching state maintains a national registry and reports basic details — launch date, orbital parameters, general function — to the UN Secretary-General, who maintains a public global registry.

The intent — transparency. So no country can deny ownership of an object in orbit. So debris can be traced back to its origin. So military use cannot hide behind ambiguity.

The Moon Agreement, 1979

Full name — Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies.

This was the most ambitious of the four — and the least successful.

The Moon Agreement declared the Moon and its natural resources to be the common heritage of mankind. It proposed that when lunar resource exploitation became feasible, an international regime should be set up to govern it, ensuring equitable sharing of benefits.

This was philosophically similar to the Law of the Sea's approach to the deep seabed. But it went further than the major spacefaring nations were willing to accept. As a result, none of the major spacefaring countries — US, Russia, China, India — have ratified the Moon Agreement. Only about 18 countries are parties, mostly non-spacefaring.

In effect, the Moon Agreement is a dead letter — it exists on paper but has no practical force. This is why the lunar governance question is now being re-opened through newer forums like ATLAC and through parallel American-led initiatives like the Artemis Accords, which take a very different approach on resource use.

The Five Treaties — A Summary View

Together, these five treaties (OST + Rescue + Liability + Registration + Moon) form what is called the five UN space treaties. The first four are widely accepted; the fifth is largely ignored by spacefaring states. This gap is where much of the current debate on lunar governance sits.

If the treaties are the constitution, COPUOS is the parliament.

The Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS) was established by the UN General Assembly in 1959 — even before the Outer Space Treaty. It is the main international forum for developing the international law of space.

Its Role

COPUOS meets annually in Vienna, where the UN Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) is headquartered. Its work is divided between two subcommittees:

• Scientific and Technical Subcommittee — deals with technical issues like space debris mitigation, near-Earth objects, use of space for sustainable development.
• Legal Subcommittee — deals with legal issues, treaty interpretation, and new normative frameworks.

COPUOS operates by consensus — a single dissenting country can block any decision. This makes progress slow, but any decision that emerges has broad legitimacy.

Membership

COPUOS started with 24 members and has grown to over 100. India has been a member from the earliest days. The Committee has produced not just the five UN space treaties but also several important UNGA resolutions and guidelines — on remote sensing, direct broadcast satellites, use of nuclear power in space, and space debris mitigation.

ATLAC — The Newest Layer

Now here comes the modern twist. As lunar activity has exploded — Chandrayaan-3, Chang'e missions, Artemis programme, private landers, planned bases — the question has become urgent. Who coordinates all this? Who ensures nations do not clash on the Moon? Who ensures scientific sites are not damaged? Who deals with rival landing zones?

The Outer Space Treaty's general "consultation" principle in Article IX is not enough for the crowded lunar future. So in February 2025, COPUOS formally established the Action Team on Lunar Activities Consultation — ATLAC.

The purpose of ATLAC — hold focused, expert-level exchanges among member states to develop recommendations aimed at improving consultations related to lunar activities. It is co-chaired by Romania and Pakistan and is expected to produce recommendations that could lead to an international mechanism for lunar coordination.

Importantly, ATLAC is without prejudice to Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty — it does not replace the treaty, it builds on it.

Parallel to ATLAC, there is also the Working Group on Legal Aspects of Space Resource Activities (Space Resources Working Group) under the Legal Subcommittee, which is working on principles for future space resource utilisation. The two together represent the early emergence of lunar governance for a Moon that is about to see many nations landing many things.

ATLAC is one of the freshest additions in space governance — because it captures the live evolution of international law.