On June 5, U.S. astronauts Sunita “Suni” Williams and Barry “Butch” Wilmore entered space aboard Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner. Originally scheduled to return to Earth on the 14th, the Starliner has been stranded in space for over a month due to a series of technical failures, and Boeing has been unable to provide a clear timetable for its return.
The development and service process of the Starliner has been troubled from the start. Initially set to fly in 2017, it finally launched on December 20, 2019, using the Kosmos-5 launch vehicle, but failed to enter the intended orbit.
An investigation revealed that an incorrectly set onboard clock caused the spacecraft to miss its ignition time. In 2022, the Starliner conducted two unmanned missions to test its docking capability with the international space station (ISS). The first mission was canceled due to thruster failure, and the second experienced a thruster ignition failure during flight, requiring the activation of a backup system to reach the ISS.
The Starliner was then scheduled to carry astronauts to the ISS in early 2023. However, the manned mission was delayed to late 2023, and then to May and June 2024. When it finally launched with two NASA astronauts, it encountered a helium leak and propulsion failure while docking with the ISS. The astronauts had to complete the docking manually. Persistent malfunctions led NASA and Boeing to postpone the return flight several times to investigate and resolve the issues.
Despite frequent accidents during unmanned flights, Boeing attempted manned flight missions without adequately improving the design and optimizing the flight system. Even before the current manned launch, the Starliner suffered a helium leak, which Boeing downplayed as “not a big problem” and forced the launch.
In contrast, China launched its first manned spacecraft, Shenzhou V, only after four successful unmanned test flights. Similarly, SpaceX’s Dragon2 conducted its first official manned mission in November 2020, following three unmanned test flights and one manned test flight, all of which met the predetermined targets.
Boeing is responsible for solving the issues according to its contract with NASA, which provided $4.2 billion for the development of the Starliner to carry NASA astronauts to and from the ISS. The contract stipulates that the Starliner must complete at least one manned flight test and between two to six official manned missions.
Allowing a third party to complete the mission would expose Boeing’s shortcomings and damage its credibility. NASA would likely refrain from awarding similar contracts to Boeing in the future and might even discuss liquidated damages or contract termination. The Starliner can remain docked to the ISS for up to 210 days, according to design specifications.
If a last resort is necessary, Boeing’s least likely option would be to use SpaceX’s Dragon2, as this would admit the superiority of SpaceX’s product and cede market share. This leaves Boeing with two theoretical options: China’s Shenzhou and Russia’s Soyuz.
Technically, the Soyuz docking system is compatible with the Russian segment of the ISS, and Soyuz has a long history of successful missions. The two American astronauts could transfer to the Russian segment and return to Earth on a Soyuz spacecraft with a Russian astronaut. In contrast, Shenzhou’s docking system is not compatible with the ISS, and the flight altitudes and orbital inclinations differ significantly.
Institutionally, the Soyuz remains a better option despite strained U.S.-Russia relations due to the ongoing war in Ukraine. U.S.-Russian cooperation around the ISS continues, though it is reduced compared to when U.S. astronauts leased Russian spacecraft.
The U.S. has banned official space cooperation with China under the Wolfe Amendment, and other regulations complicate space cooperation with China. Boeing requesting China’s help would violate the Wolfe Amendment, and NASA would not approve it. However, there have been instances where the Wolfe Amendment was flexibly interpreted, such as NASA’s inquiry about obtaining moon soil from China’s Chang’e 6.
Ultimately, the key issue is not China’s feasibility to rescue but whether China has a legal obligation to do so. If Boeing asks for help, does China have the right to ignore it?
With the development of human space exploration, safeguarding the lives of astronauts has become a crucial issue. International organizations, primarily under the United Nations, have formulated and adopted a series of norms to regulate space activities and prevent risks, forming the system of international space law. Key documents include the Outer Space Treaty and the Rescue Agreement, which both impose legal obligations. China signed these documents in 1983 and 1988, respectively.
As the first written law in the international space law system, the Outer Space Treaty establishes guiding principles for space activities, including the rescue of astronauts. Article V states:
“States Parties to the Treaty shall regard astronauts as envoys of mankind in outer space and shall render to them all possible assistance in the event of accident, distress, or emergency landing on the territory of another State Party or on the high seas. When astronauts make such a landing, they shall be safely and promptly returned to the State of registry of their space vehicle.”
The Rescue Agreement provides more detailed regulations by Article I: “Notify the launching authority or, if it cannot identify and immediately communicate with the launching authority, immediately make a public announcement by all appropriate means of communication at its disposal; Notify the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who should disseminate the information without delay by all appropriate means of communication at his disposal.”
Article II states:
“If, owing to accident, distress, emergency or unintended landing, the personnel of a spacecraft land in territory under the jurisdiction of a contracting party, it shall immediately take all possible steps to rescue them and render them all necessary assistance. It shall inform the launching authority and also the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the steps it is taking and of their progress.”
Article III extends this to situations where astronauts land on the high seas or any place not under any state’s jurisdiction, requiring States Parties in a position to assist to support search and rescue operations and notify the launching authority and the UN Secretary-General of the progress.
International law requires States Parties to make every effort to search and rescue astronauts who have landed on the surface, especially within their own territories, and to keep the international community informed. However, it does not require States Parties, even those with human spaceflight capabilities, to use personnel and equipment to carry out space rescues. The law lacks a clear definition of “accident” and “distress,” leaving discretionary power to States Parties to assess the situation according to their own judgment.
Under current international law, China is not obligated to launch a spacecraft to rescue the two U.S. astronauts unless they crash-land in or near China or in the open sea. NASA’s commercial manned program manager emphasized that the two astronauts are “very safe” and “not trapped,” so China has even more reason to believe there is no “accident” or “distress.” Therefore, even if Boeing seeks help from China, they may be refused.
In short, regarding the Boeing spacecraft astronauts, China has no responsibility, mission feasibility, or legal obligation to participate. What is notable is the significant gap in product development and operation levels between Boeing and SpaceX, despite their similar development models. The factors and lessons behind this disparity are worth in-depth consideration.
Source: Space, SpaceNews, ZLSA Design, New Space Economy
