NASA Suspends Contact with Russia, Except for the ISS

Rhykker

Level 16 Scallywag
Feb 28, 2010
814
0
0
NASA Suspends Contact with Russia, Except for the ISS



In light of Russia's recent actions towards Ukraine, NASA has decided to suspend all contact with the country's space program, except for the required cooperation involving the International Space Station.

Political tension between Russia and the U.S. has resulted in NASA taking measures to limit its contact with Russia's space agency, Roscosmos. Cooperation on the International Space Station, currently staffed by two American, three Russian, and one Japanese astronaut, is presently the only exception. Without the crew cooperating, the entire station would shut down, said NASA administrator Charles Bolden.

News that initially broke as a leaked internal memo has been confirmed on NASA's official Google+ page. [https://plus.google.com/+NASA/posts/eihoeSm5fVy] "Given Russia's ongoing violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity, NASA is suspending the majority of its ongoing engagements with the Russian Federation," the statement reads. "NASA and Roscosmos will, however, continue to work together to maintain safe and continuous operation of the International Space Station."

The verbiage of the leaked memo, as reported by The Verge [http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/2/5574896/nasa-suspends-contracts-with-russia], differs slightly from the official statement, as can be seen in this excerpt: "Until further notice, the U.S. Government has determined that all NASA contacts with Russian Government representatives are suspended, unless the activity has been specifically excepted. [...] At the present time, only operational International Space Station activities have been excepted."

NASA shut down its shuttle program in 2011, and since then, has relied on Russia to transport its crew to the ISS at a cost of $70.7 million per astronaut. However, NASA is hoping to put an end to this by 2017. NASA's statement reads:

"NASA is laser focused on a plan to return human spaceflight launches to American soil, and end our reliance on Russia to get into space. This has been a top priority of the Obama Administration's for the past five years, and had our plan been fully funded, we would have returned American human spaceflight launches - and the jobs they support - back to the United States next year. With the reduced level of funding approved by Congress, we're now looking at launching from U.S. soil in 2017. The choice here is between fully funding the plan to bring space launches back to America or continuing to send millions of dollars to the Russians. It's that simple. The Obama Administration chooses to invest in America - and we are hopeful that Congress will do the same."

Source: Gigaom [http://gigaom.com/2014/04/02/nasa-limits-contact-with-russian-federal-space-agency/]

Permalink
 

Scorpid

New member
Jul 24, 2011
814
0
0
I really wish there was a way we could just separate science and politics, so political scuffles like this don't result in scientists having to pick sides.
 

Hawk eye1466

New member
May 31, 2010
619
0
0
And this is why we shouldn't have decomissioned all of our rockets and shuttles and cut nasa's funding to what is probably just enough to keep the lights on. Because if Russia says go fuck yourselves guess what, we have to recourse and our astronauts are at their mercy.

I'm not saying their going to keep them hostage but it would be nice to know that there's more than one country in the world that has a functioning space program.
 

RJ 17

The Sound of Silence
Nov 27, 2011
8,687
0
0
Bush brought us the War Against Terror, and now Obama has brought us the 2nd Cold War. Woo-hoo!
 

The_Great_Galendo

New member
Sep 14, 2012
186
0
0
So what happens now if Russia decides to meet the NASA's lack of cooperation in everything other than the ISS by refusing to cooperate on the ISS? I'm not saying they would -- it would just aggravate a politically charged issue -- but more shortsighted things have happened. The decision to suspend cooperation seems pretty darn shortsighted anyway, if you ask me.
 

oliver.begg

New member
Oct 7, 2010
140
0
0
The_Great_Galendo said:
So what happens now if Russia decides to meet the NASA's lack of cooperation in everything other than the ISS by refusing to cooperate on the ISS? I'm not saying they would -- it would just aggravate a politically charged issue -- but more shortsighted things have happened. The decision to suspend cooperation seems pretty darn shortsighted anyway, if you ask me.
russia wins that round?

seriously what can the US do.
 

Roxas1359

Burn, Burn it All!
Aug 8, 2009
33,758
1
0
RJ 17 said:
Bush brought us the War Against Terror, and now Obama has brought us the 2nd Cold War. Woo-hoo!
I wouldn't say it's a Cold War yet, seeing as this is barely only 2 months old. When proxy wars between the two start in other countries besides the Middle East, then yes it is Cold War number 2.

OT: Once again science and progress suffers because of idiots in political power trying to show just how tough they are.
 

Li Mu

New member
Oct 17, 2011
552
0
0
All these sanctions seem to be a case of 'cutting off your nose to spite your own face'. It's all going to affect the US more than Russia in the long run. As history has shown time and time again, the only people who can defeat Russia are the Russians. Putin will ruin Russia himself, not the US.

The biggest issue is if the West's sanctions force Russia to make stronger ties with China. Asia is the future, despite what some may believe (I'm looking at you John 'crazy' McCain) and If BRICS can get their act together, they will become pretty badass.

Anyway, as some have said before, it's stupid that NASA are doing this, but clearly this order has come down from government level and not from NASA themselves.
 

Li Mu

New member
Oct 17, 2011
552
0
0
Halyah said:
How would it affect the USA more when it's Russia that's dependant on the west for its very survival economically speaking?
If Russia can broker the fuel deal with China, it pretty much wont need the west. It's trading heavily with BRICS nations and has just struck a nice big deal with Iran. Basically, Russia is becoming as unreliant on the west as possible.
Russia doesn't make anything, so it's not like it has exports. It just has fossil fuels.

Of course, when all their gas runs out, they're fucked.

The Russian economy was on a serious downward drop before the whole crisis, but somehow it's begun to rise again despite the sanctions. Russia has an economic crash every few decades, so sanctions wont make much difference. For a country which has vast land, resources and people, they sure as hell manage to CAN I HAS BREAK ECONOMY on a regular basis.

Basically, the sanctions will do nothing to Russia. As I said before, only Russians can pwn Russians (and they manage well)

Without getting into a horribly tedious political debate, I just wonder why sanctions were never placed on the US or UK after their illegal invasion of the middle east.
And before people start ranting about how it was totally legal and kewl;

OLD NEWS, but it appear not to have reached many people...
The United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, declared explicitly for the first time last night that the US-led war on Iraq was illegal.
Mr Annan said that the invasion was not sanctioned by the UN security council or in accordance with the UN's founding charter. In an interview with the BBC World Service broadcast last night, he was asked outright if the war was illegal. He replied: "Yes, if you wish."

He then added unequivocally: "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and from the charter point of view it was illegal."
So why is illegal war by US good and illegal war by Russia bad? Hypocrisy anyone?
 

Arnoxthe1

Elite Member
Dec 25, 2010
3,391
2
43
Li Mu said:
So why is illegal war by US good and illegal war by Russia bad? Hypocrisy anyone?
Well, yes and no. We ALLEGEDLY went into the Middle East to show everyone FREEDOM and stuff and also because we got our twin towers smashed. Russia's just rolling into the Ukraine so they can resubjugate as much people as possible.
 

JET1971

New member
Apr 7, 2011
836
0
0
Li Mu said:
Halyah said:
How would it affect the USA more when it's Russia that's dependant on the west for its very survival economically speaking?
If Russia can broker the fuel deal with China, it pretty much wont need the west.
Russia already has a contract with China for gas supplies. China is the second largest purchaser of Russian gas and oil compared to the EU. Cut the EU off and Russia goes broke because China is already importing what it needs from Russia. Also to broker a deal with china in the event that the EU cuts off purchasing Russian gas China will broker a deal to purchase at prices far lower than what Russia can afford. China is not stupid when it comes to making trade agreements and a desperate trader is what China will take advantage of.

You also need to look at the politics between the 2 countries. neither one of them like each other but they will cooperate, China though will and has flipped the bird at Russia when it is to China's advantage. China is not or will ever be a salvation for Russia.

Economic sanctions against Russia will cripple the economy of Russia, as of now the sanctions are against individuals in Putin's inner circle and not the country itself. If real sanctions are in place it will be against the tiny amount of exports they have and that will be the crippling factor. almost no exports, makes for no jobs for the Russian people. no jobs means they cannot buy anything. nobody buying anything and economy dies.

Stop reading the propaganda.
 

Li Mu

New member
Oct 17, 2011
552
0
0
Arnoxthe1 said:
Li Mu said:
So why is illegal war by US good and illegal war by Russia bad? Hypocrisy anyone?
Well, yes and no. We ALLEGEDLY went into the Middle East to show everyone FREEDOM and stuff and also because we got our twin towers smashed. Russia's just rolling into the Ukraine so they can resubjugate as much people as possible.
I'd say that most Ukrainians in Crimea do indeed want to be a part of Russia. If you watch any independent reports it does appear that they really are happy to be a part of Russia. Lets face it, being with Russia is probably better than being with Ukraine right now. All the Ukrainians I know (and I know several) are Russo-files and prefer closer ties to Russia than Europe. But then, my friends and colleagues are all from the East, which is an ethnically Russian area.

I'd say that Putin isn't even that interested in subjugating anyone. He just wants to secure the Black Sea Fleet and ensure that he has a naval foothold in the area. The idea that the area might end up in the hands of a US friendly Ukraine (and therefore potentially being a home to a US naval detachment) was just too much of a threat to ignore.

I just really wish Russia would pull back it's troops from the border of Ukraine. I always thought that Putin was too intelligent to go into Ukraine proper, but all this waving of military penises is getting me a little concerned.
 

Li Mu

New member
Oct 17, 2011
552
0
0
JET1971 said:
Russia already has a contract with China for gas supplies.
Gonna have to disagree with you there...

The Holy Grail for Moscow is a natural gas supply deal with China that is apparently now close after years of negotiations. If it can be signed when Putin visits China in May, he will be able to hold it up to show that global power has shifted eastwards and he does not need the West.

"The worse Russia's relations are with the West, the closer Russia will want to be to China. If China supports you, no one can say you're isolated," said Vasily Kashin, a China expert at the Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST) think thank.

A strong alliance would suit both countries as a counterbalance to the United States.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/21/us-ukraine-crisis-russia-insight-idUSBREA2K07S20140321


As for me reading 'propaganda', I didn't realise that Reuters was a propaganda agency. I have a difference of opinion to you which I think is equally as valid as yours. Lets try and keep this friendly and not resort to any name calling or insulting each other's ability to spot the difference between a relatively unbiased report and something from Fox News or RT.
 

gigastar

Insert one-liner here.
Sep 13, 2010
4,419
0
0
Li Mu said:
So why is illegal war by US good and illegal war by Russia bad? Hypocrisy anyone?
Well, to be fair the justifications this time are completely different. The Iraq and Afghanistan wars were primarily for hunting down those responsible for 9/11. The Crimea situation is just Putin making a land grab.

Though given how fast Crimea was to switch sides, i wonder if the whole thing wasnt set up by Russia to begin with.
 

008Zulu_v1legacy

New member
Sep 6, 2009
6,019
0
0
Hawk eye1466 said:
And this is why we shouldn't have decomissioned all of our rockets and shuttles and cut nasa's funding to what is probably just enough to keep the lights on.
They had to be decommissioned. They were being used well past their original used by date.
 

Fulbert

New member
Jan 15, 2009
269
0
0
gigastar said:
Li Mu said:
So why is illegal war by US good and illegal war by Russia bad? Hypocrisy anyone?
Well, to be fair the justifications this time are completely different. The Iraq and Afghanistan wars were primarily for hunting down those responsible for 9/11. The Crimea situation is just Putin making a land grab.

Though given how fast Crimea was to switch sides, i wonder if the whole thing wasnt set up by Russia to begin with.
Russia stepped in to protect the Russian-speakers from the Western Ukrainian lynchers (yep, Ukrainian freedom fighters planned to start hanging Russians after Crimea is pacified [https://www.facebook.com/borys.filatov/posts/603173516431216]). How is it 'just Putin making a land grab'?
 

Pebkio

The Purple Mage
Nov 9, 2009
780
0
0
Okay, wait... so basically NASA just quit their job without having another one lined up? Under this analogy, they don't even have any savings to fall back on until they get a new job.

What would America do if Russia flipped us the bird and didn't let us go to ISS anymore? Nothing. We can't do jack shit. What are we going to do, turn to the Constellation Program? No, it was cancelled to make way for private companies. How's that going, anyway? Oh right, the 2017 deadline.

Well, best of luck to them. I wonder what we're going to do for the next three years whenever a satellite needs minor repairs...