I think this time the emerging interest is that by leading the effort of and controlling most of the infrastructure for establishing a long term, potentially permanent presence on the Moon, the US can dictate the terms of these first realistic international agreements on the resource rights on foreign bodies. The next closest adversary who is a contender technology-wise for establishing a similar presence is China, so you can imagine that all the issues with them are involved too.

Plus, to a smaller extent there's the idea behind Artemis that all this is a staging ground for our eventual trips to Mars (which, due to the mechanics of it, would have to be a long term thing), where of course the big interest is that it would be another monumental event in human history and politicians would very much like for that to be associated with their name (hell, part of Artemis' motivation was just that they promised to put boots on the Moon before the end of Trump's assumed second term, allowing him to claim to have been the one to oversee America's return to the Moon).