Mark Whittington has a long rebuttal to Jeff Foust's commentary at The Space Review, about the "coming space race with China." It's worth reading, though I still believe that such a race, now or in the future, is a mirage.

I do need to respond to one point in particular:

One interesting point against the idea of a Chinese space threat was made recently by Rand Simberg in his Transterrestrial Musings weblog. He stated, ?a true free- market approach (of which, under the current regime, I suspect they?re incapable) will leave them in the dust. That?s why I don?t even consider them relevant to our species? future in space, unless they display some dramatic change in approach.? The problem is that the United States is not following a free market approach in space flight. NASA is still insisting on running its own space line, rather than going to the private sector for launch services, for example.

Mark hasn't been paying attention. Certainly NASA isn't taking a free-market approach, but the country is increasingly doing so (note the rising number of stories of dot commies finally putting their money where their mouths are).

At this point, I still consider both China and NASA irrelevancies to our future in space. But by the third and final page of his piece, I think that all three of us are ultimately in agreement.

On the off chance of repeating myself (100% chance), I contend that if the US had lost the race to the moon, we would have made it to Mars by now.

Simberg is correct, a race, now or in the future, would be a mirage. Because we were in such a deadlock of MAD, political maneuvering could only be done by bolstering some national pride. There is no climate for that anymore? strangely, for some reason, I think I wrote that with regret.

Another interesting angle would be to explore a private race to space between countries. Russia has certainly beat us out of the gate as far as space tourism is concerned and they forced the issue onto an unreceptive Dan Goldin. Watching that unfold almost convinced me that bringing the Russians on board to help with ISS construction was a good idea.

41 Years.

1492 - Columbus for Spain discovers the southern route to the Bahamas after an outward voyage of 33 days and a return voyage of 47 days.

1498 - John Cabot for England discovers northern route to Newfoundland after an outward voyage of 31 days and a return voyage of 15 days.

1969 - America discovers the translunar route to the Moon after an outward voyage of 4 days and a return voyage of 3 days.

The English were in a poor position to exploit the northern route.

Spain and Portugal had 3 times their population. France, 6 times.

Northern route explorers found only ice, trees, and natives with nothing of value. No minerals.
The southern route led to the tropics. Early on, southern route explorers could cut a load of hardwood in Brazil to pay for the voyage.

The northern route only had fish to recoup costs. For decades following fishing vessels would sail to the Grand Banks--within site of land--fill up their holds, and return without ever going ashore.

41 years after Columbus, Cartier would decide to try to found a colony in the north. It failed.

Why then, is North America the home of an English speaking, world-dominating super power 500 years later?

Here at MWO WWWW, I don't have a clue. Perhaps the countries of the southern route were distracted by unchecked greed, military adventurism, and the difficulties of controlling their subject peoples.

1969 - America discovers the translunar route to the Moon after an outward voyage of 4 days and a return voyage of 3 days.

2003 - China will be launching its first astronaut.

2010 - 41 years after Apollo, China plans to found a colony on the moon.

I can't predict what will be happening on the Moon five hundred years from now, April 26, 2503. I can imagine that an American and an Englishman are sitting in a bar there, if they still have things like bars.
"We ruled the world, once." says the Englishman.
"Us too." says the American.

link

The only case in which I'd be genuinely worried about the Chinese is if they actually managed to successfully build an Orion or 5.

Here's hoping they don't have the balls or vision for that! (They already appear to have stolen much of the needed tech).

The thing is, Chinese government _is_ concerned about space, US isnt.
If US government would care about space, all the regulatory hurdles would be already worked out, NASA would be purely research agency and private space development efforts would be heavily subsidized.
Currently, there are even no plans to getting rid of the biggest roadblock in space efforts, NASA manned space program.
As long as Chinese have space policy, and US doesnt, its entirely possible for China to become a dominating space superpower. Regardless of how its accomplished.

Blank poster (6.25.03):

Hmmm. I seem to recall arguments about industrial policy and the Japanese that made roughly the same argument. So long as Japan had an industrial policy (and powerhouses like MITI), then they could apply their R&D more effectively, their research, which focused on production, would keep them ahead of our entrepreneurs, they'd apply their investment capital more efficiently, and they'd wind up controlling not just the auto industry, but shipbuilding, chips, and (gasp!) SOFTWARE.

Somehow, the idea of decentralized approaches always loses out, theoretically, to preplanned policies, especially those masterminded by the government.

Somehow, the idea of decentralized approaches always loses out, theoretically, to preplanned policies, especially those masterminded by the government.

That, of course, is because the people who come up with these theories are generally the same people who do the planning...