Walker Praises New OTA Report on US-Russian Space Activities
Even as the House and Senate voted to pass budget resolutions with provisions to abolish the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) (see FYI #74), House Science Committee Chairman Robert Walker (R-PA) praised a May 15 OTA report for its review of US-Russian space partnerships.
Of the 144-page report, “U.S.-Russian Cooperation in Space,” Walker said, “The Committee is delighted to have such a valuable study to use in weighing our evolutionary space partnership with Russia. The OTA report covers the range of significant concerns that supporters and opponents of space development now face working with Russia....” OTA has planned future reports on the US launch industry, but their status is questionable in light of OTA’s uncertain future.
The OTA report “surveys the potential benefits and drawbacks of expanded cooperation with Russia and other nations of the FSU [former Soviet Union] in space activities.... Such cooperation has begun to return scientific, technological, political, and economic benefits to the United States. However, the political and economic risks of cooperating with the Russians are higher than with the United States’ traditional partners in space.”
According to the report, “NASA is exploring cooperative space research and development with Russia in virtually every programmatic area.” In addition to Russia’s technical contributions, foreign policy benefits may accrue from NASA’s purchases of almost $650 million in goods and services. This may assist in the stabilization of the Russian economy and preserving employment for some Russian engineers and technicians. Yet Russia’s “severe economic hardships” pose the risk that its government and enterprises may not be able to perform as necessary. OTA recommends the following elements as critical to the success of any cooperative space partnership: successful management of large, multilateral projects; progress in stabilizing Russia’s political and economic institutions; preservation of Russian space enterprises; awareness and management of cultural and institutional differences; Russian adherence to missile-technology controls; and liberalization of export control, customs, and finance laws.
With the exception of the space station, OTA notes that “Russian contributions are not in the `critical path’ to completion of key projects.” While Russian involvement in the space station “promises to increase program flexibility and capability,” the report warns that “placing the Russian contribution in the critical path...poses unprecedented programmatic and political risks.”
In addition to NASA’s cooperative programs, the report says, “most large U.S. aerospace companies are pursuing some form of joint venture or partnership with Russian concerns,...[but] it is too early to tell how successful they will be.” OTA advocates reform of U.S. export-control laws to help such efforts, but finds no consensus on how expanded cooperation with Russia will affect the U.S. aerospace industry.
The report, OTA-ISS-618, can be purchased from the Government Printing Office. Contact the Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC. 20402-9328; (202) 512-0132; fax: (202) 512-2250; or it can be accessed via the WorldWideWeb at http://www.ota.gov
