Last week the National Intelligence Council (NIC) released its most recent unclassified global briefing, Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World that closely parallels forecasts of this weblog. 21stCenturyWaves.com forecasts are based on patterns in long-term trends in the economy, technology, exploration, and society over the last 200 years, that include spectacular pulses of Great Explorations and Macro-Engineering Projects (MEPs) known as Maslow Windows.

NIC provides long-term strategic thinking for the U.S. Intelligence Community and reports to the Director of National Intelligence. It has a Deputy National Intelligence Officer for each of 12 areas and subject matters, including East Asia, Europe, Russia and Eurasia, Economics and Global Issues, and Military Issues, etc., and consults with experts in academia and the private sector.

Global Trends 2025’s preliminary assessments for the next 15 years include:

1) We should expect “unprecedented economic growth.” This NIC assessment is completely consistent with this weblog’s economic forecasts that include rhythmic, twice-per-century major economic booms; the next one should culminate around 2025. This “unprecedented economic growth” is essential for the affluence and ebullience that’s driven the spectacular Great Explorations and MEPs of Maslow Windows over the last 200 years.

2) “The whole international system — as constructed following WW II — will be revolutionized.” There will be “new players — Brazil, Russia, India, China — …at the international high table…bringing new stakes and rules…” This NIC expectation is consistent with the history of exploration over the last 200 years and supports our forecast that NASA will become more globally oriented. More specifically it supports our 1992 concept for a truly global space organization (like Interspace) that could take shape in 4-6 years to optimally focus global assets on human exploration of the solar system.

3) “The potential for conflict will increase…and the unprecedented transfer of wealth roughly from West to East …will continue…” Sadly, the last 200 years show that every Maslow Window of the last 200 years is terminated by a major war; this NIC assessment is consistent with our forecast of another major war in the mid-2020s. If this war comes early (e.g., 2020), in addition to widespread death and destruction, we could lose many or most of the Great Explorations and MEPs anticipated for the next Maslow Window. The timing of the major 2020s war remains a total wildcard of crucial importance.

Like James Bond, who believed that “The World is Not Enough!”, The Planetary Society thinks the Moon is not enough…and frankly I agree with them!

The World is not enough… Click .

I’ve always liked Lou Friedman and The Planetary Society! Explore the planets, humans to Mars, an international team — what’s not to like? It’s practically the meaning of life! I also enjoyed their new roadmap to the solar system: Beyond the Moon: A New Roadmap for Human Space Exploration in the 21st Century. And the title of their plan says it all: the Moon is not enough. They have clear differences with NASA’s current Vision for Space Exploration.

The Moon is not enough… Click .

There are now three fundamental visions for space: 1) NASA’s current Moon-focused Vision for Space Exploration, (VSE) 2) The Planetary Society’s roadmap featuring Mars, and 3) a vision with interstellar travel to the nearby stars as its focus. Vision 3 has been championed by the British Interplanetary Society since its 1970s Project Daedalus study, as well as by Gene Roddenberry. More recently it has resurfaced as a way to promote a multidecade, global commitment to human space exploration; in essence they believe that Mars is not enough.

Is Mars enough? Click .

The model of this weblog (e.g., Cordell, 2006, and “Forecasting...”) has met with considerable success in explaining great explorations and technology development over the last 200 years in the context of long-term fluctuations in the economy. For example, a) this model explains why Apollo began when it did and why it ended abruptly (as well as all the other Great Explorations over the last 200 years), b) the model pointed to a financial panic near 2008 and Obama’s likely election (although I failed to explicitly forecast them!), and 3) the model projects what we currently observe — increasing global interest in space as we approach another ebullient 1960s-like decade: the 2015 Maslow Window.

So in the context of this long-term economic model, I want to offer a few comments on the Planetary Society’s roadmap:

1. The program focus — Moon, Mars, interstellar — really matters from a marketing perspective. The Moon suffers from the fact that humans went there 6 times almost 40 years ago. This might encourage a “been there, done that” attitude. Or will the global public see human exploration of the Moon like past generations viewed terrestrial Great Explorations; i.e., progressing from more accessible locations like northwest North America (Lewis & Clark) to more distant ones like central Africa (”Dr. Livingstone I presume”) and both polar regions (early 20th Century)? However, if the global public views the Moon as just one more stop on the road to Mars and beyond, the sequence of Great Explorations over the last 200 years — North America, central Africa, Polar regions, Moon — suggests that Mars makes a more alluring program focus — from a marketing perspective — than the Moon.

2. Global momentum is currently toward the Moon. The U.S., with its International Lunar Network, as well as many other countries (including China, Japan) have expressed strong interests in Moon bases circa 2020. Authoritative sources (e.g., National Intelligence Council) forecast a “revolutionized” international system toward 2025 (during the 2015 Maslow Window) including new players at the high table (e.g., Brazil, India) and new rules. This will enhance U.S. plans for expanding ISS-style coorperation to the Moon and beyond, and may even make a truly global approach to space (such as Interspace) possible. This trend, plus the closeness and easy access of the Moon, may make a Mars focus — even in the 2020s — less attractive to the global public.

3. Astronaut safety will drive any deep space program strategy.
Current NASA boss Mike Griffin contends that safety requires a Mars program to go through ISS and the Moon in logical steps, much like the Apollo program carefully approached the Moon. The Planetary Society report deemphasizes lunar surface infrastructure in favor of near-term human exploration of near-Earth asteroids. Although not mentioned in their report, developing human space ops experience at near-Earth asteroids will be extremely valuable at Mars when establishing human bases on Phobos and Deimos. The Planetary Society Mars-focus strategy elegantly integrates the first human missions beyond the Earth-Moon system with planetary defense (from near-Earth asteroid impacts), and with specific preparations for future human operations in the Mars system.

4. For a multidecade, global space vision to be viable, it must include a realistic geopolitical and economic framework provided by long-term trends over the last 200 years. The Planetary Society roadmap asserts that the NASA VSE goal of a human return to the Moon by 2020 may “lead to multi-decade delays in expansion of human activity beyond the Earth-Moon system.” They are absolutely right as I pointed out previously, although it’s not fundamentally because of programmatic and funding conflicts. They are more on target here: “The national economic situation exacerbates NASA’s budget difficulties and makes it likely that the stated lunar exploration timetable cannot be met.” In fact, the national (and global) economic situation is a predictable consequence of technological, exploration, and military trends that have persisted over at least the last 200 years. Ignorance of them results in disappointments like the abrupt end of the spectacular Apollo program. However, in reality, they provide a dependable framework within which multi-decade programs of any kind (including space) can be structured so they flourish and enable human expansion into the cosmos.

Back in the U.S. fresh from the International Astronautical Congress in Glasgow, Scotland, Jerry Grey, a President Emeritus of the International Astronautical Federation himself and current Editor-at-Large of Aerospace America, suggests that what we need now is “a united, global effort for long-term human space exploration using the burgeoning capabilities of all nations to the best possible advantage of our home planet,” (Aerospace America, October, 2008).

This is certainly the right answer and I couldn’t agree more!

Based on the history of NASA and long wave timing, I suggested in 1996 and again in 2006, that around 2013 NASA was likely to morph into (or become part of) an international organization focused on human exploration of the Moon and planets. In fact as I’ve highlighted in this weblog, in 1992 Otto Steinbronn and I (both then with General Dynamics) proposed a specific model — called Interspace — for a truly global space agency. Interspace features both ESA-style and Intelsat-style management structures.

An international Moon Base is definitely in the cards. Click .

As evidence that we (globally) are ready for a “One World” approach to space, Grey cites the 10th anniversary of the “international marvel” known as the International Space Station. ISS partners and participants include the U.S., Russia, Canada, Japan, and the European Space Agency (Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom).

According to Grey, NASA’s efforts to organize the International Lunar Network (ILN) is “another bellwether of global cooperation” in space. In July 2008, representatives of nine countries — including Canada, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, United Kingdom, and the U.S. — held a meeting at NASA Ames Research Center and agreed to a cooperative approach for lunar exploration.

More evidence supporting a unified, international approach to space is provided by the Asia-Pacific Regional Space Agency founded in 1993 and headquartered in Beijing. APRSA promotes the peaceful use of space technology in the Asia-Pacific region especially for Earth observation, communication satellites, space environment utilization, and space education. In addition to China, a partial list of its participants includes Australia, Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Iran, Malaysia, Mongolia, Pakistan, Peru, Republic of Korea, Thailand, and Turkey.

Grey laments the fact that “there is as yet no truly unified drive to pursue a multidecade (or better, multicentury) partnership” for human exploration of the solar system. Part of the challenge is that historically speaking, Maslow Windows – ebullient times of Great Explorations and Macro-Engineering Projects — have peaked only during brief intervals separated by 55 to 60 years.

Optimal use of global assets for the exploration of the Universe will require the “kind of leadership exhibited in 1975 by…Roy Gibson” when the European Space Agency was created. With Gibson-style leadership and if we can leverage such experiences as ESA, ISS, ILN, and APRSA, we’ll be able to develop a unified, global, multidecade, Interspace-style approach to space. This will enable us to: 1) optimally open up the planetary worlds to all humankind, 2) coordinate our defense of Earth against space impactors (e.g. asteroids), and 3) develop multidecade plans that are specifically designed to facilitate continuous human expansion into the cosmos even outside Maslow Windows.

The last 200 years teach us that approximately every 56 years great explorations like Lewis and Clark splash into history along with stunning macro-engineering projects (MEPs) like the Suez Canal. Tragically, they are usually followed shortly by a major war like World War I.

Most of this twice-per-century action occurs in the decade just before a peak in the well-documented 56 year energy cycle. These Maslow Windows are invariably the time of exceptional economic booms that create widespread affluence and elevate society to higher realms of Maslow’s Heirarchy. Thus many people momentarily find great explorations and MEPs not only tolerable, but almost irresistible.

Our time is coming. We’re rapidly approaching the opening of the next Maslow Window near 2015, and can expect the usual unfortunate escalation of international tensions of the type we saw in the 1950s during the Cold War.

Unfortunately the current parallel with the 1950s is striking. The Wall Street Journal (8/12/08) suggests that Russian tanks in Georgia revealed “Vladimir Putin’s Napoleonic ambitions”: to dominate Eurasia again. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice asserted that “Georgia can be rebuilt. Russia’s reputation is going to take a while, if ever,” (CBS TV, 8/17/08). Peter Zeihan, a geopolitical analyst with Stratfor, which Barron’s once referred to as “the shadow CIA,” suggests that, “Russia is attempting to reforge its Cold War-era influence…”

One attractive Russian target is Cuba. Since space centers are the rage around the globe these days, Russia’s offered to build them one (Reuters, 9/17/08). Of course this would just involve little things like joint use of “space equipment…and space communications systems.” If this doesn’t remind you of the Cuban missile crisis (1962) during the early Apollo Maslow Window when WW III almost began, you need to Google it. For their part, the Russians openly acknowledge that “they want to renew Cuban ties that were neglected after the Soviet Union’s collapse.”

One of the greatest sources of joy to the American public, as revealed by opinion polls over the decades, is the prospect of true international cooperation in space, especially with the Russians. And now word comes from the recent International Astronautical Congress in Glascow, Scotland that not only the Russians, but the Chinese want to go to Mars… with the U.S.!!

Such a sparkling joint great exploration concept brings to mind the phrase, “Where do I sign?” But students of long-term trends in geopolitics and history must reluctantly advise caution.

Once upon a time, about one energy cycle ago in the 1950s, there was the International Geophysical Year (IGY), an exhuberant time of global scientific devouring of Earth’s atmospheric and space environment. In 1954 the International Council of Scientific Unions announced plans for artificial satellites to be launched during the IGY, and in July, 1955 the U.S. confirmed its intention to launch one for the IGY. Almost immediately, according to Professor Asif Siddiqi, the Soviets began a secret, crash program to beat the Americans and launch the first satellite.

The shocking result — at least to the U.S. — was the Soviet launch of Sputnik in October, 1957; an event that ignited the 1st race to space and culminated in Neil Armstrong’s footsteps on the Moon in 1969.

What will ignite the next race to space? One possible, but chilling response comes from Stratfor’s Zeihan, “It’s a fairly straightforward exercise to predict where Russian activity will reach its deepest. One only needs to revisit Cold War history.”

Every other Friday the State of the Wave summarizes specific progress toward the opening of the 2015 Maslow Window and movement toward real, near-term space colonization. The focus is on events and trends from around the world of long-range significance, especially in the context of the 10 Wave Guides.

It’s easy this week, although not very pleasant, to summarize the Wave: the Russian invasion of Georgia has thrown the 2010+ future of the American space program into real uncertainty. (See Russian Invasion and the Shuttle 5-Yr Gap)

Using Russian systems as an add-on launch capability was one thing, but becoming dependent on the Russian Soyuz for American access to the Space Station is proving to be a deeply flawed strategy. Will there be a U.S. commercial alternative that can substitute for the Shuttle after 2010?

Because the Russia/Georgia crisis has implications far beyond the space program, and the U.S. feels a need to punish Russia, the prospects for U.S. human spaceflight after 2010 appear dim, even if Georgia does join NATO in the near future.

As we approach a time of ebullient global space activity, many space-related groups are very energetic. For example, a space elevator conference was recently held at Microsoft in Washington. Their hopes center on major technology advances in power beaming and ultra-strong materials, but their technology literally offers the relatively near-term promise of a frontier society in space. Likewise India announced recently that they have decided to launch their own spacecraft to the Moon, in addition to participating in the multinational agreement signed recently with the U.S. as part of the International Lunar Network.

Based on long-term trends over the last 200 years, the major economic boom expected to usher in the next Maslow Window is right on schedule for a 2013-15 take-off. However, short-term, the Wall Street Journal (8/15/08) highlights a 4-year unemployment peak in July of 5.7%, an uptick in U.S. inflation (July’s 17 year high of 5.6 % from the year before), plus sluggish GDP trends in Europe. But China, India, and other developing economies continue to expand strongly, and the dollar’s increasing strength could cool inflation somewhat.

To provide historical perspective, it’s interesting to identify analogs of major recessions that gave way to the major economic booms that drove previous Maslow Windows. One such example is the Panic of 1837. The Panic began 20 years before its 56 year cycle energy peak (in 1857) while our current economic “recession” began in late 2007, about 18 years before our peak (coming in 2025). Thus its wave timing (very similar to now) and its severity (considerably worse than now) make it very relevant to our future.

The Panic featured closure of 40% of all U.S. banks, record high unemployment, and economic turmoil until 1843; it is considered second only to the Great Depression of the 1930s. Nevertheless, the mid-19th Century Maslow Window (1847-57), powered by a major economic boom, opened right on schedule and featured ebullient behavior like Stanley’s African search for Dr. Livingstone engaged in his Great Exploration (”Dr. Livingstone I presume?”) and the California Gold Rush (1848-55). This Maslow Window also featured the “technological jewel” of the 19th Century — the Suez Canal — plus several other secondary MEPs, and tragically, the worst war in U.S. history: the Civil War. More on this Panic soon.

The current picture — sadly including Russian misbehavior and flickering of a renewed Cold War — is very consistent with our expectations 5 to 7 years out from our next Maslow Window.

Every other Friday the State of the Wave summarizes specific progress toward the opening of the 2015 Maslow Window and movement toward real, near-term space colonization. The focus is on events and trends from around the world of long-range significance, especially in the context of the 10 Wave Guides.

Space-related highlights from the last 2+ weeks feature dynamic international activity, growing public interest in space-related topics, and both the economy and NASA limping along as we approach the 2013-2015 Maslow Window. Both are expected to fully recover soon.

For example, China announced plans to make it’s space technology industry world-class by 2015. Doubling the number of space technology centers around the country will beef up its commercial satellite and launch businesses and support its growing manned space program.

The importance of the recent multinational lunar exploration agreement (International Lunar Network; ILN) between the U.S. and 8 other countries (India, Japan, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, South Korea) cannot be overstated. Clearly we’re forming the international teams that NASA will share unmanned and probably manned exploration of the Moon with. With proper maintenance the ISS could probably continue ops for decades, and as of last month, the International Partners are now openly contemplating ISS operations beyond 2015. Although China is not on either team (ILN or ISS), that could change further downstream.

Exciting rumors are circulating and building a lot of suspense about a new discovery by the Phoenix Mars Lander relating to the habitability of Mars. That announcement may come tomorrow. Equally exciting for NASA but also disturbing, Apollo Moonwalker Ed Mitchell publicly reiterated his “inside” information that UFOs are real and the U.S. government has been aware of space aliens for several decades. He appeared recently on Larry King Live. Both examples suggest public interest in space-related topics continues to grow as we approach the next Maslow Window.

The economic triple threat — inflation, slow growth, troubled credit markets — continues to plague the financial system, although several Washington politicians have talked recently about ways to increase oil supplies. Long term, we think the odds are very good for a return to a strong global economic boom of the type that was interrupted in summer, 2007. More on that soon. Despite the above accomplishments, NASA is pictured by some as “limping along” because it is not yet “tied to an overriding national priority.”

No surprise. This is what we’d expect for a NASA still 5 - 7 years from its next Maslow Window.

Every other Friday the State of the Wave summarizes specific progress toward the opening of the 2015 Maslow Window and movement toward real, near-term space colonization. The focus is on events and trends from around the world of long-range significance, especially in the context of the 10 Wave Guides.

Most of the news from the last 2+ weeks points toward a a developing world scenario that’s potentially reminiscent of pre-Sputnik 1950s times, including increased international capabilities and competition in space. The scenario could become competitive and near 2013 produce a Sputnik-like shock for the U.S., although a Grand Alliance for Space, cooperatively involving all global space powers, is also possible.

If near-term movement toward a global space organization like Interspace is observed, that will signal a Grand Alliance is taking shape. Otherwise a more competitive, Sputnik-style global interaction may become ascendant.

For example, Futron Corporation published their 2008 Space Competitiveness Index in which, “Systemic and competitive forces threaten U.S. space leadership.” acording Futron president Joseph Fuller, Jr.. This comes on top of a recent AP report (7/17/08) that budget problems will preclude a 2013 rollout date for NASA’s new moon rocket; it will slip to 2015.

The eerie, retro pre-Sputnik 1950s feel of today’s State of the Wave is enhanced by the American public’s seeming lack of concern either about the Shuttle’s 5 year gap (starting at 2010) or potential space competitors like China.

Looking into the 2020s, there’s good news and bad news about a potential major war. The University of Maryland’s Peace and Conflict 2008 reports that battle fatalities in major conflicts have dropped since 1946. And the Human Security Report Project documents a recent, significant decline in terrorist events. This must be balanced against the fact that every Maslow Window of the last 200 years has been afflicted by a major war, that’s breached global peace and security and directly or indirectly terminated great explorations.

Impressive activity in Non-Space Macro-Engineering Projects(MEPs) continues to indicate our approach to the 2015 Maslow Window. For example, a recent Airbus Advertising Supplement in Wall Street Journal (7/14/08) states that, “This year will see an acceleration of funding into some seriously fast aircraft programs.” Accordng to Alan Bond of Reaction Engines (a UK company), “The long-term demand for supersonic and hypersonic aircraft will depend on political will,” including China’s interest in establishing fast air routes to North America and Europe.

By the way, the Chicago Tribune last week suggested there might be parallels between President Theodore Roosevelt and John McCain. But their reliability is suspect because they forgot to mention Roosevelt’s huge connection with the Panama Canal — the greatest pre-Apollo MEP of the last 200 years! However, we see more parallels between McCain and Dwight Eisenhower (than with Roosevelt), and — based solely on long-term economic and social trends — see McCain favored this November, and a John F. Kennedy-like candidate (Obama?) favored in 4 or 8 years.

Thanks to E.P. Grondine for interesting comments this morning on “10 Reasons China is Good for Space,” particularly with respect to the comet/asteroid threat issue.

For example, “…Neither “football game” nor “cold war’ is the correct analogy, as neither accounts for cometary and asteroid impact . The currently emerging facts about asteroid and comet impact have severe implications for all existing frameworks of political-economic analysis…”

‘Football game’ and ‘cold war’ are functional approaches that competing groups could use to organize their assets for an important task. In a pro football game there are high stakes and a large engaged audience, but there are also rules, schedules, and a framework of cooperation within which the competition occurs. In ‘cold war’ there’s little cooperation and the atmosphere is generally hostile. So doing an asteroid mitigation program in either program mode (especially ‘cold war’), might be inefficient and uncoordinated.

Much closer cooperation would be possible with a truly global space organization like “Interspace” that may be formed after 2013 as a result of Maslow programs and/or asteroid/comet threats.

In an earlier post (”Mars vs the Moon…”) I contrasted ‘Survival’ vs. ‘Maslow’ programs. Asteroid or comet mitigation is one example of a ‘Survival’ program; it might have the same strategic priority as war. A ‘Maslow’ program can be either a Great Exploration (e.g., Apollo) or a Macro-Engineering Project (e.g., Panama Canal). The key difference is Survival programs are threat-driven (just like a traditional war) and so can occur at any time. However, Maslow programs are easier to forecast (see this Weblog!) because they are driven by major, twice-per-century economic booms that elevate society to high levels in Maslow’s heirarchy; this momentarily creates a societal mindset — “ebullience” — highly supportive of major technology/exploration initiatives.

Grondine continues, “China’s space leadership will be pursuing CAPS (the Comet and Asteroid Protection System) like a laser, with major decisions to be undertaken in 2016. China will seek international partners … the reactions of Japan, Europe, the US, Russia … to these invitations to cooperation are unclear.”

I’m not aware of China’s interest in asteroid mitigation so I emailed Rusty Schweickart this morning. Rusty indicated that, although China is a member state for Action Team 14 (NEO), he’s unaware of any specific interest in NEO deflection. But obviously it would be very welcome! Incidentally, Grondine’s 2016 timeframe is consistent with the opening of the 2015 Maslow Window.

Buzz Aldrin, the 2nd man on the Moon, is right. The Telegraph.co.uk (6/29/08) reports he’s publicly warning that unless we invest now in the future of space, we will “surrender leadership of space exploration to Russia and China,” for the rest of the century.

In fact, as I have shown (see Cordell, 1996 and 2006), long-term economic and social trends point to the next international Apollo-style race to space starting near 2013 - 2015, this time involving possibly China and others. This would create huge opportunities for science and math instruction, much like the President Kennedy’s Apollo Moon program did in the 1960s. And this time, it would happen simultaneously with the retirements of massive numbers of baby boomers in key engineering and related fields.

But what if we’re are not prepared? In that case we may experience a replay of the Sputnik shock of 1957, and attempt a crash program in education and space technology to catch up.

Buzz thinks it’s “abysmal” that, in NASA’s 50th anniversary year and after spending $ 100 B on International Space Station, “…we can’t get our own astronauts to our space station without relying on the Russians,” because of Shuttle’s planned retirement in 2010.

He wonders why commercial alternatives that might have taken U.S. astronauts to ISS between 2010 and 2015 were not adequately funded. These are the crucial five years just prior to the opening of the spectacular 2015 Maslow Window, when crewed access to space will be important.

The Chinese have a great opportunity to win the return to the Moon. To do that, according to Buzz, all they have to do is, “…fly around the Moon and back…” In fact, just landing a Chinese astronaut on the Moon for a day, “…and he’d be a national hero.”

“We can do wonderful science on the Moon, and wonderful commercial things. Then we can pack up and move on to Mars.” Buzz will share these ideas with both McCain and Obama to guarantee NASA is funded to greet the future as a leader.

I had the pleasure, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, of meeting and getting to know Buzz when he visited us at General Dynamics in San Diego and also at Case for Mars Conferences. If he isn’t your all-time favorite astronaut, or at least one of them, he should be!

SPECIAL NOTE: Thanks to political scientist Dr. Anny Wong for her contributions to this post.

A key issue for civilization is whether we’ll establish a significant, self-sufficient presence in space by 2025. If not, the last 200 years suggest that our next real opportunity won’t be until 2071. And by then, the world will be unpredictably different. So the 2015 Maslow Window is essentially our last forecastable shot at establishing a large-scale human presence in space.

Will China accelerate this process? The answer is ‘Yes’, and here are 10 reasons China is good for space:

10. China’s space program stretches back more than 35 years, suggesting that space will expand in importance because of the growing economic, technological, and scientific culture of the country. Responding to Sputnik in 1958, Mao Zedong asserted, “We too must build artificial satellites.” China’s first successful satellite launch was in 1970. Some of the earliest scientists involved in China’s space program were disillusioned Chinese Americans who found pride in the new China and were fed up with a glass ceiling in the U.S..

9. In manned space, China is already at the Mercury/Gemini stage. It’s first manned orbital mission was in 2003 and its 3rd is this October. With plans for a space station in hand, they’re right on schedule to play a major role in the spectacular 2015 Maslow Window.

8. China’s space infrastructure is among the most advanced in the world, and includes the development of the Long-March rocket systems, successfully entering the international commercial launch market in 1985, developing a variety of Chinese launch sites, and creating Chinese satellites for military, communications, weather, and space sciences. Plans for the Chinese manned space program began in 1985.

7. China’s very rapid economic growth hovers around 10% annually. This is very important internally to the Communist Party leaders, as well as to major export sources like Wal-Mart! It also provides the financial cornerstone for future Chinese technology and space initiatives.

6. China’s space program is very popular with the Chinese public which adds to program momentum as it bolsters Chinese nationalism, something the government leadership needs every now and then to make the public forget its faults — like major corruption, environmental problems, and huge economic disparities.

5. China has growing high-technology industries and international connections that can support future space initiatives. For example, in addition to information technology, China has made aerospace a top national priority in industrial development — so bet on China courting Boeing and all others to build their equipment there and groom human talent at the ground level.

4. China has gained international prestige from its space adventures. International prestige feeds domestic pride, but more importantly, it’s the additional weight it gives China in security and defense matters where international prestige really counts.

3. Energy-hungry China may decide to lead solar power satellite development. Facing $ trillions of energy infrastructure costs in the next 20 years, China may decide to develop this inexhaustible energy source that would reduce both environmental pollution and strategic tensions.

2. China and U.S. (and others) may form a Grand Space Alliance for the 2015 Maslow Window. If indeed we’re “less than 5 years from a new generation of Chinese leaders with whom a far stronger relationship may be built,” — see Thomas Barnett — new options are possible. With joint interests in global security, new energy sources, and the exploration of space, China and the U.S. may decide that a “Football Game” model is more productive than the previous Cold War space experience was. In an American professional football game there are rules, big money, great excitement, intense competition, and winners and losers, but at the end of the game both teams survive, learn, and remain friends; they also look forward to the next game on the schedule.

1. A less attractive option is that China (and partners) may stimulate the rapid development of space by challenging the U.S. in a Cold War-style confrontation, complete with a Sputnik-like event. Reason #2 (above) is basically a model of greatly expanded International Geophysical Year-style friendly cooperation. However, in 1957 it led to the surprise launch of Sputnik which shocked America and triggered the 1960s race to space between two very unfriendly countries.

As we draw closer to the 2015 Maslow Window it will become clearer which model of international space development — “Football Game” or “Cold War”– will occur.