Among the many challenges that outgoing-President Bush is leaving President-Elect Obama, one of the least negative lies with Bush's push to have the United States establish a permanent presence on the Moon. While there are many who feel there is little reason to return to the Moon and that those resources could be better utilized elsewhere, there are a number of benefits that would result if Obama were to back efforts to return to the Moon. These benefits are not just technological (though the technological advancements that Apollo brought about alone more than compensate for the fiscal costs of going to the Moon).
Apollo revealed to the world that it is possible to safely go to the Moon and return. Indeed, Apollo 13 helped draw the world together as NASA strove to bring our astronauts home, and empathized that we cannot slack off on redundancy systems and safety measures (as did Challenger and Columbia). However, there are multiple problems with returning to the Moon (or going to Mars or indeed creating a permanent presence in orbit and encouraging industry to start building factories and the like in orbit). The primary problem is cost. It is difficult and still somewhat dangerous to get into orbit.
The alternatives to strapping yourself to the top of a controlled powderkeg and detonating it (and hoping it doesn't blow you apart) are theories that require technologies we either lack or are in the infancy of developing. Talk of space elevators and the like are wonderful in concept, but they aren't especially practical. Other approaches also have significant problems in development and cost.
These issues pale in comparison to the sociopolitical consequences of returning to the Moon. Space has become a field of national competition once more. China is seeking to go to the Moon, and other countries are eyeing our closest celestial neighbor as well. If we start rushing to reach the Moon once more, tensions could arise between nations concerning territorial rights and development and more. Yet these problems are the main reason we need to reach the Moon and establish a long-term presence there.
There is a solution to this, and it is one we've some practice with: a coalition effort to reach the Moon and establish a multinational base on its surface. The International Space Station is a prime example of what we can do as a global community if we work together. While there have been hiccups and drawbacks in building the ISS, it revealed one important fact: we, as a global community, can work successfully together on a large project. By pooling our resources with the European Community, Russia, China, Japan, India, and any other nations that wish to reach for the stars, we can reduce the financial cost (as it would be shared), increase scientific learning, improve trust among nations, and create something together.
This can only help improve national security and diplomatic relations between the larger nations on the planet, and is in line with Obama's spoken policy of preferring diplomatic efforts to encourage peace rather than rattling sabers at other nations. By working together and spending resources on a project this big, peaceful relations (and diplomacy) are encouraged because the consequences for abandoning this collaborative effort would be to abandon all those resources invested in the global lunar project.
And if we as a global community work together to establish a international community on the Moon, then we can continue such collaborative efforts and perhaps work to start mining local asteroids and splitting their resources, sending new probes (and perhaps even manned missions) to the Outer Planets... and even go to Mars. While there are many who deride manned missions to other planets and feel they are costly and unnecessary, the scientific advancements alone in safely sending people to Mars (or beyond) and bringing them home makes it worthwhile.
The important thing is to work as a global community on this. By sharing the costs (of research, construction, and more), more money can be channeled into the project compared to that of one single nation, especially in these troubled economic times. Further, the sociopolitical consequences of working together on such a project can only help encourage diplomatic and peaceful relations between the largest nations and nation-communities on the planet.
Robert A. Howard, Tangents Reviews