Alternative Partners for the European Space Agency

Over the last few decades, cooperation between the European Space Agency (ESA) and the Russian Federal Space Agency has been mutually beneficial, but given recent developments I do not agree this partnership can continue. Due to mounting tensions over the Ukrainian Civil War, and an increase in sanction from many ESA member nations directed towards Russia, continued cooperation on space missions does not look like an attractive policy. Amidst this political turmoil the magazine Nature has published a piece on how the ESA wishes to work with Russia on their next lunar mission by sending their equipment on board a Russian Soyuz rocket (Gibney). Meanwhile many other organizations, particularly in Asia and America, are working on their own moon missions or launchers capable of moon missions that would provide a number of benefits over working with the Russians. Though the long cooperation between the European Space Agency and the Russian Federal Space Agency has resulted in many admirable achievements, I see continued cooperation between the organizations undesirable for the ESA amidst failing relations with Russia, especially with the growth of capabilities of other organizations that would be willing to work with the ESA, and the large increase of investments for space missions around the world that is lowering the cost of large missions like the one currently being planned by the ESA.

Space X Falcon 9 on Launch Pad
Photo courtesy of NASA

Cooperation with Russia, given the current state of relations, is undesirable for the nations in the ESA. The Ukrainian Civil War has put Europe at odds with Russia due to Russia’s support of rebel groups in the eastern parts of the country, and many European nations accuse Russia of sending in heavy military equipment that will prolong the fighting considerably. Many sanctions have already been placed on Russia by Europe and its allies with more likely to be placed in the near future. Then there is the issue over Russia's support of Syrian dictator Bashar Al Assad who is accused by many in the west of the intentional bombing of civilians, and the use chemical weapons. Working with Russia under such circumstances does not seem to me as a preferred situation. Merely stating that the joint space missions should not be muddled in politics fails to see how such actions would be viewed by the rest of the world. For example, when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in the 1980’s the United States boycotted the Olympics in order to show how they will not support anything Russian given the political situation. By working with the Russians while accusing them of causing multiple humanitarian crisis around the world weakens the stance Europe has taken to contain Russia’s interests. I feel as if the only reason the Europeans consider working with the Russians during this time is because of their long standing cooperation since the 1990s on many missions, most notably through the use of Soviet era Soyuz orbital launcher that is commonly used to launch personal into space and resupply the international space station. Russia is also one of the nations with a planned robotic mission to the moon in the near future but, there are other nations and organizations in Asia and the Americas that also have moon missions planned that would make better partners for the ESA, such as Japan, South Korea, and private companies in the United States. Given these circumstances working with the Russians on a robotic mission to the moon with the tense political situation is unreasonable considering the alternatives.

Rover developed of Google X prize competition

The European Space Agency has a long history of working with the United States on space missions; a relationship that has lasted longer than their partnership with Russia. The United States is also in a much better situation politically with most of Europe avoiding the risk of politics playing a huge factor in the public opinion of cooperation. Private firms in the U.S. for space exploration are growing at an outstanding rate. Google, an American software company, is already showing interest to invest in lunar missions. Google has already given out a number of large monetary rewards to private companies in the U.S. for the creation of tools that would be useful for a moon mission and some to overseas in Asia and Europe. I see these kinds of investments as a sign that space is becoming less of a venture for large national organization and moving more towards private companies that will cooperate to provide the necessary technology for missions. NASA, the American space agency, has taken more advantage of the growth in the private space sector through the use of the Falcon 9 rocket developed by SpaceX, a private company well known for its recent advancements in rocket technology and for reducing the price of space missions over all. The success of private space firms in the US is highlighted by the budget increase to NASA specifically to the Commercial Crew program that has contracts with Boeing and SpaceX. The only reason why NASA is investing so heavily on private space is because they have benefited immensely by letting private space companies take over smaller missions which lets them focus on missions to Mars or Europa. Given the ESA like NASA is on a tight budget they will also benefit by signing contracts with these companies. Some can argue that Russia would be a better partner because they are European, but

Russia is not a part of the ESA or even the EU and they are constantly at odds with western European interests; this makes them less desirable partners than American space firms. Even the Chinese at this stage would look like better partners for the Europeans given their recent advancements in lunar mission technology. It seems clear that even though the Russians are Europeans that does not instantly make them a more viable option over other organizations around the world.

Soviet era Soyuz during launch
Photo couetesy of NASA

The issue remains that though Russian spacecraft have proven to be technologically sufficient, reliable, and relatively cheap compared to other options in the last few decades, new developments from other nations have better, more up to date technology that can accomplish the same tasks the ESA needs. Even internally the ESA is working on a heavy launcher, Ariane 6, capable of sending spacecraft deep into space. The issue with the Ariane unfortunately is that it is not expected to be operational until the 2020 while the ESA is looking to go to the moon sometime in the near future. In that case NASA already has a heavy launcher in service, the Delta IV Heavy that costs around $300 million compared to the heavy Soyuz launcher which would be more along the lines of $320 million. The cheapest option currently is the Falcon 9 heavy from SpaceX which will purportedly cost a meager $85 million and will be ready by the end of 2015. Given these recent developments the ESA will likely be able to get a cheaper and more suitable launcher for sending its equipment to the moon within the next year or so while it develops its own rockets capable of the same missions. SpaceX in particular looks like a very promising partner for lunar exploration considering the amount of money its CEO Elon Musk is investing on improving his company’s technologies which push the bounds of what private companies are able to do. I am certain that these private companies would enjoy the opportunity to prove their capabilities by working on missions like the ones being planned by the ESA.

Overall, given the circumstance, the ESA would be better off working with an organization other than the Russians for their planned lunar mission. The stance Europe and its allies have taken against Russia over the situation in Ukraine and Syria would be weakened by continued reliance on their space program. It would be better and possible even cheaper if the ESA were to postpone their moon plan slightly and find a partner elsewhere. Promising developments in the private sector and the more cost effective solution that could be provided by NASA and their partners will prove to be better alternatives and be available in the near future. Given the growing interest in space exploration in the private sector it may not be long before rockets like the Falcon 9 are being sold and used as cheaper alternatives to the expensive, established community of heavy launch vehicles. The entire landscape of space exploration is changing and there are now more options for a space mission than ever before. The ESA should not be so open to this plan to work with the Russians at this time and their interests on a whole would be better served if they found new partners to work with.

Works Cited

Gibney, Elizabeth. "Europe Proposes Joint Moon Trips with Russia." Nature. Nature Publishing Group, 9 Dec. 2014. Web. 1 Feb. 2015. <http://www.nature.com/news/europe-proposes-joint-moon-trips-with-russia-1.16517>.