Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said Tuesday that, in response to American sanctions imposed after its annexation of Crimea, his country would ban the United States from the International Space Station after 2020.
“The Russian segment can exist independently from the American one,” he said. “The U.S. one cannot.”
Rogozin has a point, and it’s one that puts the future of U.S. spaceflight in question. While the station is manned by an American and Russian (and Japanese and Canadian) crew, the only way to get there is on Russian Soyuz spacecraft. NASA pays Russia $70.7 million per trip to ferry its astronauts to and from the station. While Russia depends on NASA’s electronics and communications technology, which are more advanced, transportation trumps tech out there.
Rogozin’s remarks may also be no more than political posturing. NASA officials say the agency has not received any official notification from Russia about changes in cooperation. It’s business as usual at the station right now: Three astronauts — American, Russian and Japanese — returned to earth from the station on Wednesday after more than six months working together in space. Two Russians and one American remain, and a new batch of astronauts is expected to launch in a few weeks.
Clara Moskowitz at Scientific American points out that talk about cutting ties with the U.S. came from a Russian politician, rather than an official at Roscosmos, Russia’s space agency, or the country’s scientific community. “At the political level, people are starting to huff and puff,” space policy expert Roger Handberg of the University of Central Florida told Moskowitz. “But at the agency level, they’re trying to keep it calm because they understand they’re tied together at this point.”
In January, the Obama administration extended the ISS mission, scheduled to end in 2017, until 2024. In March, when the Ukraine crisis began in earnest, the idea that political tension would affect one of humanity’s greatest achievements was hard to believe. Back then, NASA was “confident that our two space agencies will continue to work closely as they have throughout various ups and downs of the broader U.S.-Russia relationship,” a spokesman for the agency said. After all, NASA’s relationship with Roscomos had previously withstood the conflict in Syria and Russia’s protection of NSA whistle-blower Edward Snowden.
The rosy picture of collaboration has soured since then. In early April, NASA suspended contact with Russian government representatives, citing the country’s “ongoing violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.” At the time, operations aboard the ISS were exempt from the suspension. Now the future of those operations is in doubt.
That kind of talk is enough to change the situation on the ground even as cooperation continues in space. Russia’s threat of kicking U.S. astronauts off ISS could add more fuel to NASA’s partnership with private American spaceflight companies, who are working to launch astronauts from American soil by 2017. U.S. lawmakers have long called for ending American dependence on Russian space transport, and the recent threats from Moscow could rally support in Washington.
Weakened ties with Russia could also mean that one of America’s biggest political rivals on earth could become its biggest ally in space. China is not part of the ISS mission, in part because of U.S. opposition, but it recently successfully transported crew to and from a Chinese space station.
“China is an obvious addition to the international [human spaceflight] partnership, both for the ISS program and beyond,” Leroy Chiao, a former NASA astronaut, told the Senate Science and Space Subcommittee last month.
So don’t worry, Russia’s ban does not mean the ISS is going to plummet into the ocean anytime soon. It does, however, mean that even space is no longer immune to politics.
What We're Following See More »
Foreign Policy takes a look at the future of mining the estimated "100,000 near-Earth objects—including asteroids and comets—in the neighborhood of our planet. Some of these NEOs, as they’re called, are small. Others are substantial and potentially packed full of water and various important minerals, such as nickel, cobalt, and iron. One day, advocates believe, those objects will be tapped by variations on the equipment used in the coal mines of Kentucky or in the diamond mines of Africa. And for immense gain: According to industry experts, the contents of a single asteroid could be worth trillions of dollars." But the technology to get us there is only the first step. Experts say "a multinational body might emerge" to manage rights to NEOs, as well as a body of law, including an international court.
Not to be outdone by Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece in The Atlantic about President Obama's foreign policy, the New York Times Magazine checks in with a longread on the president's economic legacy. In it, Obama is cognizant that the economic reality--73 straight months of growth--isn't matched by public perceptions. Some of that, he says, is due to a constant drumbeat from the right that "that denies any progress." But he also accepts some blame himself. “I mean, the truth of the matter is that if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken to the swing voter,” he said, “then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate.”
Ronald Reagan's children and political allies took to the media and Twitter this week to chide funnyman Will Ferrell for his plans to play a dementia-addled Reagan in his second term in a new comedy entitled Reagan. In an open letter, Reagan's daughter Patti Davis tells Ferrell, who's also a producer on the movie, “Perhaps for your comedy you would like to visit some dementia facilities. I have—I didn’t find anything comedic there, and my hope would be that if you’re a decent human being, you wouldn’t either.” Michael Reagan, the president's son, tweeted, "What an Outrag....Alzheimers is not joke...It kills..You should be ashamed all of you." And former Rep. Joe Walsh called it an example of "Hollywood taking a shot at conservatives again."
In a sign that she’s ready to put a longer-than-expected primary battle behind her, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D) is no longer going on the air in upcoming primary states. “Team Clinton hasn’t spent a single cent in … California, Indiana, Kentucky, Oregon and West Virginia, while” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “campaign has spent a little more than $1 million in those same states.” Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sanders’ "lone backer in the Senate, said the candidate should end his presidential campaign if he’s losing to Hillary Clinton after the primary season concludes in June, breaking sharply with the candidate who is vowing to take his insurgent bid to the party convention in Philadelphia.”