Despite the rapid development of space exploration in recent decades, legal norms regulating extraterrestrial activities have failed to keep pace. Today, both near-Earth orbit and the lunar surface face an alarming regulatory vacuum, which, due to the absence of clear laws, jeopardizes orbital technologies and causes serious diplomatic disagreements between nations.
The foundation of international space law is the Outer Space Treaty, a document supported by the UN Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) and signed in 1967. This treaty establishes that outer space is free for exploration, and no country can claim sovereignty over the Moon or other celestial bodies.
However, this rule was developed in a time when only governments launched rockets. The lack of regulation for the private sector has created a huge loophole, allowing companies to operate without clear environmental restrictions, which directly leads to the uncontrolled accumulation of debris in low Earth orbit.
According to the European Space Agency's (ESA) Space Debris Office, there are nearly 47 thousand tracked large objects and over 231 million small fragments orbiting the planet without control. These debris move at incredible speeds, exceeding 27,000 kilometers per hour. At such speeds, even a tiny screw or piece of paint becomes a destructive projectile. A collision could destroy critical communication and meteorological satellites or puncture the hull of space stations, endangering the lives of astronauts during missions.
Astronomer Erika Rossetto, Orbital Dynamics Manager at Claro Brasil, explains that while the overall figures are impressive, including estimates of microscopic objects smaller than a millimeter, small particles are unlikely to cause a catastrophic incident capable of destroying an entire satellite. The specialist noted: 'But a very small object can damage some electronic systems, like a bullet piercing a large body.' She added that such cases have been recorded, but emphasized that the problem is much more critical in low orbit, where most of this debris is concentrated; the concentration of objects is significantly lower in geostationary orbits, so the probability of small objects hitting satellites is lower.
According to Erika, monitoring space debris fragments faces serious technological limitations. The astronomer, who studied the identification and orbital correction of debris as part of her master's thesis, points to operational difficulties. 'The telescopes used for this purpose are typically small, which limits observation. Furthermore, these bodies do not have their own luminescence; they are metallic objects reflecting sunlight, and because they are small and opaque, they are difficult to track.' Nevertheless, she stressed that the recent increase in investment in the sector has allowed for the use of more powerful telescopes, making it possible to catalog objects smaller than 30 centimeters.
Faced with the accumulation of debris, the scientific community warns of the so-called 'Kessler Syndrome'—a hypothetical scenario suggesting an uncontrolled chain reaction of collisions, where accidents generate new debris that mass-destroys other satellites. Erika insists that this hypothesis is merely a simulation and estimates that today there are opportunities for monitoring, raising awareness, and implementing debris removal initiatives to avoid the point of losing access to Earth orbit.
To this end, satellite operating companies must work integratively. Erika holds a position on the board of the Space Data Association (SDA), an organization founded by operators in 2009 to promote orbital safety. According to her, 'the motivation for creating SDA was the understanding that no single operator could ensure the safety of its satellites alone.'
'It is meaningless for the specialist if everyone does their own job. It is important for companies to exchange information to guarantee the safety of the entire community, because what happens to one satellite can affect many others. This is the realization we are trying to convey to the community: ensuring that everyone is ready to share their data. Commercial practices and competition take a backseat, and our priority is truly to ensure the safety and sustainable use of space.'
Cleaning up this space debris runs into a complex diplomatic knot. The 1967 Treaty states that any object sent into space remains under the perpetual jurisdiction and ownership of the country that launched it. This means a nation cannot take another country's broken satellite without prior permission. Any unauthorized interference can be interpreted under international law as a violation of sovereignty or an act of military espionage.
The situation is exacerbated by the lack of legal liability for leaving equipment in space after decommissioning. 'Unfortunately, when a satellite is decommissioned, no organization is responsible for it,' reports Erika. 'It effectively becomes space debris, and if an accident occurs, it is impossible to hold anyone accountable.' For this reason, the trend in the sector is to pressure organizations to adopt preventive measures when proximity risks are identified.
Disagreements over territorial control are also recurring on the lunar surface, where the race for valuable resources intensifies global competition. The Moon's south pole has become the most desirable area for current research, as it contains strategic reserves of water in the form of ice deep within craters. This resource is vital for the survival of human bases and for local production of rocket fuel.
Since the treaty prohibits ownership of the surface but does not detail material extraction, powers interpret the rules differently. To attempt to organize operations on the natural satellite, NASA developed the Artemis Accords. This document proposes the creation of 'safety zones' to prevent operational interference between competing missions on the lunar surface.
Nevertheless, this proposal has not received support from all major space powers. China and Russia are not participating in the US-led initiative, while debates about new rules for space resource utilization are also taking place at the United Nations (UN), where a dedicated working group on the matter has been established.
Previous attempts to resolve the regulatory vacuum have also failed. The UN's 1979 Governmental Agreement on State Activities on the Moon, which declared lunar resources the common heritage of mankind, was ignored by the main carrier nations. The lack of practical enforcement has frozen the creation of legally binding laws with real applicability.
Although historical and recent missions have left waste on the Moon, the scale of this debris is incomparably smaller than that accumulated in near-Earth orbit. Erika notes that lunar debris may have a different fate through recycling, serving as metallic raw material for building human bases. The astronomer estimates that new lunar missions are already starting at a level of responsibility and sustainability far exceeding initial terrestrial exploration.
However, from a legal and diplomatic standpoint, there remains no clear definition of what constitutes debris versus what should be preserved as historical heritage, such as Apollo 11 landing sites, which remains a subject of discussion in the UN Space Committee.
The time to act is now. Waiting until a satellite is hit, a mission is blocked, or a lunar area is occupied before filling this legal gap is too high a risk. When a dispute turns into a real conflict, solving the problem will become much more difficult—and the damage much greater.