Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Russian Invasion of Georgia Might Jeopardize Space Station

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the you-can't-get-there-from-here dept.

mknewman writes "Sen. Bill Nelson, one of NASA's biggest proponents on the Hill, is openly questioning how Russia's military intervention in Georgia will affect our access to the space station after the Shuttle is retired in 2010. Currently, NASA is able to use Soyuz vehicles for crew access and lifeboat operations thanks to an exemption from the Iran Non-Proliferation Act. The exemption expires in 2011, only one year after the Shuttle is due to head to the museums."

39 of 515 comments (clear)

  1. What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The summary makes absolutely no sense.

    Can anyone shed light on what is going on?

    1. Re:What? by MozeeToby · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ok, here goes. Most of the international community thinks that Russia is either over reacting or taking advantage of Goergia's internal conflict with a Goergian province that declared independence. This may lead to repercussions, possibly including not renewing the exemption to the non-proliferation treaty. If the internation community chooses not to renew that exemption, based on what the summary says it sounds like Russia will not be able to launch Soyuz vehicles after the exemption expires.

      Keep in mind that this is based on the summary and a quick look at what Wikipedia has to say about the conflict and it's repercussions. Therefore, I might be completely wrong so this should be taken with a big grain of salt.

    2. Re:What? by Master+Of+Ninja · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm not sure that even not renewing the exemption (i admit I have no idea the details of it) will do that much. A lot of countries have broken treaties without blinking an eyelid. I can't see much being done against Russia, except issuing diplomatic statements. The UN will be paralysed by Russia's veto, and I can't see China being in a rush to side against Russia (or side for it). Russia and China (perhaps with Brazil and India - the BRIC countries) could just go it alone - they have a lot of the world's population in them.

      I think the Georgians (or at least the president) were completely foolish to try and invade when Putin was at the Olympics and think that he wouldn't do anything. Compounding it is the fact that they seemed to be carrying out (from what I gather from the BBC) seems like ethnic cleansing by firing on the civilian population, and then killing Russian troops in the process. They burnt their bridges to some of their possible allies, who were also allies who being militarily over-extended aren't really in a position to help.

      What I think will happen is that giving it a few weeks people will forget about this. The whole situation will be framed as Ossetians (sp?) are just like Kosovo - they have a right to be independent, and with Russian influence in the region they will eventually become re-united with Russia. The issue of the ISS is just a distraction - everything will stay the same.

    3. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Clinton signed the Iran Non Proliferation Act penalizing any country doing weapons-related business with Iran. Russia has been selling missiles and nuclear fuel which meant we couldn't do business with them. Hence the exception.

      The exception was a tough sell the first time and NASA concerned it's dead in the water when time comes to renew it.

    4. Re:What? by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 4, Funny

      The summary makes absolutely no sense.

      Can anyone shed light on what is going on?

      Well, you see, it's like this: Chewbacca is a Wookie from the planet Kashyyyk...

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    5. Re:What? by camperdave · · Score: 4, Informative

      In particular, I'd like to know what non-proliferation in/of/for/by Iran has to do with Soyuz or Georgia.

      Basically, the US pays Russia a retainer for having the Soyuz craft docked at the ISS. The Iran non-proliferation act more or less forbids the US from dealing with any country that trades in arms and weaponry with Iran. Russia has a history of dealing in arms with Iran, so there are provisions and exceptions. I'm guessing these are in jeopardy with the recent conflict in Georgia.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    6. Re:What? by mea37 · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's about a U.S. law (the Iran Nonproliferation Act), not an international non-proliferation treaty.

      Congress has expressly forbidden the U.S. from making ISS-related payments to Russia unless it determines that Russia is taking steps to curb proliferation of weapons technoogy to Iran. On something of a "we have to or we're screwed" basis, they enacted a temporary exemption so we could pay Russia to carry our crewmembers to the ISS.

      So when the exemption expires, Russia's authority to launch Soyuz vehicles will not fall under question. US authority to purchase passage on those vehicles will be gone, though.

      So:

      1) If current events create enough antipathy towards Russia in the US Congress, then they may be unwilling to extend the exemption. Essentially they'd be re-enacting an economic sanction even though we don't have an alternate vendor for the service in question.

      2) Even if Congress extends the exemption, there's some question about Russia's ongoing willingness to sell us passage on their rockets (at a reasonable price, or maybe at all) if diplomatic relations worsen.

    7. Re:What? by martin-boundary · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How do you invade your own territory?

      Be careful how you state this. If Georgia has truly invaded its own territory, then it follows that Saakashvili bombed his own people. Saddam was hanged for this.

  2. moral decline by polar+red · · Score: 4, Insightful

    These problems occur, when a country prouding itself to be the greatest, democratic nation on earth, breaks its own rules(like : not intruding on other nations Sovereignty), which lead to other nations breaking those same rules, ... This empire is on its way out i fear, and the results won't be pretty.

    --
    Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
    1. Re:moral decline by couchslug · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "which lead to other nations breaking those same rules, .."

      Our Cold War opponents broke them at will in the recent past anyway, because it served them well and they could.

      "Rules" are window dressing to amuse the earnest and naive people who believe in them. Power is what matters, because to the extent one has power one can make up and enforce rules.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  3. priorities man! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Shit, if germany decided to kill the jews again, CmdrTaco would be wondering how this affects his BMW's warranty.

    1. Re:priorities man! by eln · · Score: 5, Funny

      To be fair he did get the extended warranty protection, and that shit ain't cheap.

    2. Re:priorities man! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, if you're more passive you get to use them. You get mod points more if you read stories but don't post in them (giving them to people who post in every story they read doesn't make sense, since they will never be able to use them). I usually post in stories, and rarely get mod points. When I'm busy and only have time to read a few comments in a story and not to post, I get them all the time.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  4. Russia has ultimate weapon. by BitterOldGUy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ...somehow since then we aren't allowed to piss them off.

    Russia has the greatest weapon of our time: oil. They have more than the Saudis. Nobody is going to piss them off and disrupt their supply.

    1. Re:Russia has ultimate weapon. by Erwos · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is exactly it, and it's even more true for Europe. Europe is extremely dependent on Russia for their energy needs. That's why the reaction has been relatively quiet compared to the usual shrill screams that they have when a large country runs roughshod over a smaller one (even one that might have deserved it). It's the same reason they kowtow to the Arab states, and it's the same reason they can't seem to find it in themselves to do anything serious about Iran (notice the comma - I know Iran isn't an Arab state).

      You can call it pragmatic or whatever, but I laugh a little every time I hear some smug European government official tell us how he or she is "principled" when it comes to foreign relations. The principle they're practicing ain't the same one they're preaching. The principle is, of course, "advance my country by any means possible". (Which is how it's always been, really.) The Russians and Chinese, however much I dislike their governments, at least tend to be up front about it.

      --
      Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
    2. Re:Russia has ultimate weapon. by mcvos · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ...somehow since then we aren't allowed to piss them off.

      Russia has the greatest weapon of our time: oil. They have more than the Saudis. Nobody is going to piss them off and disrupt their supply.

      Oil is what the Russia/Georgia conflict is actually about! There's lots of oil and gas in the Caspian Sea and central Asia. There are a couple of ways to get it, but two of the most important ones are:

      1: through Kazakhstan and Russia
      2: through Azerbaidjan, Georgia and Turkey

      There's your conflict, including the reason why the US and EU want Russia out of Georgia.

    3. Re:Russia has ultimate weapon. by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Oil is a big part of it, but it's hardly the only element. The real cause of it is that a reascendant Russian Empire is telling all the fledgling statelets that broke off during a decade of political and economic chaos after the collapse of the Communist Dynasty are being reigned back in. This is a pattern of behavior for Russia that is centuries old now. It has long viewed every region with Slavic populations as being either an integral part of Mother Russia or a client state. This was the case under the Muscovite Princes, under the Russian Czars and under the Communists (and in particularly under Stalin and the later Soviet leaders).

      Oil certainly is a motivator, but I'm not even sure it's the main one. We're dealing with cultural and political forces and ideals that survived the Tatars, basically foreign rule under German noblemen (and in Catherine the Great's case, noblewoman), the upheavals of the late 19th century, the revolution and the civil war, the Bolshevik takeover, the harsh reign of Stalin and the inept rule of his successors, and even the near collapse of central authority after the fall of the Soviet Empire. It is has been a basic tenet of Russian foreign policy for centuries that wherever you find Slavs, they ultimately should owe their allegiance to the Muscovite Princes (whatever form that might take at any particular moment in time). Unfortunately, in a world of petroleum-dominated economics, we tend to think of things in terms of dollars and cents, and yet one should never underestimate the power of nationalism. Oil is simply the current coin by which Russia can exert its muscle, but the situation is no different than it was twenty years ago or two hundred years ago.

      Russia may be forced to release its hold on some of the Western Slavic peoples like the Poles, Czechs, Slovaks and Ukrainians (the first three have long been more Western European in culture and religion, the latter is of greater pain to the Russian identity, many seeing the Ukraine as an organic part of Russia), but you can be goddamned sure that everywhere else where there is some sort of ethnic Russian minority or some pro-Russian Slavic population we're not likely going to be able to have as much luck.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    4. Re:Russia has ultimate weapon. by steelfood · · Score: 5, Funny

      Since the fall of the U.S.S.R, Russia's been working hard at westernizing. They're just completing the transition by invading another smaller country for oil under the pretext of national security.

      Tongue-in-cheek of course.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
  5. I doubt this will really matter by Bullfish · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I doubt this will really matter in the end. Especially long term. The Russians will likely leave by the end of the week as soon as the Georgian military is dismantled. In the end, Georgia started this, and really, what effect did the crushing of the Prague spring, the Hungarian uprising of 56 etc really have on relations between the west and Russia?

    And as others have pointed out, the Georgians started it with an area of effect attack on a city populated by ethnic Russians. If there is trouble with the ISS, it will be for other reasons.

  6. Re:NO wonder nerds have a bad rep by Evilest+Doer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't believe that a slight pertubation to the timeline of the hopeless ISS is what really troubles nerds when two countries are at war. Seriously..!

    Or, you could look at it this way. Overall human progress is being delayed because two countries are involved in a pissing and "my-dick-is-bigger-than-yours" contest. Or, similar to what Ernest Rutherford said, we've got more important things to worry about than another stupid war.

    --
    I feel like death on a soda cracker.
  7. Re:When push comes to shove by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, US foreign policy has been pretty much spineless when dealing with Russia since Reagans day...

    I know it's fashionable to rail against the US, but in truth the European countries have shared this shortcoming due to their addiction to Russian oil.

    Economic realities drive foreign policy for most countries in the world. We only manage to stand up in righteous indignation when we've got nothing really to lose. It's why we (eventually) were willing to isolate Apartheid South Africa, but never took any measures of consequence against China for {choose any one of many offenses}.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  8. Re:NO wonder nerds have a bad rep by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's right! No web site, anywhere, should ever talk about anything besides people dying, because people are always dying and it's always the most important thing happening.

    Sheesh. You realize humans are capable of paying attention to more than one thing at a time?

    --
    If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
  9. There is a big problem actually by thermian · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Due to the desire of the US to use the space shuttle to service the ISS, it was placed in a much lower orbit then would otherwise have been the case. Certainly it was much lower then most interested parties wanted.

    As a result of this it is constantly being slowed by friction caused by contact with the outer atmosphere. We are talking very slight friction, but at the speed of the ISS that slight friction is enough to bring it into a lower orbit over time.

    One of the main worries after the challenger disaster was that space shuttle had been used to correct this reduction in orbit periodically by firing its thrusters whilst docked. Instead they had to use Soyuz capsules to try and do the same thing.

    Its bad either way, but if there is tension and both countries stop going there, the orbit will deteriorate to the point where only a specialised mission to boost it would work. That may not be possible, or indeed successful.

    While it would have to drop a long way to re-enter the atmosphere and burn up, it wouldn't have to drop too far to start being prohibitively complicated and expensive to get it back into its normal orbit.

    --
    A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
    1. Re:There is a big problem actually by TorKlingberg · · Score: 4, Informative

      The European Automated Transfer Vehicle can also re-boost the station. If I remember correctly, even more than the shuttle can.

  10. Re:US manned spaceflight ends in 2010 by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The US can't afford it any more.

    What bullshit! The US doesn't want to pay it any more. It can certainly afford it. Bringing NASA up to Apollo levels of funding would be a virtually unnoticeable drop in the current federal budget.

    --
    If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
  11. Re:NO wonder nerds have a bad rep by Peter+Cooper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is that sarcasm? Things like nuclear power and landing on the moon came out of a "my dick is bigger than yours" contest between countries.

  12. Re:American planning in action by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Funny

    Russia thinks ahead and plans ahead.

    I believe the phrase you're looking for is, "Russians don't take a dump, son, without a plan".
    - Adm. Painter, The Hunt for Red October

    Ahhh, Permanent UN Security Council members and their toys...

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  13. Re:Russia's ressponse was reasonable and justified by dunkelfalke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    now please explain to me how georgia could kill only 6 people by shelling a sleeping capital city at midnight?

    also of note is the fact, that georgia borders chechnya where lots of russian troops are waiting for any action.

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  14. Re:When push comes to shove by kesuki · · Score: 4, Informative

    just so long as you realize these 'freedom fighters' of south osetia had won a majority election, which was then overturned by the Georgia government by holding a special election where the polls were guarded by armed guards to 'elect' a pro-Georgia government.

    just so you realize only 28% of the population of south osetia is actually Georgians and that the entire reason for this war is that Georgia wants the tax revenue on all the freight lines that run from Russia to Georgia through south osetia.

    yeah,yeah russia made the population of south osetia russian citizens so they could invade goergia, and possibly grab a significant portion of their oil fields, but it's not like georgia are good guys either.

    --
    https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
  15. Re:Russia's ressponse was reasonable and justified by Atilla · · Score: 5, Informative

    Did you get these numbers from a bubble gum machine?

    There were about a dozen of Russian peace keeper troops dead, along with over 1500 civilians, all of which died either during the "hailstorm" barrage from Georgia side, or directly by Georgian troops... But who cares about civilians, right?

    --
    --- sig moved for great justice.
  16. Re:When push comes to shove by Bemopolis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah, US foreign policy has been pretty much spineless when dealing with Russia since Reagans day...

    Yeah, I'm sure glad we had the foresight to arm and fund the muhajadin in Afghanistan. I mean, that went great and NEVER AFFECTED US EVER AGAIN...

    --
    "I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
  17. Re:When push comes to shove by X.25 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why don't you ask somebody from Poland, the Baltic States, Finland or Ukraine what they think of recent Russian actions?

    Why don't you ask someone from Balkans what they think about US actions in regards of bombing sovereign nation, taking part of their country and allowing it to declare independence?

  18. Re:Russia's ressponse was reasonable and justified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Russians are very closely aligned with the rebels in South Ossetia (the Russians sign most of their paychecks). They used the rebels to provoke Georgia into attacking (which they did because their leader thought the US would back them up).

    So Georgia attacks first, and Russia gets to attack back while looking like the good guys.

    Meanwhile, the rest of the world is not willing to risk too much to defend Georgia. Although Europe is more willing to do so than the US because of the pipeline going through Georgia.

    The situation is very complex, with lots of ego on both sides.

  19. Re:your idea of democracy is a guy who wins with 9 by BLAG-blast · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No! In a "real" democracy, the guy with 49% beats the guy 51%.

    sounds like bullshit show elections to me.

    More or less BS sounding show elections than the guy winning with 49%....?

    --
    M0571y H@rml355.
  20. Re:Russia's ressponse was reasonable and justified by Bruha · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'd love to know where you get your intelligence.

    Oh you're taking Russia's word that they were only responding to Georgian aggression. Great thinking there buddy.

    Russia will occupy these two provinces and suddenly there will be new breakaway regions adjacent to these. Russia will rinse and repeat, while the west begin a process of appeasement or hollow diplomatic actions and Russia will eventually forcefully integrate Georgia back into the fold.

    Yeah our commitment to democracy goes only so far.

  21. Re:Russia's ressponse was reasonable and justified by tomz16 · · Score: 5, Informative

    it should have no effect on our relations. WE should apologize for egging Georgia on./ Those cowards staged a missile attack on a city in the middle of the fucking night. After 10+ years of peace. fuck Georgia, they got what they deserved.

    EXACTLY! I've been shocked by the abysmal coverage we've been getting from the major news outlets in the US! I felt sorry for the Georgians until I did some of my own research.

    This is a simple story FULL of douchebaggery on all sides...

    Background:
    - Russia has bad bad bad history with Georgians

    - The South Ossetians have wanted to split from Georgia for 10+ years now via several democratic votes, and identify themselves with the Russians (use the same currency, etc.).

    - Russia is sympathetic to South Ossetia, and again, HATES GEORGIA.

    - Russia has tactical incentive to stop Georgia from joining/bringing NATO into Russia's backyard. They are looking for an excuse to mess Georgia's shit up, and it's no secret.

    - Russia has been flexing its war muscle for the past year or two after having run into some petro dollars.

    - Georgia doesn't want to let South Ossetia break away, and there has been sporadic fighting in the region related to this fact.

    - AGAIN, Russians hate hate hate the Georgians, and are kind of partial to the South Ossetians.

    What happened:

    - Georgia KNOWS that Russia is amassing troops on the border (big time), and is just looking for an excuse.

    - Georgia KNOWS that Russian peacekeepers are in South Ossetia.

    - Georgia is counting on the fact that its western ties will keep Russia out... maybe even hoping that we will intervene on their behalf if they start shit.

    - Georgia sucker punches South Ossetia in the middle of the night with heavy weaponry (probably supplied by us or our allies). Kills 1500+ civilians, and about a dozen Russian Peacekeepers. (keep in mind that 1,500 civilians is a significant percentage of all South Ossetians, making this a borderline genocidal act)

    - Georgia acts all surprised when Russia completely tank fucks them the next day. They act even more surprised when Russia doesn't stop at repelling their attack on South Ossetia and keeps messing their junk up.

    - The USA airlifts Georgian troops from Iraq into the theater of combat to fight AGAINST the Russians (SERIOUSLY! WTF GUYS? Let's mind our own business. If you were a Russian, how would you feel about the USA right now?)

    and the media reports "Russia invades Georgia"

    Bullshit.

    The worst part is that if Georgia had actually made it into NATO, we could have very well gotten ourselves tangled up in WWIII here.

    p.S. if you need it in pictures :

    here

  22. Re:typically, your numbers are dead WRONG by Columcille · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most of the world recognizes Israel. Most of the world does not recognize South Ossetia. This isn't just the US throwing its weight around. Russia is trying to force things its way. Russia could choose to recognize the People's Republic of Texas if it wanted to but that wouldn't change the fact that Texas remains part of the US. And I know all the Russians living in South Ossetia do not want it to be part of Georgia, but there is something odd about Russian Citizens getting to say what Georgia should do with its territory.

    --
    I love my sig.
  23. Re:Russia's ressponse was reasonable and justified by mea37 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Consistant foreign policy would be nice, yes.

    But as long as you're trying to put things in first-person perspective, how would you expect the U.S. to respond if one or more states were to suddenly declare independence?

    "Ok, no worries about the federal money and infrastructure build-up from which you've benefitted. We'll just relocate any strategic military assets we might have placed within your borders." I doubt it. More likely, a civil war.

    Any "democratic" government probably ought to have a specific procedure for secession. Absent that, any attempt to break away from ones parent country has always been, and will always be, a morally grey area. While the U.S. certainly has benefited from, and engaged in the role of being, foreign aid to one side in a civil war, that doesn't make it right in the general case.

    I'm not convinced either side (Georgia or Russia) is taking the "high road". I also don't claim to have the historical -- or even current event -- perspective to weigh all the factors in the rights-and-wrongs of a border dispute. Given the one-sided nature of most of the posts here, I'd wager most of the posters are in that same ill-informed boat.

    My two cents: By default, I assume national sovereignty. If a population wants to secede, I generally consider it an internal affair; and just because the local population expresses a wish to be separate, that doesn't automatically make it so from a sound international standpoint.

    But were there human rights violations, war crimes, etc. going on between Georgia and Southern Ossetia? That would certainly weaken any sovereignty claims... Lacking those things, what were peacekeepers doing on Georgian soil in the first place? Did Georgia accept their presence, or were they essentially an occupying force?

    If I put my troops in harms way, can I really claim the right to retalliate when they get hurt? Can Russia draw a strategic connection between bombing near the Geogian capital (something like 30 miles out of their way) and protecting those in Southern Ossetia?

    Simply too many questions to justify all the "Country X is good and Country Y is evil" rhetoric around here.

  24. Re:When push comes to shove by Darinbob · · Score: 5, Informative

    Kosovo was essentially created by Marshall Tito, as an autonomous region. The borders were drawn to limit Serbian power and domination of Yugoslavia, but it was still majority Albanian. It had never been a part of Serbia properly. Kosovo autonomy was revoked by Milosevic (giving him one extra vote in the Yugoslavian presidency). At which point Albanian was removed as an official language, Serb was taught in the schools, etc. There was a period of resistance, terrorism, crime, etc, after this.

    The UN had resolutions regarding Kosovo, there were the Dayton agreements, Kosovo Verification Mission, etc. There was a long time-line here. Both sides were at fault. Things reached a climax after the massacre at Rachak, and NATO decided it had to step in and force a peace; force Serbia and Milosovic to stop acting like thugs, and threaten the KLA to behave or they'd be abandoned, and restore the pre 1990 autonomous status of Kosovo. Further peace talks were attempted. All before any bombing. The bombing was by NATO, an alliance, not a US unilateral action. The US is not the boss of NATO, and NATO was acting in the interests of Europe in this case.

    The difference here from Georgia and South Ossetia is the time line and number of parties involved. Russia acted immediately after the attacks on Tskhinvali, with no negotiations, no UN consultations, no diplomacy, no formal protests, no attempted peace process, etc. Russia responded in less than one day. Russia acted unilaterally.

    There are very interesting similarities though: Kosovo was never really a part of Serbia, and South Ossetia was never really Georgian, except by the drawing of borders for political reasons. Both Kosovo and South Ossetia had armed separatist/resistance movements. Both Serbia and Georgia attempted harsh crackdowns. Both Serbia and Georgia badly underestimated the backlash that they would get from NATO or Russia.