WASHINGTON—When NASA’s Orion capsule landed in the Pacific Ocean off the coast of California last week, it marked the end of the historic Artemis II mission. But as NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman announced shortly after the successful splashdown, sending four astronauts further into space than any humans before them was just the beginning—“the opening act of America’s return to the Moon.” This ambition isn’t new. In fact, NASA has been preparing a return to the lunar surface for years and has actively worked on plans to establish humanity’s first lunar-orbit space station. What is new, however, is that the space agency won’t be moving forward with the project as part of its 2019 Gateway program anymore. Just before the launch of Artemis II, NASA announced that it would “pause Gateway in its current form.” Instead, it intends to shift its focus and resources toward its recently announced Ignition program, which was designed to align with US President Donald Trump’s National Space Policy.

Despite the agency’s “no surprises” policy, this announcement apparently caught some international partners off guard. And not surprisingly so: while many of them invested in Gateway, which aimed to establish an international space station in lunar orbit, the Ignition agenda prioritizes building a US presence on the surface of the Moon. Even more concerning for US partners and allies—including Canada, Europe, Japan, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE)—is the fact that NASA has yet to clarify what role they will play in its new approach going forward. 

From Europe to Asia, allies grapple with NASA’s pivot

Among NASA’s international partners, reactions to the agency’s strategic pivot have been mixed, with some indicating flexibility and others openly expressing frustration. 

For example, the UAE’s Mohammed bin Rashid Space Centre, which was tasked with the development of Gateway’s multi-million-dollar Crew and Science Airlock Module, has pledged its continued support under Ignition. But responses from Canada and Europe have been more cautious. 

MDA Space, the Canadian manufacturing company that was actively developing a robotic arm for Gateway’s lunar orbit space station under the Canadian Space Agency, has stated that the shift came as a “surprise.” Meanwhile, European Space Agency (ESA) director Josef Aschbacher cautioned that a conversation about ESA’s role in Ignition—and about the consequences for its contracted private companies—must “take place right now.” 

Within international partnerships, consistency and clear communication are key. And even though it’s likely that Gateway-related projects will be repurposed, NASA’s international partners are clearly left grappling with uncertainty about how their prior commitments will translate into NASA’s new strategic framework.

Why international collaboration is central to US space ambitions

Addressing this issue should be central to the space operations of US partners and to NASA. After all, a mission like Artemis II—which sent the first Canadian astronaut around the Moon—would not have been possible without both the technical and financial support of international partners. Agencies from Canada, Europe, and Japan are contributing crucial components to NASA missions, and they have demonstrated a willingness to provide financial and technical support in times of change. 

In May 2025, when NASA faced the possibility of budget cuts, the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency pledged that it would support lower-cost lunar missions if the United States shifted its budgeting priorities—and that it would be willing to align its contributions with NASA’s preferred exploration goals. Given that the Trump administration has recently announced that it wants to cut $3.4 billion from NASA’s science programs as part of its 2027 budget proposal, as well as cancel forty of the agency’s planned missions, this kind of allied financial support might prove crucial in the future. 

Moreover, international partnerships will be essential to maintaining US leadership in space exploration, particularly as China advances its own lunar ambitions. As Charity Weeden, nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s GeoTech Center and former associate administrator for technology, policy, and strategy at NASA, told me, the United States must assert its role “as a global leader with its allies, not standing alone.”

China has completed two robotic lunar sample return missions since 2020. The United States has not conducted a human lunar sample return mission since Apollo 17 in 1972. China is also planning a Mars mission in 2028 that is expected to return samples to Earth three years later. Moreover, Beijing has moved to build its own international partnerships and has pushed forward multilateral projects, such as its International Lunar Research Station, for which it has already signed memoranda of understanding with partners such as the UAE. Against this backdrop, a failure of the US administration to effectively coordinate with its international partners risks turning into a major setback for US dominance in space diplomacy.

Three priorities for ensuring allied cooperation under the Ignition program

As past NASA reports have found, the agency has at times failed to effectively communicate the role of international partnerships in its missions. In the case of Artemis, for instance, NASA initially failed to provide clear cost estimates, making it difficult for international partners to assess where their resources and capabilities fit into the project. This has not always been the case, however. In 2009, NASA published a plan titled “Human Exploration of Mars: Design Reference Architecture,” which contained specific details on objectives and how resources would be utilized. The agency should build on such models again to ensure that partners are “insiders” and not afterthoughts.

2. Open opportunities for international partnerships to sustain space leadership

If the US administration’s focus is on beating China, then ensuring allied space agencies are working alongside it will be crucial. Since the contracts for Ignition’s lunar base have not yet been finalized, there is a narrow window to integrate NASA’s partners in the development of lunar habitat modules or robots—key infrastructure for the success of Ignition. NASA must rethink its partnerships as genuine joint ventures rather than simple plug-in contributions. Aligning international stakeholder interests might come at the cost of speed, but it would result in a more sustainable overall exploration program. And leveraging allied capabilities and soft power is the most effective way to outpace China in the long run.

3. Frame priorities around shared international ambitions

By framing Ignition’s primary goal as ensuring that “America never again gives up the Moon,” NASA has left too little room for international cooperation. Moving away from this purely individualistic language and framing the program as not just benefiting NASA but also its partners would help ensure that US dominance in space is strengthened. As Dan Hart, nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s GeoTech Center, has argued: “Landing on the Moon and planting a flag has major symbolic value, but scientific leadership has a longer-lasting effect on US leadership.”