SENSENBRENNER CHALLENGES ADMINISTRATION'S LATEST REVERSAL OF SPACE STATION POLICY

Washington, D.C. - Following a hearing on the International Space Station by the Committee on Science on October 13, Chairman F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., submitted a series of written questions to the State Department regarding Russia's role in the International Space Station and how that role might be affected by ongoing Russian activities to proliferate weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. After reviewing the State Department's responses, Chairman Sensenbrenner made the following statement:

"The State Department's responses are disturbing on many levels. Two areas of major concern involve the State Department's acceptance of continual delays and cost growth as well as their disregard for making Russia accountable for breaking non-proliferation and international cooperation agreements.

The State Department openly declares that implementing a "comprehensive contingency plan to remove Russia from the critical path of the construction and development of the ISS . . . would not be in the overall interests of U.S. foreign policy." In taking this position, the State Department is announcing that the Administration finds continued delays and cost growth in the International Space Station acceptable for foreign policy reasons. This contradicts the recommendations of Congress, NASA, and the independent Cost Assessment and Validation Task Force that the U.S. sever dependence on Russia's failing space program in order to keep the Space Station on schedule and control cost growth.

Their position is at odds with NASA's decision last fall to begin procuring long-lead items to develop an independent U.S. propulsion capability that would slowly wean the Space Station off of its Russian dependence. I publicly welcomed that development, especially since it would have brought the program back into line with the President's 1993 and 1994 promises not to make the Space Station dependent on Russia. (more) In addition, the State Department appears impervious to arguments that Russia should be held accountable for breaking its agreements in the areas of non-proliferation and international cooperation in space. The Clinton Administration testified explicitly in 1993 and 1994 that bringing Russia into the Space Station program would help prevent Russia from transferring technologies useful in creating weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles to third parties. The Administration paid Russia nearly $1 billion to help achieve this goal.

Unfortunately, the Russians continue their proliferation activities, as the Administration admitted in July 1998 when it sanctioned seven Russian aerospace enterprises, one of which reports directly to the Russian Space Agency. Yet, having indicated that the Russians are proliferating, the State Department wrote me, "[the imposition of penalties under the Executive Order on Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction as amended in July 1998] does not reflect any judgment as to whether the activities of concern are inconsistent with the Missile Technology Control Regime."

The Administration wants us to believe that they are being tough on the Russians but won't charge the Russians with the cheating for which they've been sanctioned. This kind of double-talk is completely unacceptable. It must stop so we can get on with the business of working out a bipartisan approach to fixing the Space Station and reducing proliferation.

Return to NASA Watch