On Wednesday last week, China successfully landed its Chang’e 4 spacecraft on the moon’s far side — an impressive technological accomplishment that speaks to China’s emergence as a major space power.
Understandably, some Chinese scientists are taking a victory lap, with one going so far as to gloat to the New York Times that: “We Chinese people have done something that the Americans have not dared try.”
That cockiness speaks to the spirit of great-power competition animating the Chinese space program. China is open about the fact that it is not merely looking to expand human knowledge and boundaries; it is hoping to supplant the US as the 21st century’s dominant space power.
Illustration: Mountain People
If this were still the 1960s, when the US and Soviet space agencies fiercely competed against one another, China’s deep pockets, focus and methodical approach to conquering the heavens might indeed win the day.
However, the truth is, thanks to the development of a dynamic, fast-moving US commercial space industry, China’s almost certain to be a runner-up for decades to come.
That does not mean the People’s Republic of China is not making progress in its attempts to colonize the moon and turn it into the outer space equivalent of its South China Sea outposts — an avowed goal of Ye Peijian (葉培建), head of China’s lunar program.
China is to launch a mission to bring back samples from the moon later this year. Over the next decade, it plans to launch a space station, a Mars probe, asteroid missions and a Jupiter probe, while continuing to develop reusable rockets and other vehicles that would enhance its access to space. A human mission to the moon is targeted for 2030 and a permanent colony by the middle of the century.
By contrast, NASA’s own ambitions seem limited. US astronauts have not left low-Earth orbit since the last Apollo moon landing in 1972, while the US lost the ability to fly to the taxpayer-funded International Space Station with the retirement of the space shuttle.
Too often, new US presidents have shifted space priorities, forcing NASA to cancel or reconfigure expensive missions that have been years in the planning. Worse, many members of US Congress still view NASA as a tool to deliver wasteful, pork-barrel spending to politically connected constituencies.
However, that hardly describes the entirety of the US space program. Since the mid-2000s, when Congress authorized the agency to begin cultivating public-private partnerships, NASA’s most important role has been as a seed investor and adviser to private space companies.
While Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies Corp — or SpaceX — receives the bulk of attention, the commercial space industry now comprises dozens of firms in fields ranging from small satellites to lunar exploration.
The results have been spectacular: By NASA’s own estimates, the cost of SpaceX developing its workhorse Falcon 9 rocket was less than 10 percent of what it would have cost if NASA had done it.
NASA’s backing is paying dividends elsewhere, too. In coming weeks, SpaceX is to launch uncrewed orbital test flights of its Crew Dragon spacecraft — a capsule designed to deliver US astronauts to the International Space Station.
At least two other companies are looking to launch commercial space stations.
Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin is planning an uncrewed moon landing by 2023 (in line with NASA’s lunar goals). Meanwhile, SpaceX is developing a larger rocket that is scheduled to take tourists around the moon that same year. And NASA, keen to encourage more lunar exploration, has announced a partnership with nine companies developing lunar landers, with the first missions set to launch as early as this year.
Of course, space exploration is not just about making money and colonizing the moon. Science, too, remains a motivation and there the US remains a global leader with a nearly insurmountable lead.
Last week, the New Horizons probe completed the most distant exploration in history (of a small rock 6.4 billion kilometers from Earth) and the OSIRIS-REx probe went into orbit around a small asteroid (that it is to sample next year).
NASA also has — among other missions — one ongoing mission at Jupiter and four at Mars, a solar probe and two spacecraft that have entered interstellar space.
Neither China nor any other country has plans to compete with this record of accomplishment, nor do they have the scientific or engineering experience to do so.
As long as the US remains focused on cultivating its commercial space industry and continuing to fund cutting-edge science programs, it has little reason to fear falling behind. Better yet, it has a much better chance to attract space scientists and other talent keen to profit from one of the 21st century’s most promising growth industries.
China, too, is not oblivious to the potential of commercial space — it is developing its own industry — but the persistent dominance of China’s state sector ensures that its entrepreneurs would spend as much time on politics as propulsion systems. If there is a new race to the stars, the US remains a good bet to win.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS