The Practical Values of Space Exploration | Page 8

world image. Shots seem to have been timed to maximize the effects of
visits of Soviet leaders and to punctuate Soviet statements and positions
in international negotiations. This is not to equate their space activities
with hollow propaganda. Empty claims do not have a positive effect for
long. Nor is there any firm evidence that it has been possible for
political policymakers to call their shots at times inconsistent with good
scientific and technical needs. The conclusion is rather that the many
elements of scientific, technical, military, political, and psychological
policy are all weighed, and tests which make a full contribution to such
a combined strategy are carried out and supported with appropriate
publicity.[23]
There is also evidence that scientific endeavor by the Russians for
prestige purposes is having repercussions on internal policy. Great
emphasis is currently being placed on the demonstrable usefulness of
scientific effort--to the extent that Soviet colleges, research institutions,
examining boards, and academies of science have been directed to be
more exacting in conferring scientific degrees and titles. Newness and
usefulness are requisite, but, at the same time, degrees may now be
awarded for other than dissertations; inventions and textbooks of major
importance may also earn a degree for their authors.[24]
Within the prestige context, it is true that the United States must labor
under certain handicaps because of the nature of its democratic system.

No effort is made in the American space program to hide the failures
which result from its highly complex character. Our burnups, misfires,
explosions, fizzles, and lost or wayward vehicles are well publicized.
Those of the Soviet Union rarely are. Even though most nations are
well aware that the Russians must be having their troubles, too, the
appearance of uniform success fostered by the U.S.S.R. inevitably
contributes to an image of scientific superiority. In addition, the Soviets
have developed a habit of striving for spectacular "firsts," most of
which undoubtedly are undertaken almost as much for prestige reasons
as for scientific ones.
[Illustration: FIGURE 4.--Symbolic of the American effort in space is
this Thor-Able rocket, shown here launching the Tiros weather satellite
into a near-perfect orbit. This same vehicle, which launched the
record-breaking 23 million-mile communication probe--Pioneer V--has
contributed enormously to U.S. prestige abroad.]
Still, the United States has not done badly from the prestige angle. So
far as the world's scientific fraternity is concerned, it may even be well
in the lead.
In the first 30 or so months following the opening of the space age, as
signaled by the launching of Sputnik I in October 1957, the United
States put 21 satellites into orbit out of 42 attempts. Two out of five
deep-space probes were successful. The degree of success for all major
launchings ran better than 50 percent. The American effort has been
based on a broad scope of inquiry and includes long-range
communications, weather reporting, navigation and surveillance
vehicles, as well as information-gathering satellites.
During the same period the Soviets launched four Earth satellites, one
deep-space probe, one lunar-impact probe and one satellite into a much
elongated Earth orbit which circled and photographed the Moon. Most
of their vehicles have been substantially heavier than those launched by
the United States, although complete information on their scientific
purposes and the result obtained has never been disclosed.
The world political value of such programs cannot be discounted. To

the extent that the welfare of the United States depends upon its stature
in the eyes of the rest of the world (which is believed considerable) and
to the extent that the scientific capability of the United States
influences such stature (which is also believed considerable) our space
venture has very marked practical utility. It may even mean the
difference between freedom and dictatorship, between survival and
oblivion.
SPACE AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR WAR
A natural outgrowth of the military and prestige facets of space
exploration is the question of whether this activity, in time, will replace
the forces which have historically driven nations into armed conflict.
Any number of social scientists and historians have speculated that this
might occur. The theory is that the conquest of space may prove to be
the moral equivalent of war by substituting for certain material and
psychological needs usually supplied through war; that the absorption
of energies, resources, imagination, and aggressiveness in pursuit of the
space adventure may become an effective way of maintaining peace.
Put another way, nations might become "extroverted" to the point
where their urge to overcome the unknown would dwarf their historic
desires for power, wealth, and recognition--attributes which have so
often led to war in the past.
The fact that the United Nations, late in 1959, agreed to set up a
permanent Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space attests to
the hopes and potential of such a development.
Of