Monthly Archives: March 2022

As the war in Ukraine goes on, theres a looming threat that Russia might ditch the International Space Station a football field-sized satellite that currently houses several astronauts and allow it to crash into Earth. This raises two scary questions. One, can Russia just drop the ISS on the planet? And two, is the post-Cold War era of space collaboration between Russia and the US coming to an end? The answers are complicated.

The uncertain state of the ISS reflects the rift between its two main partners, who are currently clashing over Russias ongoing war against Ukraine. Concerns that Russia might let the ISS fall to Earth came up late last month when Russian space chief Dmitry Rogozin raised the idea in a series of tweets complaining about new US sanctions against Russia, including some aimed at its space program. The issue came up again this week after Rogozin suggested on a state-controlled Russian television show that if the US continued to be hostile, Roscosmos would rescind its support for the space station.

But even if the ISS stays in orbit for now and it almost certainly will these ongoing tensions are a clear sign that the state of international collaboration in space is rapidly changing, and becoming much more sensitive to politics here on Earth.

The safety of the ISS is a real concern. Russia controls critical aspects of the space stations propulsion control systems. While the ISS is in orbit, Earths gravity gradually pulls it toward the atmosphere, so the space station typically uses a propulsion module which is controlled by Russia to keep it in place. Without these regular boosts, though, the ISS would very slowly fall toward the atmosphere, where it would mostly burn up. The astronauts aboard would likely have plenty of time to escape the space station and travel back to Earth. But some of us might not be as lucky: a number of heavy components that make up the ISS could survive the atmosphere and fall to the Earths surface, where, without control over the ISSs deorbit, they could hit structures or kill people.

Again, there are many reasons why this is unlikely to happen. For one, NASA insists everything is fine. Rogozin is also known for bombastic statements. Destroying the space station isnt necessarily to Russias advantage, either. Roscosmos, Russias space agency, may not want to take the risk of an uncontrolled deorbit, even if the ISS doesnt normally travel over much of Russia. And then theres the fact that just as NASA depends on Roscosmos to keep the ISS operational, Roscosmos also depends on NASA, and has a long history of working with the US, even through periods of tension. This is the nature of the ISSs founding partnership, which is now more than two decades old.

The current situation is a result of decisions made basically 29 years ago to build a space station that was interdependent with Russia and the United States at its core, John Logsdon, the founder of George Washington Universitys Space Policy Institute, told Recode. This dependence on Russia for propulsion was not an accident.

The future of space may not look as cooperative, though. Like the US, Russia wants to travel to the moon, Mars, and, eventually, Venus and Jupiter. But as Roscosmoss waning commitment to the ISS makes clear, the space agency doesnt seem so interested anymore in working closely with the US. Instead, Roscosmos is gearing up to lead its own space explorations and work with other countries on its efforts, rather than NASA. This race is already playing out on the moon. After the US announced the Artemis program, a NASA-led international effort to explore and establish a human presence on the lunar surface, Russia and China announced that they would team up in a separate partnership to do something similar.

We dont know exactly how these new politics of space will play out. We also dont know whether Russias war on Ukraine will force the country to go it alone in space. But we do know that tensions between Russia and the US are driving Roscosmos and NASA apart. This is setting the groundwork for a new era of space collaboration, one that doesnt involve a singular international partnership, like the ISS does, but rather several different factions of space-faring countries that sometimes will work together and sometimes wont. As Roscosmoss reaction to the war in Ukraine makes clear, this could become very tricky very quickly.

Politics isnt supposed to influence the ISS. Russia and the US first started building the space station in the late 1990s, and the partnership was considered a major feat of international collaboration, especially in the wake of the Cold War and the decadeslong space race. Since then, the ISS has brought together astronauts from around the world to conduct research that could, eventually, help bring humans even further into outer space. The ISS partnership now includes 15 different countries, and is considered by some to be humanitys greatest achievement and one that has mostly been above whatever is happening on planet Earth.

This is increasingly not the case. Back in 2014, Russia used the ISS in an attempt to pressure the US into recognizing its annexation of Crimea, a peninsula in the southern part of Ukraine (and which Ukraine still considers to be part of its territory). If the US didnt formally recognize Russias claims on the region, the Russian space program suggested it would relocate astronaut training to Crimea. This was a critical threat at the time: NASA astronauts needed training to travel on Russias Soyuz rocket, which, back then, was the only way to get to the ISS. The conflict came just months after the US instituted sanctions that were meant to punish Russia for its invasion of Crimea. In response, Roscosmos had implied it would stop transporting any NASA astronauts at all, with Rogozin suggesting in a tweet that the US bring their astronauts to the International Space Station using a trampoline.

There has been a sense that the ISS is starting to become a bargaining chip of some sort in relations between the United States, in particular, and Russia, explains Wendy Whitman Cobb, a professor at the US Air Forces School of Advanced Air and Space Studies.

The good news is that the US is no longer dependent on Roscosmos for transportation to the ISS; SpaceX has been transporting NASA astronauts to the space station since 2020. The not-so-good news is that Russia seems to care less and less about the ISS. Russia threatened to withdraw from the space station partnership last year again over US sanctions.

The situation became even grimmer this past fall when Russia blew up a defunct spy satellite with an anti-satellite missile and created thousands of pieces of space debris, including some that US officials feared could damage the ISS. This test didnt just highlight that Russia has the ability to shoot down a satellite from Earth, but that it was potentially willing to endanger its own ISS cosmonauts, who were forced to shelter in emergency vehicles for several hours after the test.

Things degraded even further this week. The Russian space agency announced it will no longer work with Germany on science experiments on the ISS, and also said that it will stop selling rocket engines to the US, which NASA has historically depended on. And Rogozin again raised the idea that without Russias help, NASA would need to find another way to get to the ISS. This time, he suggested broomsticks.

It is likely that Russia could exit the ISS given the geopolitical situation of Ukraine before 2025, explained Namrata Goswami, an independent scholar of space policy. If Russia ends up leaving the ISS earlier than 2025 due to the Ukraine crisis, it will be difficult to quickly develop the Russian support cycle for the ISS.

Despite the war, NASA has tried to keep up the appearance of normalcy aboard the ISS. The agency has posted updates about science experiments happening aboard the space station and even put on a press conference promoting the first privately crewed mission to the ISS, which is scheduled for later this month. But behind the scenes, the US is racing to figure out what an ISS without Russia might look like. One company, Northrop Grumman, has already volunteered to build a propulsion system that would replace Russias, and Elon Musk has suggested on Twitter that SpaceX could help too.

These efforts might keep the ISS up and running without Russia for a few years, but the space station wont be around forever. NASA still plans to vacate the ISS by the end of the decade, at which point it will be slowly deorbited over a remote part of the Pacific Ocean, clearing the way for new space stations to take its place. This includes Chinas Tiangong space station; Tiangongs first module launched into orbit last May astronauts already live aboard and the station is supposed to be complete by the end of 2022. The US is also funding several new commercial space stations, and Russia and India both plan to launch their own national space stations in the coming decade. Because these stations will generally be under the purview of one specific country, they probably wont be as catholic as the ISS is.

Some of Russias near-term plans in space havent been affected by its ongoing war with Ukraine, at least for now. Astronaut Mark Vande Hei, for instance, is still scheduled to travel back to the Earth on Russias Soyuz vehicle at the end of this month, along with two cosmonauts. Russia and the US are collaborating on training sessions, NASA said on Monday. The agency is also working on plans to carry cosmonaut Anna Kikina on SpaceXs Crew Dragon later this year. But other aspects of Russias space agenda are now up in the air, and possibly signal Roscosmoss new approach.

For one, deteriorating relations between Europe and Russia have already impacted their work in space: The European Space Agency (ESA) which represents 22 European countries has issued a statement recognizing sanctions against Russia. In response, Roscosmos has delayed the launches of several satellites at Europes spaceport in French Guiana that were supposed to use Russias Soyuz rocket. Separately, the Russian space agency is also in a standoff with the UK over plans to launch into orbit 36 satellites from the satellite internet company OneWeb. Roscosmos was supposed to deliver these satellites (again using Soyuz) on March 4, but is now refusing to do so unless the UK sells its stake in the company and promises that the satellites wont be used by its military. The UK, which has declared its own sanctions against Russia, has said its not willing to negotiate.

Plans for missions that will go deeper into outer space are also changing. Days after Russia attacked Ukraine, Romania announced that it would join the Artemis Accords. Fifteen other countries, including Poland and Ukraine, have already signed on to the NASA-led set of principles, which are meant to guide how countries explore outer space. And although Roscosmos was supposed to send a robot to Mars sometime this year alongside the ESA, officials say these plans are now very unlikely. Rogozin has also announced Russia will bar the US from its eventual plan to send a mission to Venus. Rocosmoss Rogozin, for what its worth, has previously suggested that Venus is a Russian planet.

We dont yet know how Russias war with Ukraine might impact its collaboration with Chinas space program, the China Manned Space Agency (CMSA). In the past few years, the two countries space agencies have developed wide-ranging plans to work together in space, including an effort to build a base on the moon. It isnt surprising that CMSA would work with Roscosmos over NASA. The US has largely excluded China from its work in space: A 2011 US law bars NASA from collaborating with Chinas space agency, and no astronaut from China has ever visited the ISS. This prohibition is a reminder that the ISS has never been as international as its name implies, and has also given CMSA ample reason to build a sophisticated space program on its own.

But that doesnt mean that Russia and Chinas space relations are a sure bet. While Roscosmoss Rogozin has argued that Roscosmos can sidestep sanctions by buying space technology from China, theres reason to believe that might not happen. China hasnt quite backed Russias invasion of Ukraine; it may be wary of getting on the wrong side of sanctions. India, which agreed to collaborate with Russia in space at the end of last year, might also reconsider its relationship with Russias space program for the same reasons.

Its not yet clear how much this might matter to Russia. Again, Roscosmos has plans to build its own national space station, which it aims to complete in 2025, and the Russian space agency has already started work on the stations first core module. Then theres the fact that Russia was a leader in the space race long before it started working with the ISS.

And theres always the possibility that Roscosmos comes around and reconciles with NASA. After all, the Soviet Union and the US did try to work together in space throughout the Cold War even as the two countries also tried to outdo each other, explains Teasel Muir-Harmony, the curator of the Apollo collection at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum.

Theres always been the combination of both competition and cooperation in space between the US and Russia, said Muir-Harmony. It waxes and wanes. Its a fascinating thing.

Read this article:
Russias war against Ukraine has reached the ISS - Vox.com

SpaceX put another 47 Starlink internet satellites into orbit Thursday while competitor OneWeb, which relies on Russian Soyuz rockets for the ride to space, announced it is suspending launches in the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

The move comes amid escalating tension between the Russian space program and the West as the nation that put the first satellite and the first human in orbit severs commercial ties, threatening the cooperation that makes the International Space Station and other commercial ventures possible.

While the space station continues to operate in near-normal fashion for now, the Russians have terminated commercial Soyuz launch operations at the European Space Agency's launch site in Kourou, French Guiana, and cut-off sales and support for Russian rocket engines used in U.S. rockets.

"In a situation like this we can't supply the United States with our world's best rocket engines," Reuters quoted Dmitri Rogozin, head of the Russian space agency Roscosmos, as saying. "Let them fly on something else, their broomsticks, I don't know what."

SpaceX founder Elon Musk posted that quote on Twitter under the title "American Broomstick," reminding Rogozin that SpaceX has the capability to launch equipment and astronauts to the station from U.S. soil aboard American rockets.

Against that backdrop, OneWeb, an international consortium partially owned by the British government, had planned to launch another batch of its internet satellites Friday atop a Russian Soyuz 2.1a booster that was hauled to the pad at the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan earlier this week.

But Rogozin threatened to cancel the launch, OneWeb's 14th atop a Soyuz, if the company did not guarantee its system would not be used for any military purposes and if the U.K. did not sell its stake in the project.

"The British authorities must withdraw from the shareholders of OneWeb to launch satellites," Rogozin tweeted. "Otherwise, there will be no launches."

On Thursday, OneWeb said in a one-sentence statement: "The Board of OneWeb has voted to suspend all launches from Baikonur." Company personnel have been told to leave Baikonur and to return to their homes.

It's not yet clear what will happen to the 36 OneWeb satellites still aboard the Soyuz rocket or what boosters might be used for future launches if the conflict isn't resolved. But the cancellation of Soyuz flights, if it remains in force, would mark a major setback for a company that reorganized in the wake of bankruptcy, attracting major investments from the United Kingdom.

Along with threatening OneWeb, Rogozin and Roscosmos have ended commercial Soyuz launch operations at the ESA-Arianespace launch site in Kourou a week after suggesting the Europeans consider launching piloted Soyuz missions from there.

"After the cancellation of Soyuz launches, the European Space Agency can launch European satellites on its rockets... when they have them," Rogozin tweeted.

The Russians also have announced they will no longer service the RD-180 engines powering United Launch Alliance's Atlas 5 rockets and will not sell any more RD-181 engines for use in Northrop Grumman's Antares space station cargo rocket. The Antares first stage is built in Ukraine while the engines are built in Russia.

Company officials said the hardware for the final two flights in Northrop Grumman's current contract with NASA are already in the United States and those flights are expected to proceed as planned. Beyond that, Northrop Grumman may be forced to find another launch provider. The company has not yet commented.

United Launch Alliance has already taken delivery of the two dozen RD-180s needed to carry out all remaining Atlas 5 flights as the company transitions to a new, all-U.S. rocket called the Vulcan. While Russian technical support would have been appreciated, ULA CEO Tory Bruno says, it's not required.

But the Atlas 5 eventually will be used to launch NASA astronauts aboard Boeing Starliner capsules "without the supervision of our specialists," Rogozin tweeted. "Well, let's pray for our American friends!"

Despite Rogozin's rhetoric, joint U.S.-Russian operations continue aboard the International Space Station. NASA Administrator Bill Nelson and the agency's senior managers have kept a deliberately low profile and have not publicly responded to the Russian director-general. They've said only that both sides are working to maintain safe operations in space.

But relations are clearly at risk. On Wednesday, Rogozin said Roscosmos will "closely monitor the actions of our American partners and, if they continue to be hostile, we will return to the question of the existence of the International Space Station."

Former shuttle flight director and program manager Wayne Hale told the NASA Advisory Council on Tuesday the U.S. agency should consider "assembling a tiger team to prepare contingency plans" for ISS operations given the escalating tensions.

"It just seems prudent," he said. "Hopefully, it doesn't come to pass, but we've always prepared for contingencies if they were serious enough."

If they chose not to maintain the status quo, the Russians could, in theory, detach their modules from the station and chart their own course, leaving NASA to come up with the propulsion needed to keep its section of the outpost in orbit and to safely bring it down at the end of its life.

Less drastic, the Russians could attempt independent operations while still attached to the U.S. segment. Or they could simply abandon the outpost, forcing NASA to either follow suit or quickly develop supplemental propulsion.

In the near term, three Russian cosmonauts are scheduled for launch to the station aboard the Soyuz MS-21/67S ferry ship on March 18, docking at the newly attached Prichal multi-port module. On March 30, another Soyuz, MS-19/65S, is expected to return to Earth, bringing two cosmonauts and NASA astronaut Mark Vande Hei back to Earth.

Vande Hei and crewmate Pyotr Dubrov, launched on April 9, 2021, aboard a different Soyuz, will wrap up a 355-day stay in space, a new single-flight record for a NASA astronaut.

The same day Vande Hei's crew comes down, a SpaceX Crew Dragon is scheduled for launch to carry four private citizens to the space station for a 10-day commercial visit, coming home on April 9. Another Crew Dragon is set for launch six days after that, on April 15, to carry four fresh long-duration crew members to the lab. The crew they will replace plans to return to Earth on April 26.

How that sequence of flights might be affected by the ongoing crisis in Ukraine is not yet known. Regardless of the rhetoric, the space station requires both space super powers to operate.

The International Space Station was first proposed by President Ronald Reagan in his 1984 State of the Union address. In the wake of the Soviet Union's collapse, Russia joined the station project under the Clinton administration, helping design and build the largest structure ever assembled in space.

One former NASA manager, speaking after the Ukraine invasion began, called it "a deal made with the devil, with the best intentions," but there is little argument the venture has been remarkably successful to this point with astronauts and cosmonauts living aboard the complex continuously since November 2000.

One hundred and seven piloted station missions have been launched to date, including 66 Russian Soyuz crew rotation flights, 37 space shuttle assembly missions, four SpaceX Crew Dragon astronaut ferry flights, 80 unpiloted Russian Progress cargo flights and 55 U.S., European and Japanese supply ships.

The station features 16 pressurized modules, including seven provided by NASA, one by ESA and two from the Japanese space agency. The Russian segment is made up of the Zarya and Zvezda modules, two docking compartments, a newly arrived lab module and the Prichal docking port.

NASA astronauts, cosmonauts and partner astronauts have carried out 246 spacewalks to date to build and maintain the outpost, logging 65 days working in the vacuum of space.

The lab now stretches 167 feet from the forward Harmony module to Russia's aft Zvezda module and 357 feet across its NASA-supplied solar power truss. With a mass of nearly a million pounds, the station provides the pressurized volume of a 747 jumbo jet. It is the largest structure ever assembled in space.

Russia provides the propellant and thrusters needed to keep the station in orbit and to eventually guide the huge lab back into the atmosphere for a safe, targeted re-entry and breakup at the end of its life. The United States provides the powerful gyro devices used to maintain the lab's orientation and supplies the lion's share of the station's electrical power.

A Northrop Grumman Cygnus cargo ship launched February 19 is the first U.S. craft since the now-retired shuttle that is capable of raising the station's altitude. SpaceX Dragon capsules presumably could provide reboost capability as well, although additional launches of both spacecraft, at additional cost, would be required to make that happen. And it's not known how long it might take to implement any such plans.

In the meantime, Russian cosmonauts are not trained to operate U.S. systems and NASA astronauts cannot operate Russia's. The space station is, in the end, a truly international project that requires both superpowers, working together, to function in its current form.

"It would be very difficult for us to be operating on our own," said NASA space operations chief Kathy Lueders. "The ISS is an international partnership ... with joint dependencies."

Before the Ukraine crisis erupted, NASA, ESA Canada and Japan were aiming to extend station operations through 2030. Russia had not yet formally signed on, however, and as of now, all bets are off.

Bill Harwood has been covering the U.S. space program full-time since 1984, first as Cape Canaveral bureau chief for United Press International and now as a consultant for CBS News. He covered 129 space shuttle missions, every interplanetary flight since Voyager 2's flyby of Neptune and scores of commercial and military launches. Based at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, Harwood is a devoted amateur astronomer and co-author of "Comm Check: The Final Flight of Shuttle Columbia."

Read the original post:
Russia severs ties with U.S. and European space projects; ISS operating normally for now - CBS News

Get the Insider App

A personalized feed, summary mode, and ad-free experience.

The International Space Station (ISS) has helped expand our knowledge of the universe, fostered the birth of the space industry, and led the international community's scientific collaboration.

"The International Space Station is a beacon of peaceful international scientific collaboration and for more than 20 years has returned enormous scientific, educational, and technological developments to benefit humanity," said NASA administrator Bill Nelson.

But its days are nevertheless numbered. Like all space exploration missions, the ISS has a lifespan which is gradually nearing its end.

NASA's station, which weighs 419,725 kilograms, will be redirected and brought into the atmosphere so it can crash land in the middle of the ocean by January 2031, according to Sky News.

NASA announced that President Joe Biden has committed to keeping the ISS running until 2030.

"Extending operations through 2030 will continue another productive decade of research advancement and enable a seamless transition of capabilities in low-Earth orbit to one or more commercially owned and operated destinations in the late 2020s," NASA said in a statement.

According to Sky, the ISS lifespan has been increased to 2030 to allow the private sector to develop the necessary technology.

The report also says that NASA confirmed to the US Congress that it will keep at least a couple of its astronauts on these privately-owned space stations.

The ISS typically orbits at an altitude of about 253 miles in low Earth orbit and takes between 90 and 93 minutes to complete one orbit of Earth, making about 16 orbits per day, depending on the altitude it's at.

By January 2031, NASA plans to slowly lower the ISS into the atmosphere, where the increasing density of the atmosphere will increase air resistance.

The speed of the structure will also create a lot of heat, which may cause it to begin to break up.

This is why NASA is aiming to crash the ISS into the middle of the ocean. The location that NASA is aiming for is Point Nemo, in the south Pacific Ocean.

Point Nemo is the furthest point on Earth from any land, and this has led it to become a "space cemetery," according to Interesting Engineering.

There are a number of external factors that may affect the ISS's controlled descent for example, according to Sky, high solar activity could cause the ISS to miss its landing point.

See the article here:
NASA plans to crash the International Space Station into the ocean - Business Insider

They pinky swear they won't act like kids in a candy shop. Bothering Astronauts

We can all heave huge sighs of relief knowing that the space tourists who are part of the first all-private mission to the International Space Station have vowed not to irritate the actual astronauts onboard the station.

During a briefing about the upcoming mission by private spaceflight company Axiom Space, former NASA astronaut and mission commander Michael Lpez-Alegra said that he plans to make sure his crew doesnt disrupt the stations existing crew members once there.

Were super sensitive to that, and we think thats a very good example to be setting for future crews, Lpez-Alegra said during the livestreamed press conference. Everybody on the crew is very dedicated, very committed, very professional in this, and we really are taking this very, very seriously.

Its not tourism, he argued, implying the Ax-1 crew is traveling to the ISS to do some serious science, not to go on a very expensive holiday in orbit a matter that is clearly up for some debate.

Axiom Space CEO Michael Suffredini agreed, adding that the crew will be busy conducting research of their own and wont paste their nose on the window.

Having spent a considerable amount of time on board the space station himself, Lpez-Alegras promises have at least someweight behind them.

But that doesnt mean the introduction of civilian outsiders wont be adding to an already chaotic situation on board the ISS. Russian cosmonauts and American astronauts are currently cooped up together in space while their countries are locked in political conflict back on Earth.

Nevertheless, Lpez-Alegra promised members of his crew will be the standard bearers and set the bar very, very high during the first consumer space flight of its kind.

Hopefully they wont irritate the professionals too much, because lets be honest they have more than enough on their plates already.

More on the Axiom Space mission: Man Getting Paid to Fly Rich Guys to Space Says Dont Worry, Theyre Not Just Idle Tourists

Care about supporting clean energy adoption? Find out how much money (and planet!) you could save by switching to solar power at UnderstandSolar.com. By signing up through this link, Futurism.com may receive a small commission.

See the rest here:
Space Tourists Promise Not to Annoy Astronauts While on Space Station - Futurism

New U.S. sanctions on Russiawill encompass Russias space agency, Roscosmos, according to aspeech U.S. President Joe Biden gaveon Feb. 24, 2022.

In response to these sanctions, the head of Roscosmos on the same dayposted a tweet saying, among other things, If you block cooperation with us, who will save the ISS from an uncontrolled deorbit and fall into the United States or Europe?

The International Space Station has often stayed above the fray of geopolitics. That position is under threat.

Built and run by the U.S., Russia, Europe, Japan and Canada, the ISS has shown how countries can cooperate on major projects in space. The station has been continuously occupied for over 20 years and hashosted more than 250 people from 19 countries.

As a space policy expert, the ISS represents, to me, a high point of cooperation in space exploration. But forthe current crewof two Russians, four Americans and one German, things may be getting worrisome as tensions rise between the U.S. and Russia.

Several agreements and systems are in place to make sure that the space station can function smoothly while being run by five different space agencies. As of Feb. 24, there were no announcements of unusual actions aboard the station despite the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine. But the Russian government has brought the ISS into geopolitics before and is doing so again.

What came to be known as the International Space Station was first conceived on NASA drawing boards in the early 1980s. As costs rose past initial estimates,NASA officials invited international partnersfrom the European Space Agency, Canada and Japan to join the project.

When the Soviet Union collapsed at the end of the Cold War in the early 1990s, the Russian space programfound itself in dire straits, suffering from lack of funding and an exodus of engineers and program officials. To take advantage ofRussian expertise in space stationsand foster post-Cold War cooperation, the NASA administrator at the time, Dan Goldin,convinced the Clinton administrationto bring Russia into the program that was rechristened the International Space Station.

By 1998, just prior to the launch of the first modules, Russia, the U.S. and the other international partners of the ISS entered intomemorandums of understandingthat spelled out how major decisions would be made and what kind of control each nation would have over various parts of the station.

The body thatgoverns the operation of the space stationis the Multilateral Coordination Board. This board has representatives from each of the space agencies involved in the ISS and is chaired by the U.S. The board operates by consensus in making decisions on things like acode of conduct for ISS crews.

Even among international partners who want to work together, consensus is not always possible. If this happens, either the chair of the board can make decisions on how to move forward or the issue can be elevated to the NASA administrator and the head of the Russian space agency, Roscosmos.

While the overall operations of the station are run by the Multilateral Coordination Board, things are more complicated when it comes to the modules themselves.

The International Space Station is made of16 different segmentsconstructed by different countries, including the U.S., Russia, Japan, Italy and the European Space Agency. Under the ISS agreements, each country maintains control over how its modules are used. This includes the RussianZarya, which provides electricity and propulsion to the station, andZvezda, which provides all of the stations life support systems like oxygen production and water recycling.

The result is that ISS modules are treated legally as if they areterritorial extensionsof their countries of origin. While all crew onboard can theoretically be in and use any of the modules, how they are used must be approved by each country.

While the ISS has functioned under this structure remarkably well since its launch more than 20 years ago, there have been some disputes.

When Russian forces annexedthe Ukrainian territory of Crimea in 2014, the U.S. imposed economic sanctions on Russia. As a result, Russian officialsannounced that they would no longer launchU.S. astronauts to and from the space station beginning in 2020. Since NASA had retired the space shuttle in 2011, the U.S. was entirely dependent on Russian rockets to get astronauts to and from the ISS, and this threat could have meant the end of the American presence aboard the space station entirely.

While Russia did not follow through on its threat and continued to transport U.S. astronauts, the threat needed to be taken seriously. The situation today is quite different. The U.S. has been relying on private SpaceX rockets to transport astronauts to and from the ISS. This makes potential Russian threats to launch access less meaningful.

But the invasion of Ukraine does seem to have upped the intensity of geopolitical maneuvering involving the ISS.

The new U.S. sanctions are designed to degrade their aerospace industry, including their space program. Thetweet in responsefrom Dmitry Rogozin, the head of Roscosmos, explained that Russian modules are key to moving the station when it needs to dodgespace junkor adjust its orbit. He went on to say that Russia could eitherrefuse to move the station when needed or even crash it into the U.S., Europe, India or China.

Though dramatic, this is likely an idle threat due to both political consequences and the practical difficulty of getting Russian cosmonauts off the ISS safely. But I am concerned about how the invasion will affect the remaining years of the space station.

In December 2021, theU.S. announced its intention toextend operation of ISS operations from its planned end date of 2024 to 2030. Most ISS partners expressed support for the plan, but Russia will also need to agree to keep the ISS operating beyond 2024. Without Russias support, the station and all of its scientific and cooperative achievements may face an early end.

The ISS has served as a prime example for how nations can cooperate with one another in an endeavor that has been relatively free from politics. Increasing tensions, threats and more aggressive Russian actions including itsrecent test of anti-satellite weapons are straining the realities of international cooperation in space going forward.

This article first appeared on The Conversation.

Continued here:
Russian invasion of Ukraine and resulting US sanctions threaten the future of the International Space Station - Stuff Magazines