Other

Resetting US-China space cooperation

In November NASA administration Charles Bolden suggested any US-China space cooperation would proceed at a slow pace after his visit to China in October. That meeting, set up after a meeting of Presidents Hu and Obama in China in 2009, was also to feature a visit to the US by “the appropriate Chinese counterpart” to Bolden in 2010. That visit didn’t come, though, as Aviation Week suggested that Bolden was trying not to “alienate” Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), a leading critic of China and the new chairman of the appropriations subcommittee whose jurisdiction includes NASA.

In a joint statement yesterday during Hu’s visit to Washington, the issue of space again appeared, with a new offer by the US for hosting a Chinese space meeting:

The United States and China agreed to take specific actions to deepen dialogue and exchanges in the field of space. The United States invited a Chinese delegation to visit NASA headquarters and other appropriate NASA facilities in 2011 to reciprocate for the productive visit of the U.S. NASA Administrator to China in 2010. The two sides agreed to continue discussions on opportunities for practical future cooperation in the space arena, based on principles of transparency, reciprocity, and mutual benefit.

The statement this time refers to a “Chinese delegation” instead of the “appropriate Chinese counterpart” to the NASA administrator, perhaps getting around one issue Chinese space experts like Dean Cheng have observed: China has apparently never designated who the counterpart to the NASA administrator is in the Chinese space program.

22 comments to Resetting US-China space cooperation

  • GeeSpace

    The statement this time refers to a “Chinese delegation” instead of the “appropriate Chinese counterpart” to the NASA administrator.

    Well, the answer is apparent—It takes several Chinese persons to equal one Charles Bolden.

  • Dennis Berube

    Does anyone think China will be allowed to link up to the ISS?

  • Does anyone think China will be allowed to link up to the ISS?

    I’m not sure why they would want to. In fact, I’m not sure why they would want to cooperate with the U.S. in space exploration at all. People often wonder if we should go to Mars with China or without China. The real issue might be whether they want to go with or without us. They were the ones who were willing to spend $100 million on their Olympics opening ceremony. For what? There’s no other reason but national prestige. It helped to elevate them higher on the world stage.

    A Chinese mission to the Moon or Mars would have the same effect. Does anyone think the U.S. was asking the Soviets if they wanted to cooperate with us after they launched Sputnik and Gagarin? No, because we wanted to prove ourselves.

  • James T

    @ Dennis Berube

    I don’t see why not. Actually that would seem to me to be the first logical step towards future cooperation.

    Adding any new partners to the ISS could reduce our own financial obligations. Considering the fact that the EU still hasn’t committed funds for the 2020 extension (correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought that’s where the situation still stood), any new commitments we can get from any new partners would be a plus. We get to save some money and they get somewhere to go in space that isn’t as difficult or long term as their plans to land their own man on the moon. That represents the “mutual benefit” that is talked about as the basis for future relations.

    Now take it from the other angle. Let’s say we don’t let them join into the ISS or our other partners don’t let them join (I’m not sure how the bureaucracy plays out with the ISS). The other alternative for a cooperative effort would have to be a new project, and this new project must be mutually beneficial. This project can either be US-China only or another international effort. Any new project represents a commitment of personnel and money that is not already on the books. Such a project would need to be included into a budget proposal, passed by congress, and signed by the president. So this kind of effort would, at the very least, be subject to our domestic political infighting and would take time to finally be implemented. I’m not trying to suggest that inclusion into the ISS is immune to factors such as these, but I imagine it would be easier than a brand new effort.

    In conclusion, I find that including China in ISS efforts is a readily available option for cooperation that doesn’t require new money or personnel on our part. This would serve as a foundation upon which future cooperation can be built, not just with us but with the all of the ISS partners (although I’m not sure how much they care about working with China). Not to mention that I think it would look bad to try and start a new project with them while excluding them from an ongoing international project.

  • amightywind

    Congress is increasingly hostile to China and sensitive to technology transfer, especially the kind that can be launched back at us. Deeper cooperation won’t happen in the near future. Sad that Obama continues to use the silly ‘reset’ language considering it has been a total failure in Russia policy.

  • William Mellberg

    James wrote:

    “The real issue might be whether they want to go with or without us. They were the ones who were willing to spend $100 million on their Olympics opening ceremony. For what? There’s no other reason but national prestige. It helped to elevate them higher on the world stage.”

    Excellent point!

    The Chinese are pursuing their own space station effort. The first component of that station, the Tiangong 1 module, will reportedly be launched during the first half of this year followed by an unmanned Shenzhou 8 docking mission which will add another module to the station. If all goes well, two additional Tiangong modules will be added over the next few years. Shenzhou 9 will reportedly send the first crew to China’s space station in 2012.

    As with its new J-20 stealth fighter, the Chinese are flexing their muscles and demonstrating their growing superpower status. An aggressive manned space program is an important and prestigious part of China’s rapidly developing technological base — and one which has propaganda value both at home and abroad.

  • Vladislaw

    James wrote:

    “Does anyone think the U.S. was asking the Soviets if they wanted to cooperate with us after they launched Sputnik and Gagarin? No, because we wanted to prove ourselves.”

    Ah .. ya, actually we did:

    “Early in his presidency, John F. Kennedy made repeated attempts to engage the Soviet Union in space cooperation. In his inaugural address, Kennedy said, “Let both sides seek to invoke the wonders of science instead of its terrors. Together let us explore the stars.’’ Khrushchev, still persuaded of the eternal supremacy of Soviet rocketry, was not moved. Less than three months after Kennedy’s inauguration, on April 12, 1961, Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin became the first human to escape Earth’s gravity. In the aftermath of his brief flight, the piloted component of the Soviet space program rapidly grew to become indisputably dominant over any other type of space activity. Official Soviet propaganda was obsessed with everything that happened in orbit, including elaborate descriptions of the cosmonauts’ menu at their last breakfast and all of the details of their physical exercise program. Every launch produced several more “Heroes of the Soviet Union,” and more photographs of space superstars embraced by Khrushchev. At the same time, the Soviets were left far behind in other key areas of space technology. Their first geostationary telecommunication satellite was launched 11 years after its American counterpart. In the case of getting meteorological data from a geostationary location, the gap was even bigger.

    Despite the continued space competition between the United States and U.S.S.R., Khrushchev sent Kennedy a letter raising the possibility of space cooperation on a modest level after John Glenn became the first American to orbit Earth on Feb. 20, 1962. That led to two rounds of discussions between NASA’s Deputy Administrator Hugh Dryden and Soviet academician Blagonravov. An agreement led to the opening of cooperation in three areas: 1) the exchange of weather data from satellites and the eventual coordinated launching of meteorological satellites; 2) a joint effort to map the geomagnetic field of Earth; and 3) cooperation in the experimental relay of communications. This link became a primary forum for subsequent U.S.-U.S.S.R. interaction on space.”

    http://www.nasa.gov/50th/50th_magazine/coldWarCoOp.html

    If I recall correctly didn’t President Kennedy suggest a joint lunar mission with the Soviets because of the costs?

  • DCSCA

    amightywind wrote @ January 20th, 2011 at 2:25 pm
    You don’t see Reid and Boehner rushing to break bread with Chinese leadership to chat about joint space missions, do you. My morning paper says GOP Congressional planners want a 8% cut in NASA’s budget which NASA whines will cost the operation of the ISS. And so it goes as we march through the tunnel of the Age of Austerity. If NASA was tucked under thw ing of the DoD today, it’d be in a safer position.

  • DCSCA

    Dennis Berube wrote @ January 20th, 2011 at 11:30 am
    Does anyone think China will be allowed to link up to the ISS?

    Allow? Heck, sell the American interest in it to them.

  • amightywind

    If NASA was tucked under thw ing of the DoD today, it’d be in a safer position.

    Even the DoD will get hit eventually. DeMint is just staking out his initial position, wisely before Obama’s SOTUA. NASA will get socked. Congress will demand a reorganization, and hopefully many non-core activities will be dropped entirely. But Congress will fund rocket development. To take it away would be like taking tanks away from the Army.

  • Das Boese

    The proposed “space summit” increasingly becomes less of a “nice thing thing to have” and more of a necessity. It’s increasingly clear that the current uncoordinated patchwork of cooperations in space exploration is terribly unproductive.

    I’m not sure yet what China could contribute to ISS, but Chang’e has shown that they’re capable of making worthwhile contributions to space exploration (as has India’s Chandrayaan mission, I might add, and I’d rather like for them to participate as well, more than the Chinese actually).
    Perhaps China’s research on battery technology and semiconductor manufacturing could come in very handy for future joint projects, if they’re willing to share it.

  • If the U.S. and Soviets cooperated on weather, the geomagnetic field, and communications, that doesn’t say much. These don’t involve launching humans, and are minor issues as far as the general public is concerned. Politicians are all about doubespeak; it’s more useful to look at what actually was done. I can’t imagine the U.S. was making any offers of cooperation on human spaceflight in the late ’60s. The two powers were engaged in an all-out competition, however irrational that may be. After the moon race was clearly over, the situation changed completely and cooperation seemed like the thing to do.

    But China has not yet made any “firsts” in space. Everything they’ve done so far, the U.S. and Soviets did in the ’60s. It makes more sense to me that they will want to take a leadership role in space.

  • Coastal Ron

    amightywind wrote @ January 20th, 2011 at 7:01 pm

    …hopefully many non-core activities will be dropped entirely.

    Like the SLS. Congress was jumping the gun on it anyways, since the VSE stated:

    NASA does not plan to develop new launch vehicle capabilities except where critical NASA needs—such as heavy lift—are not met by commercial or military systems. Depending on future human mission designs, NASA could decide to develop or acquire a heavy lift vehicle later this decade. Such a vehicle could be derived from elements of the Space Shuttle, existing commercial launch vehicles, or new designs.

    Every funded program NASA has can use existing launchers, and Congress does not have plans requiring anything bigger. Killing the unneeded SLS will save billions – that’s $illions with a ‘B’. Oh, and re-competing (or killing off too) the MPCV/Orion will also save $illions.

  • DCSCA

    amightywind wrote @ January 20th, 2011 at 7:01 pm
    Not as much as you might be led to believe. They’re already attempting to restore proposed cuts. DoD is the safest place for it. As it stands now, it’s ripe for deep cuts.

  • Scott Bass

    I saw a documentary the other day about Chinas building of the 3 gorges dam, I encourage everyone to view it if they ever see it on tv again, It provides great insight in to the china machine. I have no doubt in my mind that the Chinese leadership only has to decide where they want to go, whether it is the moon, mars or anywhere else and they will make it happen in short order. I also believe they have not embraced the direction yet, it is but a tiny piece of all the things they are doing, building 16000 miles of high speed rail, highway projects that will exceed those in all the U.S. In several years. The dam project was amazing….artificially creating a lake the size of lake superior. they may not be able to get U.S. Government assistance or cooperation on many projects but they have proven their ability to assemble the best engineers from around the world to do what they decide to do.

  • Vladislaw

    James wrote:

    “If the U.S. and Soviets cooperated on weather, the geomagnetic field, and communications, that doesn’t say much. These don’t involve launching humans, and are minor issues as far as the general public is concerned.”

    Are you joking? Weather is minor concern to the general public? More people can name a weatherman than they could name an astronaut.

    Launching humans is one of thee most minor concerns to the general public.

  • Weather is minor concern to the general public?

    I’m talking about the issue of cooperation with the Soviets. I don’t think the general American public spent much time thinking about whether we were cooperating with the Soviets on weather forecasting or geomagnetic field research. These aren’t perceived as national strategic areas because a scientific breakthrough in these areas isn’t likely to result in a national advantage.

    Launching humans may be a minor concern to the general public, but that would only be because spaceflight is a minor concern in general. In your quote, it mentions how human spaceflight rapidly eclipsed all other kinds of spaceflight in Soviet propaganda after Gagarin’s flight. Why else would they obsess over the cosmonauts’ menu and exercise routine if the manned component of spaceflight was not perceived to be the most important?

  • E.P. Grondine

    Once again, I must remind all of you here of a few fundamental facts.

    First, you tend to view ISS in China-US terms, but there are also China-Russian, China-Japan, China-Europe views that also must be considered.

    Second, China has expressed no interest in manned flight to Mars.

    Three, China’s space leadership has expressed its interest in the Moon, and explicitly stated the reasons for their interest:
    1) CAPS
    2) 3He
    3) future property rights.

    Four, cooperation with China will continue to take place in certain areas simply because of the technical needs, as it already does today.

    Five, it will be several years in any case before China reaches the technical level to participate in the ISS.

    Six, at that point, China will be able to operate in LEO or on the Moon independently at that point, and whether we choose to join them then in any of their ventures will be up to us, and to Europe, and to Japan, and to Russia.

  • Vladislaw

    “Why else would they obsess over the cosmonauts’ menu and exercise routine if the manned component of spaceflight was not perceived to be the most important?”

    Because it was PROPAGANDA. The Soviet Union was in a constant state of falling apart and waiting in lines to buy toilet paper because the space program was costing so much is the reason it had to be justified and heros had to be generated.

  • P Mills

    AS for the designated counterpart to the NASA adminstrator in the Chinese Space Program all you have to do is take a look on the Web site of the China National Space Administration and he is Mr Chen Qiufa. He met last November 30 in Beijing with Mr Perminov director of the Russian Federal Space Agency. This was at the Eleventh Session of the Space Cooperation sub-Commitee of the China-Russia Premiers Regular Meeting Committe. So much for China not telling who he is! Does not take much working out!

  • Laura Grego

    There is some important historical context for why progress in cooperation and substantial dialogue with China on space issues is frustratingly slow.
    Gregory Kulacki’s comments here and in more detail here discuss why history matters here and gives some suggestions for how the impasse might be resolved.

  • Lurking Observer

    P. Mills:

    And yet, when NASA Administrator Bolden went to China, he met w/ the head of the China Manned Engineering Space Office. Why?

    More to the point, where does CNSA fit within the Chinese political structure? Certainly, from a protocol perspective, the head of CNSA is nominally head of the Chinese civilian space program–which assumes that CNSA, and not the General Armaments Department, is the main administrative element of the Chinese space program.

    For that matter, when you take a look at Chinese reporting on things like Chang’e and Shenzhou space launches, it is not CNSA that is given credit, or even the source of the senior leadership of these very high visibility programs.

Leave a Reply to William Mellberg Cancel reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>