While the Cold War and the arms race that ensued positioned the US as the world’s premier superpower, the resources poured into the space program made it a leader in innovation and technology. Interest in science, technology and math surged significantly, as young students dreamt of the opportunity to go to space one day themselves; a 2009 study in Nature found that half of the scientists polled cited the Apollo mission as the reason they pursued the sciences, regardless of their specific discipline. In the late sixties, at the height of the program’s development, NASA received nearly 4.5 percent of the federal budget, compared to its present half a percent. Today, the United States ranks 51st in quality of STEM education, according to the World Economic Forum. Although NASA has recently launched incredible exploratory missions, such as the Curiosity Mars Rover, the US has lacked the fervor and frequency with which it used to conduct missions. At the same time, the shut down of the Space Shuttle program in 2011 has effectively ended US manned explorations; this slowdown has occurred as nations like Russia and China are revving up their own space programs. However, a space revival could reverse the United States’ dwindling status in STEM, innovation and exploration, as well as redefine the country’s position in international politics.
President Vladimir Putin announced that Russia planned to invest $50 billion into its space program in 2013, with plans to build a permanent moon base and send a manned mission to Mars. Additionally, China, India and Japan are in the process of further developing their own space programs. China’s president, Xi Jinping, supports the space program, and the country has funneled significant money into its development. While China’s space program is intended to be peaceful, “Xi has said he wants China to establish itself as a space superpower.” China appears to recognize the innovations that investing in a promising space program can bring, all while believing that there is a possible military edge that can be gained in its growth. India is currently working with Russia to launch the Chandrayaan-2, India’s second moon research mission. Not only are developing countries delving into space exploration at exponential rates – they are passing over the United States for potential cooperative projects.
Space is a unique and unexpected area for diplomacy and collaboration in regards to U.S. relations with other countries. But as of late, this collaboration has looked more like dependence. American astronauts often embark on space expeditions run by other countries, including those where relationships are tense. Russia and the United States both committed to funding the International Space Station until 2024, despite the latter’s vow to discontinue space collaboration with the Russians. Yet, due to the end of the United States’ space shuttle program, Russian spacecraft have been the U.S.’s key access point to the ISS, charging a whopping $70.6 million per seat. Instead of NASA, Russia currently constructs the rocket engines used in US satellite missions as well, leading to questions about national security. The conflict in Crimea has only made the United States more susceptible, as the country’s reliance on Russia highlights its deteriorating stature in space, technology, and security.
To end this dependence and re-cement its leadership in space, the US needs a renewed focus on exploration. But unfortunately, the probability of revitalizing and introducing new space missions is small, particularly when current projects are at risk of being discontinued. NASA’s mission to Pluto, called New Horizons, may not be renewed, consequently ending human presence in the outer planets. Research made to date can only benefit from continued endeavors into exploration, but the reluctance to invest in the space program is difficult to overcome. Despite NASA taking up half a percent of the federal budget, scrounging up funding is still an issue. It is difficult to make a case for space mission funding when the timelines for these launches can take decades to complete – interest in these projects falters and can be seen as potentially wasteful. While private companies like SpaceX have the ability to bolster innovation in space and beyond, in unforeseen and unprecedented ways compared to the dawn of the space program, they are not an ideal substitute for NASA. These endeavors have a natural inclination to consider maximizing profit as a priority, while the pursuit of knowledge has been a long-term NASA mission. Companies that are currently pursuing projects in space are utilizing government protocols, licensure and technology, demonstrating the need for government in space exploration up to this point. Ventures that are growing are funded through US government contracts and incredibly wealthy investors – what will happen if the federal government revokes support of these private endeavors and donor interest in space dwindles? Although there are obvious higher political priorities in the United States, revisiting a bolstering space program is worth consideration, especially due to the potential benefits of these projects on international relations, interest in STEM, and innovation and technology.
There is a common misconception that the program’s accomplishments are limited to its actual trips to space. Yet the work done to prepare for these missions, as well as the information gathered from them has greater implications that extend beyond what is happening in space, ranging from the development of everyday technologies to advances in other scientific endeavors. NASA missions have led to the invention of many commonly used items, including water filters, smoke detectors, and memory foam. Medical technology has benefitted as well, with the development of the CAT scanner, insulin pumps, artificial limbs and cochlear implants, among others. Without NASA satellites, worldwide communication as it is known today would not be possible. Additionally, NASA has greatly contributed to advances in fields like environmental science. Examining the greenhouse effect on Venus has allowed climate scientists to apply these observations to Earth; as Dr. Curt Niebur said, “The more we learn about the other planets out there, the more we learn about Earth.”
A large debate remains as to what NASA’s priorities should be, with some stating the United States should return to the moon, while others supporting human missions to new territory. Buzz Aldrin testified his support of exploring Mars, painting a grandiose picture of a potential permanent settlement on the red planet. Meanwhile, Scott Pace of the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University argued that the Moon was a better option, due to Russia, China, India, and South Korea’s intentions to send manned and unmanned probes for lunar exploration. The divide between Mars and the Moon has a common link – both are attempts to reposition the United States as a leader in astronomical exploration. The Moon mission would poise the U.S. as the head of an international space mission alliance, while the Mars endeavor would reintroduce the United States as the country capable of uncovering unchartered territory. Despite what feels like apathy, NASA does have some promising projects in store, such as the Asteroid Redirect Mission “to identify, capture and redirect a near-Earth asteroid to a stable orbit around the moon” and its Orion spacecraft. Regardless, no matter which priority is ultimately agreed upon, the important part is an overarching agreement that these kinds of space exploration are, in fact, priorities.