Our reaction? “Punish” the Rooskies by purchasing more Soyuz rides from them.

The fact is that ASTP was a stunt that did not lead to lasting US-Soviet space cooperation and did absolutely nothing, in the big picture, to influence Soviet behavior. Real space cooperation with Russia did not occur until after the USSR broke up, and Russia was invited to join ISS. Even then, that did nothing to influence Russian behavior. The US had hoped that ISS participation would encourage Russia to stop proliferating nuclear and missile technology to nations like Iran. Not only did Russia not stop, they expanded their ties to Iran once it became clear that the US could not punish them without jeopardizing ISS. With the passage of amendments to the INA, the US failure is now complete. This should have served as an object lesson to those advocating similar cooperation with China, but it appears not to have sunk in yet. As far as I’m concerned, the burden is on the proponents of Chinese participation in ISS to prove that this will change anything substantial.

The point that you’re missing, Mark, is that there is already a thousand times more real cooperation between China and the United States than there would be from a few trips to the space station. IBM sold its Thinkpad unit to China. General Motors plans to sell millions of cars in China. There are hundreds of things like that going on.

The fact that the US and China engage in economic cooperation does not mean the US should invite China to ISS. In fact, it can be argued that strengthening those existing economic ties will have far more influence over Chinese behavior than more symbolic measures. If in the future China decides not to invade Taiwan, it will be because US economic cooperation will create a Chinese middle class that will realize that war over Taiwan will be Bad For Business, not because of their participation in ISS.

In any case, just letting some Chinese visit the space station isn’t “selling technology”. It would be good will almost for free. Assuming, that is, that the United States foregoes the even better idea of plunging the space station into the ocean.

That good will plus four bucks will buy you a Frappuccino. It certainly won’t influence Chinese behavior in any areas the US actually cares about. And you would have gotten your wish with ISS if the US had not invited Russia to join – the program would most likely have been cancelled. So if you think ISS is an albatross for the US, why strengthen it by adding yet another partner?

If we cannot cooperate with the Chinese on ISS why should we buy their clothing?

Buying their clothing benefits the US in two ways: lower prices for US consumers and an expanded Chinese middle class that may eventually influence China for the better. Cooperating with them on ISS benefits the Chinese but has no benefits for the US.

… and its trade with England grew, until eventually they were permanent allies.

Permanent allies? Or merely allies of convenience during the first and second half of the German wars of 1914-1945? The Frogs certainly are not allies of les Anglos Saxons now.

While I agree with your wider point (except the nonesense about the Space Station), I disagree with this statement. Treating China as a cold war-type adversery before it is absolutely necessary is guaranteed to get us (and the world) into a great deal of trouble. If you treat a potential criminal as if they have no choice but to become a criminal, if you give them no incentive to be good, you guarantee they will become a criminal. If and when China invades Taiwan, all bets are off. But until then, it is to our benefit to try to tie them tightly into the world economy and to engage with them politically — to give them lots of real, practical, economic reasons not to behave badly. Economic reasons are the kinds of reasons that China listens to.

Mark: I doubt that the Chinese would go for it.

China has repeatedly asked to be invited into the International Space Station project for at least a decade. Right or wrong, we have always ignored them. Who knows whether they would be interested now, but we cannot know if we simply insist they aren’t and don’t ask them.

— Donald

If ISS is an expensive asset, it isn’t really a valuable one. Even if it were valuable, one single ride to it wouldn’t be particularly expensive or valuable. The only real cost is that one of the astronauts in training would have to give up a seat. It would make that select group angry. Big deal.

Besides, if we made that offer, $5 – $7 billion to join a re-negotiated ISS partnership, and China said “no” wouldn’t that be a blow to their prestige and cut off any whining at the knees?

Let’s sell the Chinese a position at ISS ($5 billion maybe?) and add that revenue to cover Griffin’s shortfall.

By the way, I’d rather avoid a shooting war with the Chinese for obvious reasons.

It’s not a foolproof solution. But it is the only solution. China has 20% of the world’s people. Either they stay poor forever or China gains power somehow.

In any case, just letting some Chinese visit the space station isn’t “selling technology”. It would be good will almost for free. Assuming, that is, that the United States foregoes the even better idea of plunging the space station into the ocean.