Technologies

Pay Attention to the Artemis II Moon Mission. It’s Not Just Any Spaceflight

Commentary: NASA is sending four astronauts farther into space than any humans have ever traveled. But there’s a much deeper subtext about what it all means.

Travel to space has become commonplace. Over the last three decades, nearly 300 people have flown to and from the International Space Station, some of them residing there for months at a time. In the last several years, the rocket startup Blue Origin has launched a series of day trips just over the threshold into space — high-end carnival rides for celebrities including Katy Perry, Gayle King and William Shatner.

The imminent Artemis II lunar mission is different.

NASA’s spaceflight, scheduled to lift off Wednesday evening, will carry four astronauts on a round-trip all the way to the moon, a thousand times farther away than the space station, and they’ll have to break free from Earth’s gravity to do so. It’s a trip that only two dozen humans have ever taken, and the last time it happened was in 1972.

Artemis II’s Orion spacecraft will also take its four astronauts farther than any humans have ever traveled into space, on a long arc reaching 4,700 miles beyond the far side of the moon. By contrast, the Apollo astronauts 50-plus years ago were snuggled into a lunar orbit just 70 or so miles from the surface.

This will be a massive achievement for NASA in its own right. It is also a harbinger of a new and disruptive era in the still-unfolding Space Age.

Yet it hardly seems to be making a dent in the national conversation.

For sure, there’s a lot going on here on Earth that’s on the front of many people’s minds. Military conflict. Government gridlock. Political protests. Anxiety about the cost of living and adequate health care. But that was true back in the ’60s and early ’70s as well, and perhaps never more so than in the years right around the first moon landing in July 1969, Apollo 11’s one giant leap for mankind.

I was a kid when Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin put their bootprints into the dusty lunar terrain, and I vividly remember the nonstop TV coverage. I eagerly tuned in to see the splashdowns as the astronauts from all the Apollo spaceflights returned to Earth. It was a gripping, heroic narrative.

Those Apollo moon missions were the culmination of the first wave of space exploration, a decade and a half filled with remarkable feats, one after another.

The Artemis missions mark the start of a whole new era of space exploitation.

Building a lunar base

Artemis II won’t put astronauts on the lunar surface. Like the historic Apollo 8 mission in December 1968 — the first to send humans beyond Earth’s orbit, the one that gave us our first view of our planet as a blue orb against a sea of deep black — it’s a flyby in preparation for an eventual landing. That touchdown by astronauts will happen in the Artemis IV mission, currently scheduled for early 2028.

NASA’s longer-term goals include the establishment of a lunar base to achieve “an enduring human presence” on the moon. That outpost will become a hub of activity for an ambitious range of activity, from scientific investigations to power generation to the building of sustainable and habitable infrastructure.

The Apollo missions brought back a few moon rocks and dust samples. Souvenirs, basically. In the years ahead, the US and other countries will be looking to unlock the moon’s natural resources, extracting minerals with industrial value and tapping into water ice for, well, survival, but also creating fuel. NASA and others have been giving serious consideration to the opportunities for commercial space mining, including on the moon.

NASA’s efforts have also roped in SpaceX’s Elon Musk and Blue Origin’s Jeff Bezos, two of the richest humans on the planet.

The US space agency isn’t alone in wanting to put boots on the moon. China has plans to put its own crews there in 2030. Russia, India and other countries have been busy with their own (uncrewed) lunar lander programs.

We aren’t far off from a new and unprecedented round of great power competition, with real stakes, not just bragging rights.

Factories on the moon

And then there’s Musk, almost a nation-state unto himself. Long obsessed with spreading human consciousness across the solar system, long fixated on Mars as the starting point, the man behind SpaceX rockets and Starlink satellites has reoriented his grandiose attention to our nearer neighbor.

Earlier this year, Musk said he’s shifted his focus to “building a self-growing city on the Moon,” potentially “in less than 10 years.”

It would no doubt be an industrial city more than a cosmopolitan one — “a permanent presence for scientific and manufacturing pursuits,” Musk wrote in February when announcing SpaceX’s acquisition of his xAI company. “Factories on the Moon can take advantage of lunar resources to manufacture satellites and deploy them further into space.”

Let that sink in: factories on the moon.

In the near term, there will be no shortage of Musk-made satellites launching from Earth. Over the last few years, SpaceX has put 10,000 Starlink satellites into low Earth orbit, estimated to be 85% of all satellites in an increasingly crowded belt around our planet. As big as that number sounds, it’s a fraction of what Musk has in mind.

Here’s where AI enters the picture.

In that February announcement, Musk also wrote of “launching a million satellites that operate as orbital data centers.” AI data centers in space is an idea having a moment: Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, maker of the chips powering the AI revolution, seems keen on the idea as well.

NASA, meanwhile, has its own plans for a “competitive commercial ecosystem” in orbit.

‘The common heritage of mankind’

All these plans will be tested by hard engineering and economic realities. Musk envisions launching rockets every 10 days to support the construction of that moon city. NASA is targeting a moon landing every six months to start, with a potentially faster cadence to follow. But moon shots are more complicated than rocket launches to orbit.

The first moon landing program ended with the Apollo 17 mission, even though several more flights were planned. President Richard Nixon curtailed the effort because of the cost. Focus shifted to space stations and the space shuttle — and the shorter commute to low Earth orbit.

Costs and commerce will inevitably be at the center of the conversations we’ll need to have as a nation about what we do on — and to — the moon. We need to be talking more, too, about how we care for the ever-more-congested realm of satellite-strewn space just outside our atmosphere.

That can all start right now. Pay attention to this Artemis moon mission. Thrill at the adventure: watching the rocket soar into the sky, tracking Orion’s long flight out and back, giving thanks for a safe return.

And heed the words of the UN’s hopeful moon agreement of 1979 and its framework for exploration and use of our one natural satellite: “The moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind.”

Technologies

Trump Maintains US‑Iran Negotiations Continue Amid Tehran’s Denials of Duplicity

President Trump insists that US‑Iran talks are ongoing despite Tehran’s denial of any negotiation plans, while warning that only a deal or total surrender will allow passage through the Strait of Hormuz. Conflicting statements from both sides have heightened uncertainty as the conflict enters its sixth month.

On Monday, President Donald Trump asserted that negotiations between the United States and Iran are still taking place, even after Tehran stated it has no intention of engaging in direct talks with Washington.

In a fiery Truth Social post, Trump labeled Iran’s leaders “unbelievably duplicitous,” claiming they are lying about ongoing peace talks “whether Iran wants to admit it or not.” He repeated his assertion that the United States completely controls the Strait of Hormuz, despite maritime traffic through the crucial route lingering at only a small fraction of pre‑conflict levels.

He wrote, “Nothing reaches Iran unless we allow it, and nothing will pass unless a deal—or total surrender—is achieved.”

Earlier that day, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei told reporters there is no imminent plan for U.S.–Iran negotiations, contradicting Trump’s earlier comment that talks would resume Monday afternoon. Baghaei added that Iran’s only current discussions are with Oman concerning the Strait of Hormuz.

The conflicting statements have heightened uncertainty over the peace‑talk process and the broader conflict, now in its sixth month.

Trump’s assertion about new negotiations came a day after he said on Truth Social that he had agreed to cancel a massive strike against Iran “subject to being able to rapidly make a DEAL.” He said in the same post that Iran and other Middle Eastern countries had asked him to hold off on that attack because “the perimeters of a deal has been agreed to.”

Trump has claimed dozens of times throughout the more‑than‑five‑month‑long war that a deal is at hand. No permanent deal has been signed, and a temporary ceasefire reached in June has fallen apart.

Trump has also repeatedly threatened to launch devastating strikes against Iran before backing off. After the latest example, oil prices on Monday fell and stocks surged.

BMI, a research unit of Fitch Solutions, said in a note Monday that a broader diplomatic understanding on reopening the Strait of Hormuz is still achievable this quarter, while raising the probability of its escalation scenario to 35% from 25%, citing mounting military, diplomatic and economic signs of rising U.S.-Iran tensions.

“Diplomatic progress is likely to be punctuated by periodic military flare-ups, while miscalculation by either side could trigger a renewed escalation,” BMI analysts wrote in a note. The firm said the key issue to watch is the future governance of the strait, as the Iran-Oman talks — potentially backed by Gulf states, China and the U.S. — point to efforts to build a post-conflict shipping framework.

Shipping risks persist even as diplomacy appears to be advancing. The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations Centre said it received a report of an incident 20 nautical miles (23 miles) northeast of Khasab, Oman — at the mouth of the strait — with a tanker’s master reporting an explosion in close proximity to the vessel at about 20:37 UTC Sunday (4:37 pm ET). The vessel and crew were safe and authorities are investigating, UKMTO said, advising ships to transit with caution.

The proposal Trump announced over the weekend calls for the U.S. and Iran to return to negotiations and continue ironing out some of the thorny issues that had derailed diplomatic efforts, according to The Associated Press, citing a regional official involved in the mediation efforts.

The official said the proposal also includes a reopening of the Hormuz Strait and halting attacks across the region, including by Iranian-backed militias in Iraq on the Arab Gulf countries and Jordan.

The U.S., for its part, will end its naval blockade on Iran and allow Tehran to export its oil, the official said, adding that no deal has been reached, although the mediation efforts remained underway.

Trump’s weekend reversal has lowered the temperature after days of escalating attacks across the Gulf. Kuwait said Saturday that Iranian forces launched a wave of drones within its airspace, with its military destroying multiple aircraft after Iran targeted critical infrastructure in the country’s north.

A parallel track with Muscat is also advancing. Iranian diplomats said Tehran was close to reaching a new arrangement with Oman to manage shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a deal critical to preventing the war from escalating further, according to the Financial Times.

Iranian officials said negotiations over future management of the Hormuz Strait with Oman, which sits on the opposite shore of the waterway, are in their final stages. The agreed shipping route would be different from those used before, according to Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Baghaei, adding that the new route was separate from the issue of the strait’s reopening or continued closure.

Technologies

Oil Prices Slide as Trump Halts Planned Iran Strike

Oil prices dropped after Trump cancelled a planned strike on Iran, with WTI down about 5% and Brent near 5% lower. He said the move followed requests from Tehran and regional allies for a pause while a deal shaping the Strait of Hormuz and Iran’s nuclear program is negotiated.

Oil prices fell on Monday after President Donald Trump announced he had cancelled a planned strike on Iran. WTI futures dropped roughly 5% to $80.34 a barrel, while Brent slipped about 4.7% to $83.77 a barrel.

Trump said early Sunday he called off the strike after Iran and several Middle Eastern nations asked him to hold off, noting that the outlines of a deal had been agreed upon. He added that the prospective accord would entail the immediate, full opening of the Strait of Hormuz and an end to Iran’s nuclear ambitions, according to his Truth Social post.

The president had been considering another round of strikes as diplomatic hopes waned since the conflict began on February 28. He said the U.S. and Iran would meet for talks on Monday, but Iran denied any scheduled negotiations with Washington, citing PressTV. Iran’s foreign‑ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei clarified that Tehran was only discussing shipping routes through the Strait of Hormuz with Oman. In a follow‑up Truth Social message, Trump insisted that, regardless of Iran’s acknowledgment, the United States is indeed discussing a solution to a long‑standing problem created by Iran.

Technologies

Oil Prices Drop as Trump Cancels Planned Attack on Iran

Oil prices fell sharply after President Trump announced the cancellation of a planned strike on Iran, citing a new deal that would open the Hormuz Strait and end Iran’s nuclear threat.

Oil prices fell sharply on Monday after President Donald Trump announced that he had called off a planned strike on Iran.

West Texas Intermediate futures, the U.S. benchmark, slipped roughly 5% to close at $80.34 per barrel, while Brent crude, the international benchmark, declined 4.7% to settle at $83.77 a barrel.

Trump made the announcement early Sunday, saying he had canceled the strike following requests from Tehran and other Middle Eastern countries.

In a Truth Social post, he wrote: “We have just been asked by Iran, and other Middle Eastern Countries, to hold off any attack in that the perimeters of a deal has been agreed to.”

The president indicated that the proposed agreement would include the immediate, complete, and total opening of the Hormuz Strait, as well as an end to Iran’s nuclear threat.

Trump had been weighing additional strikes amid diminishing prospects for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict that began on Feb. 28. He stated that the U.S. and Iran would hold negotiations on Monday.

Tehran denied that talks were planned with Washington, according to state news outlet PressTV.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said Tehran was only holding talks with Oman regarding the routes ships can use through the Strait of Hormuz.

In a subsequent Truth Social post, Trump added that whether “Iran wants to admit it or not, we are, in fact, talking of a solution to a problem that they have caused for decades.”