Do They Still Call It “Geopolitics” In Space?

Joan Johnson-Freese expects that NASA cutting ties with Russia will prove counterproductive:

Space has a long history of serving as a surrogate for demonstrating U.S. displeasure about foreign or domestic policy actions in other countries. Though examples date back to the Cold War, the most recent case relates to China. China has been banned for years from participating in the [International Space Station (ISS)] because select members of the U.S. Congress consider it inappropriate to work with a communist government. In addition, NASA has been legislatively banned from having bilateral relations with China since 2011.

While ostensibly that ban relates to concerns about technology transfer, the underlying reason has as much or more to do with Chinese restrictions on religious freedom.

But China has neither changed its type of government nor its policies on religious freedom based on exclusion from the ISS or its relative isolation from meeting with NASA officials, nor is it likely to. In fact, China has pushed ahead with its own robotic lunar program and human space-flight program, and it works with many other countries, including Russia, in space.

Also, as Katie Zezima explains, the US space program now depends on Russia too much to cut ties completely:

Yes, NASA will stop certain contact with Russia. Russian officials won’t be able to visit the United States, and many meetings and teleconferences will be cancelled. (Wait ’til next year, boreal forest research conferences). But a number of large ties will remain intact, despite the White House directive. Cutting them just isn’t possible when, for example, the United States is wholly dependent on Russia to ferry astronauts to and from space. And, naturally, there is a U.S. astronaut in space right now who will eventually need to hitch a ride home.