Unveiling an ambitious vision for America’s future in space, President Donald Trump’s inaugural address referenced the notion of ‘manifest destiny’, a term traditionally associated with the historical expansion of the United States. His nod to this idea during his speech presented an intriguing perspective about what lies ahead for the country’s space program. ‘We will march with our manifest destiny out to the stars, propelling American astronauts to imprint the Stars and Stripes on the Martian soil,’ he profoundly stated on January 20th.
This decision of President Trump to associate America’s aspirations in space with the historical and somewhat divisive concept of manifest destiny is thought-provoking. The concept has deep roots in history, entwined with the idea of exploration and territorial expansion. Its application to America’s space program generates speculation about the country’s future trajectory in space exploration.
Originating in the 19th century, the concept of manifest destiny encapsulates the believed divine right of the United States to spread across the North American territory. Recently, Trump’s speeches have signaled a return to an expansionist ethos, with mentions of regaining control of the Panama Canal and an interest in acquiring Greenland. However, interpretations of manifest destiny’s meaning vary.
The term has different connotations to different people, similar to how the ‘Wild West’ brings forth diverse narratives about the American West during the 19th century. Manifest Destiny encapsulates the liberty to explore, settle, and utilize any given territory, a belief that was held strongly by the white settlers in 19th century USA. This perception might echo in the context of outer space too.
In terms of space exploration, many people believe that the United States possesses a unique privilege or an inevitable responsibility to investigate and possibly settle in outer space, a belief that is seen as unarguable.
This view has significant implications for organizations like NASA and SpaceX. The concept of manifest destiny has frequently been mentioned in the context of space exploration, capturing the imagination of enthusiasts and practitioners alike.
The 19th-century ‘Wild West’ and the ‘US interior’ are often analogized by various space companies, media outlets, and politicians to depict space as the new frontier, emphasizing the spirit of exploration and conquering unknown territories.
However, the practical implications of this ‘Manifest Destiny’ for NASA and the broader space industry are still uncertain. Will there be a strategic shift in focus from the moon to Mars? This could potentially upend NASA’s Artemis program, which is currently aimed at lunar exploration.
If Mars becomes the new target, SpaceX would most likely be the one tasked with turning this ambitious vision into a reality. The company’s Starship would play a crucial role in efforts to put humans on Mars. Such a change in focus could significantly affect NASA’s role and catapult SpaceX to a central position in the American space industry.
As global participants in space exploration, other nations may also hold the belief that they too have the right to explore, occupy, and utilize space. However, the historical connotations of manifest destiny could potentially cause concerns, given its association with exploitation and colonization in the past.
The power of language cannot be underestimated, especially when the United States seeks to lead space exploration on a global scale. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which the U.S. is a signatory to, declares that space is a shared frontier open to exploration by all nations and prohibitive of any sovereignty claims. As of now, there is no indication that the Trump administration plans to abandon this treaty.
Summarizing, the idea of ‘manifest destiny’ applied to space exploration could have divergent implications. On one hand, it could inspire and propel forward progress in space research and human missions to Mars. However, it could potentially stir up conflict and evoke ethical dilemmas as well.
The implications for NASA’s subsequent path forward are yet to be fully understood, given the sweeping rhetoric of ‘manifest destiny’. Any significant divergence in policy direction, such as discontinuing the Artemis program in favor of a direct mission to Mars, would likely require the backing and approval of the U.S. Congress. Pivotally, the Trump administration continues to show a consistent dedication towards furthering the United States’ position in the space-race.