Canada hosts the International Space Station Heads of Agencies Meeting

[bolun]

Some ISS Partners Ready for Chinese Participation [Global Montreal]

Leaders of the international space station (ISS) partner organizations met March 1 in Quebec City, and some expressed an interest in welcoming China to their ranks, Global Montreal reported.

“I am in favor of seeing how we can work together with China,” Jean-Jacques Dordain, director-general of the European Space Agency (ESA), told reporters after the meeting. “It will take some steps, but it will come, I am sure.”

Vladimir Popovkin, the head of the Russian space agency, Roscosmos, said the day will come when China and India will work together with the five current partners — the United States, Russia, Canada, Japan and the ESA. “We are not a closed club,” he said. “Our doors are wide open.”

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said the partners are reaching out to other nations but the U.S. space agency is prohibited by congressional action from any bilateral activities with China.

Read it at: [Global Montreal]

http://www.spacenews.com/commentaries/120302-fromwires-iss-partners-chinese-participation.html

[Space Pete]

I wonder what would actually happen if all the ISS partners bar the USA invited a Chinese Shenzhou to dock with the ISS. Would the US ban all Taikonauts from the US modules? What about the Russian FGB, which was financed by the US? Lest we forget, Taikonauts would have to transit through US modules in order to reach the European and Japanese modules.

Interesting to consider.

[robertross]

I wonder what would actually happen if all the ISS partners bar the USA invited a Chinese Shenzhou to dock with the ISS. Would the US ban all Taikonauts from the US modules? What about the Russian FGB, which was financed by the US? Lest we forget, Taikonauts would have to transit through US modules in order to reach the European and Japanese modules.

Interesting to consider.

I don't think it would ever get that far. If the USA said 'NO', then I would think it unlikely it would ever dock/berth to the ISS. Whether they would decide NOT to change the law is more interesting (imo).

(thanks for your money, but keep away...) 

[Nicolas PILLET]

If the USA said 'NO', then I would think it unlikely it would ever dock/berth to the ISS.

USA said 'NO' to Dennis Tito in 2001... 

[HappyMartian]

If the USA said 'NO', then I would think it unlikely it would ever dock/berth to the ISS.

USA said 'NO' to Dennis Tito in 2001... 

"Dennis Anthony Tito (born August 8, 1940, in Queens, New York) is an Italian American engineer and multimillionaire, most widely known as the first space tourist to fund his own trip into space. In mid-2001, he spent nearly eight days in orbit as a crew member of ISS EP-1, a visiting mission to the International Space Station. This mission was launched by the spacecraft Soyuz TM-32, and was landed by Soyuz TM-31."

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Tito


Yep. Dennis Tito, despite his Master of Science degree in Engineering Science from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, got a no go from NASA. Yet he still managed to get to the ISS. Those Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute graduates are persistent folks. Maybe it is because:

"Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, or RPI, is a private research university located in Troy, New York. It was founded in 1824 by Stephen Van Rensselaer for the 'application of science to the common purposes of life' and is the oldest technological university in the English-speaking world."

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rensselaer_Polytechnic_Institute

Other space powers seem willing to explore and make money in space with China. Eventually, so will America. Everything takes time and political wisdom.

"Dordain noted it took almost 40 years to bring together and build the current partnership.

It will take some time for China to join us and it will take some time to have India, South Korea, Brazil,' he added."

From: Global News: Global Montreal Some space station partners appear ready to welcome China into the group  by Peter Rakobowchuk
Thursday, March 01, 2012
http://www.globalmontreal.com/canada/some+space+station+partners+appear+ready+to+welcome+china+into+the+group/6442592395/story.html


Humans are trying to get their act together to create long-term LEO, L1, L2, Lunar, and Martian laboratories, propellent depots, and homes. The potential of diverse human crews and robots cooperatively doing space activities with the full participation of China, India, South Korea, Brazil, and many other nations is a bit mind boggling.

Sustainable space resource exploitation will take international cooperation and massive amounts of money from many governments and companies. Those efforts in space will have a utility that is hard to place a value on, but the international trust it strengthens could be important for the survival of humans and many other species.     

Thank you for the update jacqmans!

Cheers!

[robertross]

If the USA said 'NO', then I would think it unlikely it would ever dock/berth to the ISS.

USA said 'NO' to Dennis Tito in 2001... 

To a tourist, yes.

I'm talking hardware here.

[bolun]

Joint statement by International Space Station Heads of Agency

5 March 2012

http://www.esa.int/esaHS/SEMJI85Y1ZG_index_0.html

[veblen]

China inclusion as ISS partner forum subject apparently is locked up on NSF. So I came here. Perhaps this is not good netiquette, but I wanted to point out that U.S. congresspeople, specifically Mr. Wolf, do not have touchy-feely "Koombaya, my friend" tendencies like proponents of international cooperation in space on this board and elsewhere. Wolf's beef is human rights, but others may reference ASAT test 2007, and alleged naughty hactivism, etc.

http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/news/rep-wolf-tells-bolden-no-to-china-on-iss#.T1atybWJ3sw.twitter

In time, this may all change. But not real soon. And someone else pointed out China is doing very well in space, no need to share a space station that cannot serve to launch you further out into the solar system. And that's where China wants to go. Little robot on luna next year, if their luck holds.

[HappyMartian]

China inclusion as ISS partner forum subject apparently is locked up on NSF. So I came here. Perhaps this is not good netiquette, but I wanted to point out that U.S. congresspeople, specifically Mr. Wolf, do not have touchy-feely "Koombaya, my friend" tendencies like proponents of international cooperation in space on this board and elsewhere. Wolf's beef is human rights, but others may reference ASAT test 2007, and alleged naughty hactivism, etc.

http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/news/rep-wolf-tells-bolden-no-to-china-on-iss#.T1atybWJ3sw.twitter

In time, this may all change. But not real soon. And someone else pointed out China is doing very well in space, no need to share a space station that cannot serve to launch you further out into the solar system. And that's where China wants to go. Little robot on luna next year, if their luck holds.

You may have forgotten, but America and Russia managed to do the Apollo–Soyuz Test Project (ASTP) in July 1975 during the middle of the bloody Cold War, and it was not a time of "touchy-feely 'Koombaya, my friend' tendencies".

Saying someone is full of "touchy-feely 'Koombaya, my friend' tendencies" doesn't make it so. I'm not a person full of "touchy-feely 'Koombaya, my friend' tendencies" and yet I can see some real benefits to China, India, South Korea, and Brazil's full participation in the ISS. You may not be able to see those benefits and that's fine. Lots of folks couldn't see any benefits of the Apollo–Soyuz Test Project either. Other folks had a different perspective and saw to it that the trust building Apollo–Soyuz mission was accomplished and we all ended up 'winning' the Cold War.   

Cheers!


 

[HappyMartian]

Joint statement by International Space Station Heads of Agency

5 March 2012

http://www.esa.int/esaHS/SEMJI85Y1ZG_index_0.html

I really enjoyed the part,

"Recognizing the inspirational nature of the ISS as a human-tended outpost in space, the agency leaders applauded its strong role in motivating young people around the world to learn about science, technology, engineering and mathematics. More than 40 million students have participated in human spaceflight to date through communications downlinks and interactive experiments with station crew members."

Nice Joint statement. Thank you bolun!

Cheers!

[QuantumG]

Other folks had a different perspective and saw to it that the trust building Apollo–Soyuz mission was accomplished and we all ended up 'winning' the Cold War.   

Yep, had nothing to do with the revolutionaries of Poland.. it was all the international relations building of the space program!

[veblen]

China inclusion as ISS partner forum subject apparently is locked up on NSF. So I came here. Perhaps this is not good netiquette, but I wanted to point out that U.S. congresspeople, specifically Mr. Wolf, do not have touchy-feely "Koombaya, my friend" tendencies like proponents of international cooperation in space on this board and elsewhere. Wolf's beef is human rights, but others may reference ASAT test 2007, and alleged naughty hactivism, etc.

http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/news/rep-wolf-tells-bolden-no-to-china-on-iss#.T1atybWJ3sw.twitter

In time, this may all change. But not real soon. And someone else pointed out China is doing very well in space, no need to share a space station that cannot serve to launch you further out into the solar system. And that's where China wants to go. Little robot on luna next year, if their luck holds.

You may have forgotten, but America and Russia managed to do the Apollo–Soyuz Test Project (ASTP) in July 1975 during the middle of the bloody Cold War, and it was not a time of "touchy-feely 'Koombaya, my friend' tendencies".

Saying someone is full of "touchy-feely 'Koombaya, my friend' tendencies" doesn't make it so. I'm not a person full of "touchy-feely 'Koombaya, my friend' tendencies" and yet I can see some real benefits to China, India, South Korea, and Brazil's full participation in the ISS. You may not be able to see those benefits and that's fine. Lots of folks couldn't see any benefits of the Apollo–Soyuz Test Project either. Other folks had a different perspective and saw to it that the trust building Apollo–Soyuz mission was accomplished and we all ended up 'winning' the Cold War.   

Cheers!

HM:

I did not forget about ASTP. Richard Nixon LOVED intricate diplomatic maneuvers that enhanced his foreign policy cred. Tricky Dick was forced to resign before he could bask in the glow of that successful mission. Successful for the White House and the Kremlin that is.

IMHO, and with all due respect to the participants involved, ASTP was a waste of Apollo hardware. Taxpayer $ appropriated for moonships was diverted for a combo political-space stunt. What kind of science did we get out of ASTP? NADA. A couple more lunar missions could have told us a lot more about the moon.

You do realize that real inclusiveness includes respecting people who do not share your worldview.

Respect. And trust. What China needs to demonstrate to the U.S.A., if it cares to, prior to full partnership on ISS. Because unlike in 1970 with Nixon, President Obama faces a particularly truculent congress. Rep Wolf is but one example.


 

[HappyMartian]

Other folks had a different perspective and saw to it that the trust building Apollo–Soyuz mission was accomplished and we all ended up 'winning' the Cold War.   

Yep, had nothing to do with the revolutionaries of Poland.. it was all the international relations building of the space program!

Everything worked together. I respect what happened in Poland. I'm 1/4 Polish. Quit trying to put words in my mouth. Canada hosts the International Space Station Heads of Agencies Meeting is the subject of this thread.

Try commenting on:

Joint statement by International Space Station Heads of Agency
5 March 2012

http://www.esa.int/esaHS/SEMJI85Y1ZG_index_0.html

Cheers!

[HappyMartian]

....

HM:

I did not forget about ASTP. Richard Nixon LOVED intricate diplomatic maneuvers that enhanced his foreign policy cred. Tricky Dick was forced to resign before he could bask in the glow of that successful mission. Successful for the White House and the Kremlin that is.

IMHO, and with all due respect to the participants involved, ASTP was a waste of Apollo hardware. Taxpayer $ appropriated for moonships was diverted for a combo political-space stunt. What kind of science did we get out of ASTP? NADA. A couple more lunar missions could have told us a lot more about the moon.

You do realize that real inclusiveness includes respecting people who do not share your worldview.

Respect. And trust. What China needs to demonstrate to the U.S.A., if it cares to, prior to full partnership on ISS. Because unlike in 1970 with Nixon, President Obama faces a particularly truculent congress. Rep Wolf is but one example.

Respect and trust is mutual or it boils down to bullying. China has already demonstrated that it is an attractive and trusted potential ISS partner to some of the countries that are already ISS partners. 

All of Congress will decide the American position on this issue, not any small group of Congressional folks.

You might want to write something about the Joint statement by International Space Station Heads of Agency instead of impugning the actions and reputation of former President Richard Nixon. Generally speaking, it is considered bad manners to malign the integrity, wisdom, or judgement of a person who is dead and cannot defend himself or herself.

Space missions often have a critical international political aspect that is initially as important or even far more important than the long-term implications of their scientific results. NASA is mostly about winning hearts and minds around the world.     



"Recognizing the inspirational nature of the ISS as a human-tended outpost in space, the agency leaders applauded its strong role in motivating young people around the world to learn about science, technology, engineering and mathematics."   

From: Joint statement by International Space Station Heads of Agency
5 March 2012   At: http://www.esa.int/esaHS/SEMJI85Y1ZG_index_0.html


In 1969 we had demonstrated our technical prowess and ability to go to the Moon. In 1975, we needed to show to the world that we could work together with the Soviet Union in space and on the Earth. That was the next logical political step and the Apollo–Soyuz Test Project did help to build trust around the world in the USA as a mature, flexible, wise, and open society that could work with any other society on the planet Earth, no matter what our strong political differences were.

Serious space cadets need to think about how everyone on the planet sees the "inspirational nature of the ISS as a human-tended outpost in space" and space exploration in general. Space cadets need to be inclusive of all the diverse political and economic realities on our spaceship Earth.

International politics is how we have justified expensive space programs in the past and will continue to be how expensive space programs will be justified in the future.

If folks around the world see the International Space Sation and space exploration as an excellent motivator to get their children to study science and participate in the international exploration of space, then those same folks will want their country to be a participant in the International Space Station.

Not allowing some countries to be involved with the ISS would be considered a slap in the face of the children of those countries that are excluded, no matter what flimsy and lame excuse is tossed around to justify such exclusions.

Ignoring the real needs of the leaders and other adults in those excluded countries to inspire their children to get a good education and participate in an important and exciting international activity would be the exact opposite of 'winning hearts and minds' and would negate a large part of the purpose of NASA and the ISS.


"NASA administrator Charles Bolden pointed out that the five partners are reaching out to other non-traditional nations.

'We have encouraged each other to go out and try to find people who would not have an opportunity to enjoy this incredible facility that we have and bring them in as best we can,' he said."

From: Some space station partners appear ready to welcome China into the group  At: http://www.globalmontreal.com/canada/some+space+station+partners+appear+ready+to+welcome+china+into+the+group/6442592395/story.html


Yep. "Respect. And trust."  That is what America demonstrated to the world in 1975 with the Apollo–Soyuz Test Project. And yes, we need to do the same thing today by including as many new International Space Station participants and Partners as possible. 

Cheers!
 

[veblen]

....

HM:

I did not forget about ASTP. Richard Nixon LOVED intricate diplomatic maneuvers that enhanced his foreign policy cred. Tricky Dick was forced to resign before he could bask in the glow of that successful mission. Successful for the White House and the Kremlin that is.

IMHO, and with all due respect to the participants involved, ASTP was a waste of Apollo hardware. Taxpayer $ appropriated for moonships was diverted for a combo political-space stunt. What kind of science did we get out of ASTP? NADA. A couple more lunar missions could have told us a lot more about the moon.

You do realize that real inclusiveness includes respecting people who do not share your worldview.

Respect. And trust. What China needs to demonstrate to the U.S.A., if it cares to, prior to full partnership on ISS. Because unlike in 1970 with Nixon, President Obama faces a particularly truculent congress. Rep Wolf is but one example.

"Respect and trust is mutual or it boils down to bullying. China has already demonstrated that it is an attractive and trusted potential ISS partner to some of the countries that are already ISS partners."


Any specifics? Russia plumping for China, I can imagine. I mean look at how those two countries support al-Assad at the U.N. Nice.


"All of Congress will decide the American position on this issue, not any small group of Congressional folks."


Well then, please quote a congressperson who is publicly going to bat for China as ISS full partner. And have you read the National Aeronautics and Space Act? If you did, you would see that it mentions "the health and welfare of the United States", many many times. Not the United Nations, or ISS partners, or some other vague thing. Its basic obligations are to the taxpayers of the United States of America. Congress is bound by that.


"You might want to write something about the Joint statement by International Space Station Heads of Agency instead of impugning the actions and reputation of former President Richard Nixon. Generally speaking, it is considered bad manners to malign the integrity, wisdom, or judgement of a person who is dead and cannot defend himself or herself."


You can't be serious. Have you ever heard of Watergate?


"Space missions often have a critical international political aspect that is initially as important or even far more important than the long-term implications of their scientific results. NASA is mostly about winning hearts and minds around the world."


This is where we part ways. I am primarily interested in space, space exploration and the gaining of new knowledge about alien worlds. But to you NASA is just a political tool. For political ends. I find that boring, incorrect and sad.   


"Recognizing the inspirational nature of the ISS as a human-tended outpost in space, the agency leaders applauded its strong role in motivating young people around the world to learn about science, technology, engineering and mathematics."


Yup, math and science are important. Lots of Chinese students studying science and engineering, for eg. They are not doing this because of the existence of ISS though. Dare I say, even after ISS is de-orbited, math and science will continue to be important. Even if there were NO space exploration at all these last 50 years, math and science would still be important.


From: Joint statement by International Space Station Heads of Agency
5 March 2012   At: http://www.esa.int/esaHS/SEMJI85Y1ZG_index_0.html


"In 1969 we had demonstrated our technical prowess and ability to go to the Moon. In 1975, we needed to show to the world that we could work together with the Soviet Union in space and on the Earth. That was the next logical political step and the Apollo–Soyuz Test Project did help to build trust around the world in the USA as a mature, flexible, wise, and open society that could work with any other society on the planet Earth, no matter what our strong political differences were."


After going to the moon, ASTP was the next logical step? Only to the earth-bound politicians, like Richard Nixon, who was not a real fan of space exploration. If he could get a benefit from space, he was enthusiastic. Hence, ASTP.


Serious space cadets need to think about how everyone on the planet sees the "inspirational nature of the ISS as a human-tended outpost in space" and space exploration in general. Space cadets need to be inclusive of all the diverse political and economic realities on our spaceship Earth.


I do not agree with you or your worldview. I am not a relativist. Some political, cultural and economic realities trump coercive inclusiveness. I would not go into space with a country that committed genocide against its own people, as an eg. And I love space. At some point you have to draw the line. Those may not be your values, but they are mine.

And who are you calling a "space cadet"?


"International politics is how we have justified expensive space programs in the past and will continue to be how expensive space programs will be justified in the future."


Sharing the financial burden of space exploration makes sense. But as I said before, money, as with politics, is only one facet of a space-faring partnership. Trust is earned, not bought.


If folks around the world see the International Space Sation and space exploration as an excellent motivator to get their children to study science and participate in the international exploration of space, then those same folks will want their country to be a participant in the International Space Station.


STEM is nice and commendable. With or without the ISS.


Not allowing some countries to be involved with the ISS would be considered a slap in the face of the children of those countries that are excluded, no matter what flimsy and lame excuse is tossed around to justify such exclusions.


Earth to Happy Martian: why don't you let the representatives of the taxpayers who bore the largest (at least 70%, a lot more if you include shuttle flights, without which, no ISS would be zooming around up there in LEO to begin with) financial burden to build ISS, make that decision? And remember, these reps are bound by the Space Act. I say to you, earth-bound STEM stuff, to me, is a lame excuse wrt ISS partnership. STEM important, ISS or no ISS.

"Ignoring the real needs of the leaders and other adults in those excluded countries to inspire their children to get a good education and participate in an important and exciting international activity would be the exact opposite of 'winning hearts and minds' and would negate a large part of the purpose of NASA and the ISS."


You are confusing the U.N. with NASA, and one of its big and politically meddled-with projects (Bill Clinton, another pol who didn't much care about space, except for what space could do for him), the International Space Station.


"NASA administrator Charles Bolden pointed out that the five partners are reaching out to other non-traditional nations.

'We have encouraged each other to go out and try to find people who would not have an opportunity to enjoy this incredible facility that we have and bring them in as best we can,' he said."

You know, I like Charlie Bolden. With economic constraints in mind, he may be preparing for the future day when NASA, trying to get to Mars and back to the moon on a BFR, dispenses with ISS. Let somebody else run a station in LEO that cannot be used to get further out into the solar system. And let them worry about maintenance and the de-obit headaches.

From: Some space station partners appear ready to welcome China into the group  At: http://www.globalmontreal.com/canada/some+space+station+partners+appear+ready+to+welcome+china+into+the+group/6442592395/story.html


"Yep. "Respect. And trust."  That is what America demonstrated to the world in 1975 with the Apollo–Soyuz Test Project. And yes, we need to do the same thing today by including as many new International Space Station participants and Partners as possible." 

Believe me, I could respect and trust the USA after the Apollo lunar missions and before ASTP. What "we" need to do today is foster commercial activities in space. Along those lines, this may include Space-X or ULA partnering on ISS. Why restrict ISS partnership to nation states? If more the merrier is your thing?