As NASA admin, Jared Isaacman should commit to building a lunar base

The Hill

11-05-2025

Jared Isaacman will have quite a lot on his plate in his role of running America's space agency once he is fully confirmed. On the top of the list is what to do about sending humans both to the moon and to Mars, which Isaacman proposes to do simultaneously.
'As the president stated we will prioritize sending American astronauts to Mars,' Isaacman said during his confirmation hearings. 'Along the way, we will inevitably have the capabilities to return to the Moon and determine the scientific, economic, and national security benefits of maintaining a presence on the lunar surface.'
The plan is to conduct the Artemis II lunar circumnavigation mission and the Artemis III moon landing with hardware that already exists — that is, the Orion space capsule and the uber-expensive Space Launch System. Artemis III will also include a Human Landing System based on the SpaceX Starship. The strategy is laid out in the White House budget proposal, which states, vaguely, that after Artemis III the current lunar architecture will be replaced 'with more cost-effective commercial systems that would support more ambitious subsequent lunar missions.'
The usual Washington method of determining something like the benefits of 'maintaining a presence on the lunar surface' is to form a committee of experts to deliberate then issue a report. One example would be the Second Augustine Commission that concluded that the Bush 43-era Constellation program to return to the moon and on to Mars was unaffordable.
A better way to determine the benefits of a presence on the lunar surface is to establish a presence on the lunar surface — a lunar base. There is nothing like trying something to figure out its value.
The value of a lunar base can be divided into science, economic development, and soft political power.
Twenty years ago, Dr. Paul Spudis offered the scientific case for returning to the moon. 'The moon is a scientific laboratory of extraordinary facility, richness and benefit,' he wrote. 'The history of our corner of the solar system for the past 4 billion years is preserved and readable in the ancient dust of the lunar surface.'
Because the moon lacks an atmosphere and a dynamic surface, billions of years of impacts and the ever-changing effects of the sun are recorded in its soil.
Also, the far side of the moon, shielded from the electromagnetic noise of the Earth, is the perfect site for a space-based radio telescope. 'That allows observation of the sky at radio wavelengths never before seen,' Spudis noted.
As far as economic development goes, NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory points to important lunar resources — water, helium 3, and rare earths. In addition, the moon contains industrial resources such as titanium, iron, silicon, and aluminum.
A lunar base would a the venue for companies to develop the technologies needed to mine and refine these resources. It may not make sense to transport them all the way to Earth, but Isaacman himself has said that 'We will ignite a thriving space economy in low Earth orbit.' The moon and its resources would be an integral part of that economy.
The final reason that Isaacman should commit to a lunar base concerns its usefulness for enhancing soft political power. China, the main enemy of the United States and its allies, has its own lunar ambitions. It intends to build a moon base at the lunar south pole by 2035.
The U.S. cannot afford a situation where China has a base on the moon and it does not. If America wants to maintain its standing in the world, it must establish its own lunar base.
As with the International Space Station, the lunar base should be built and operated with American allies. Japan, India, Canada, the countries of the European Union, among others, would compete for the honor of contributing to the lunar base and to have their astronauts serve tours on it. America's influence on the world stage would be enhanced by opening the road to the moon.
A program to send humans to Mars, in alignment with Elon Musk's dream of founding a settlement on the Red Planet, is certainly a beautiful vision. But the moon is of more immediate importance and should not be neglected. With a crewed mission to Mars likely to happen in the 2030s, the moon can be a triumphant climax to the second Trump presidency by the end of the 2020s.
Mark Whittington, who writes frequently about space policy, has published a political study of space exploration entitled Why is It So Hard to Go Back to the Moon? as well as The Moon, Mars and Beyond, and, most recently, Why is America Going Back to the Moon?