The arrival of the first space tourist on the International Space Station (ISS) is undoubtedly a major event. Los Angeles businessman Dennis Tito reportedly paid the Russian space program $20 million for his ride into the history books, and the half-built ISS, due to be completed in 2006. What is clear about the trip is that the Russians were only happy to find some extra income for their program while the Americans have expressed deep concern about having “an amateur” visit the ISS. What has become suddenly unclear is how the final say on what happens in with the 16-nation ISS project is arrived at.
This is a truly international undertaking. While the Americans may be supplying much of the funding and a lot of the technology, the Russians are contributing the largest amount of know-how on the running of an orbiting space station, since until the ISS, their Mir station was the first and only space platform. Mir represented a remarkable technological and human achievement. The Russians very reasonably make the point that the near disasters that the Mir station experienced, from a serious fire to the complete loss of power and a major computer breakdown, all provided invaluable opportunities to learn about the hazards of extended existence in space.
However critical cash-rich NASA scientists may have been about the quality and sophistication of the technology and engineering that went into Mir, the truth is that all the cosmonauts who manned the station came back alive and, in a final demonstration of their technical excellence, Mir’s ground controllers ditched the aging craft on target in the Pacific, far away from human habitation. The ISS’ other partners have also been making significant technological, engineering and financial contributions. Among recent bits of the space station to be installed, the $-billion massive robot arm, which has just been attached to the ISS, was built largely by the Canadians while the Italians are supplying the cargo bays necessary to hold the stores that will sustain the ISS’ crews.
What Tito’s trip has thrown into sharp relief is that while, when it comes to the engineering and design of the ISS, the different partners may have an excellent working record, they had not, however, prepared properly for handling the “political” questions. The row that developed over the Russians bringing Tito to the ISS demonstrates that clearer management processes are needed. The main grounds for the US objection to the Tito flight were that the man had no experience. In truth, the main problem seems to have been that Moscow was “bouncing” its other partners into allowing them to carry the first space tourist. Or, perhaps, America may have felt that, as the only superpower, it was its right to record the space first.
From this first disagreement among the ISS, it is imperative that lessons be truly learned and, a solution acceptable to everyone be instituted quickly. This is not because the ISS of itself is such an important project, but rather because the ISS represents the first time that our world has come together in the face of the unknown challenges of space. We are so small and insignificant compared with the great vastness around us. This thought should surely overwhelm petty divisions and make us all work together in harmony for our common good.
