War in Georgia may put space station at risk

It is one of the projects possibly put in jeopardy by the turmoil in the Caucasus -- and by one measure one of the closest to the troubled region -- but it is nowhere on Earth.

Because the U.S. space shuttles are scheduled to be retired in 2010 and the replacement craft won't be ready until 2015, the international space station, orbiting roughly 150 miles above Earth, will rely in coming years to a large extent on Russia's Soyuz spacecraft for crew transport.

But to make the Soyuz available, NASA must negotiate a new contract with Russian officials.

The tensions between Moscow and Washington of the past week, however, have put a variety of projects in question.

The Washington Post reports today that "NASA's ability to send its astronauts to the $100 billion international space station is in danger of becoming a costly casualty of the Russian-Georgian war."

How so?

A 2000 law prohibits the U.S. government from signing contracts with nations that help Iran and North Korea with their nuclear programs -- which, the Post notes, Russia has done.

So, before NASA could finalize an agreement to use the Soyuz to reach the space station, Congress must pass a waiver of the 2000 legislation.

Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) said:

In an election year, it was going to be very difficult to get that waiver to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to an increasingly aggressive Russia, where the prime minister is acting more and more like czar. Now, I'd say it's almost impossible.

-- James Gerstenzang

Photo: AFP / Getty Images

Comments

[Chris]

Thanks again Bush Jr. for avoiding your responsibility of working on the economy. Every time the economy sours, you pick another fight in the world.

[Gary]

I don't think you've been reading the news, or this article. Georgia started the fight with Russia, not Bush. Russia then invaded Georgia. Georgia has close ties to NATO. While Bush Jr. has done many dumb things, this isn't one of them. The quote is from congress, not the President.

In this case, if you want to place blame, blame the new Russian President, or it's short sighted ex-President, whoops, I mean Prime Minister.

[Calculating]

Looks like the Soviets are back at it. Pay attention Europe, won't be long before countries near you are absorbed back into the Soviet block. The Soviets are upset because the United States is signing defense pacts with two countries it planned to absorb without physical intercedence from foreign nations. Their planned actions are not unlike the way it has been able to come up with an excuse to waltz in and basically take control of all but the capital of Georgia, which is itself pinned. Is this any different than the way it swallowed up the countries where it fought during World War II, in the name of fighting the war and then didn't relinquish its hold after the war?

[fear_itself]

So ...instead of re-negotiating with the Ruskies , why not extend the life of the space shuttle? I'm sure it could be done ...and quite frankly, it was a stupid idea in the first place to think about moth-balling it if we won't have a replacement waiting in the wings ready to go ...Am I making sense?

[Alf P. Steinbach]

The US needs to engage in healthy co-opetition (cooperation/competition) with Russia and other powers, not yet again making Russia into an enemy.

It's very simple, in a 30-40 year perspective, which the US had right after WWII (and all European nations are still extremely grateful for that!), but which it's lacked in recent years.

The enemy picture may yield short-term local political gain, but it's not as if Bush is in a position to capitalize on that. So the new stance vis-a-vis Russia reads as irrational as that administration's earlier actions on the international arena. But, what can one expect with a religious nutcase in office as president of what, just three or four years ago, still was the only remaining superpower -- how short the time to squander away such a position!

[George Wolf III]

Congress and the president should close the gap by extending the space shuttle a couple of more years and bring the Ares I rocket on line a year earlier. That would still leave a two-year gap where we would have to rely on the Russians for help, but it's better than what we've got now.

[Chuck]

Does anyone know of any practical research results or applications that we got out of the space station? What have we gotten in return for our $100 Billion?

[Dan Page]

Russia has been anxiously awaiting a chance to take over Georgia and more.
Read " The Final thrust South" by
Vladimir Volfovich Zhirinovsky
"Mad Vlad" Spelled it out 14 years ago.

[Pat Duignan]

Congress would be cutting off its nose to spite its face if it refused NASA permission to negotiate an agreement with the Russians. The Russians will just get on with sending their cosmonauts to the International Space Station. So the US would be cutting themselves out of using the space station for 5 years!

That would be NUTS!!

[Tom Mariner]

Oops, forgot about the Space factor. My initial thoughts on the Russian invasion of Georgia was "Isn't that what NATO is for?" I, like about everyone else, was lulled into the belief that Russia had turned the corner and was focusing on making their citizen's lives better rather than the tiny cadre of brutal "leaders".

But the Russians have a card I forgot -- and transport into space is a microcosm of our failure to continue our love affair with technology of 40 years ago. All large blossoming economies are simply commercializing science that we originally began years ago. And that honoring of their technologists does not stop at promoting those who are actively inventing -- The current Chinese leader is an engineer by trade -- as are many in the top ranks of government.

So we have a concrete example of how political options are dashed by our failure to recognize those who innovate, It isn't the first time, and it won't be the last as we slip down a slippery slope, yelling "point of order" or "remember we invented that".

Sad.