As a secondary goal, given that were going to have this magnificent laboratory in space to help us learn how to live in space so we could leave earth orbit, we're going to take advantage of that and run experiments, biotech and biomedical, advanced materials, information systems, robotics, communications systems, combustion, and a variety of other fields.
And it will help us rewrite chemistry, physics, and biology textbooks. Because on the station we'll have the absence of gravity without vibrations, in a controlled environment. And in that environment you can really explore the characteristics of biological and physical systems without disturbances such as convection and sedimentation and buoyancy. And you could literally rearrange atoms one-at-a-time without having some of the forces we experience here on Earth.
Are you confident that the 2004 deadline for the International Space Station will be met?
We're going to do our very best. [Laughs.] This is a very complex job. I believe we have a good shot at it.
We'll take each day one step at a time, and under no conditions are we going to drive the schedule and compromise safety or quality.
We've done a tremendous amount of planning. But the one thing we haven't done is assemble a structure that's as heavy and as big as it is in space. Because you can't reiterate it on the ground.
So assuming we have no major problems up there, I think we have a very good chance of doing that. But we'll have to wait and see. We've only put two pieces of a 48-piece puzzle together.
How has your involvement in the space station affected you personally?
Well, it was an incredible and has been an incredible experience for me. I'm a cold warrior. I designed weapons systems. I was involved in designing Star Wars [Strategic Defense Initiative]. I was involved in designing things I can't even talk about. I was responsible for the satellites that gave early warning of ballistic missile launches.
I was responsible for the systems engineering on the land-based ballistic missile. I had over 1000 people working for me. These are the Minutemen and all these other missiles that were targeted against Russia. I had a very different view of the Russians, a very harsh view. A very angry view.
And I got asked by the President of the United States to go to Russia. Boris Yeltsin was in Washington and President Bush asked me to go to Russia to see what they were doing on the space program. I had great anxieties. So did the Russians I was working with. But you sit down and talk to people, and you get to learn about them.
What I found is that there are bad people in Russia, but there are a lot of good people in Russia. And what I've got to focus on is working with good people and figuring out who the bad people are and stay away from them. And I have a very different view.
I have an unbelievable respect today for the technology of the Russians. I didn't give them credit for the kind of things they had done. Some of the stuff took my breath away. They're so good. I didn't think they were concerned about safety; they wrote the book on safety. We learned a lot of things from the Russians about safety.
The biggest thing I've learned is you can't guarantee peace. You can't guarantee good behavior. But if you take time to get to know who you're working with, even if they're an adversary, there's a higher probability that there'll be a more successful business.
And there's a higher probability that you could make it at peace. There's no guarantee, and that's one of the things I also appreciate. We may have problems in the future with Russia, but it won't be because we haven't tried to understand each other.
How have you been able to balance the competing international and domestic interests involved in the space station?
We have a different world. The world used to be simple before the Cold War was over. We had a bipolar world, and there was a very fixed organizational structure in place. And it was us and them, and we drove with a common interest in the Eastern Bloc and in the Western Bloc.
We now live in a multipolar world. We have to recognize the sovereignty of individual nations, individual needs. It's not just one focus -- beat the Evil Empire for the West. It is multipurpose. We have to learn that the United States is in a leadership position.
We are responsible for the overall management of the International Space Station, and we have to learn that this is a global program, and work with our individual partners so it involves knowledge of culture. Not just knowledge of technology. Knowledge of hopes and aspirations.
As a result, the leadership of NASA does a lot of international travel. You can't do that on a phone.
You've got to peer into someone's eyes. You've got to look at the leadership of the country and be sensitive, not just to our needs but their needs. And it's a win-win situation. It makes it much more difficult, but when we get done, we'll be in a much better position.
Can you give an example of one of those cultural interactions?
Well, the Russians have different ways of doing things than the Americans. I'll give you one example. We wanted the Russians to modify the Soyuz vehicle so its lifetime would be two years and not six months. And we just said to the Russians, "We're willing to pay to have you modify the Soyuz vehicle, because it will be much easier to put one up every two years." And we started being very direct.
And when the Russians said it couldn't be done, our people began to get suspicious. And our immediate reaction was, "Gee, the Russians have a vested interest in selling more Soyuz vehicles," instead of saying, "You know, maybe they have some concerns."
Well, this went on for about three or four months, and the American team and the Russian team [laughs] went at each other. So [Russian Space Agency President] Yuri Koptev and I got together. We had a meeting in my office, and we had the key proponents from both sides. And I said, "Yuri, I have a very simple question. Could you tell me why it's so difficult to go ahead and modify the Soyuz for two years versus six months."
He then proceeded to tell me the complexity that they went through to validate and certify for safe operation for people the six-month Soyuz. And then he said we're talking about not tens of millions but hundreds of millions, and years, to change that design.
The Russians have an approach where they go through an enormous effort. They'll build 11 different models before they get the final flight unit. We in America will build a prototype model and go fly. We use a lot of analytical simulations. They use a lot of real hardware. No one's right and no one's wrong, but the Russians have a tendency to develop something and then keep it flying it rather than changing it all the time.
America is the 'throw-away' generation. [Laughs.] We keep changing things all the time, and as a result we had what could have been a real confrontation. But we decided we're going to try and understand, and as soon as Yuri went through the details -- and he took about two hours to do it -- I said, "My God, I understand." And the rest of my team said, "Holy mackerel," and they looked down at the floor they were so embarrassed.
And, see, no one was wrong. But the way you build international tension is not to understand the culture. There is always a tendency to extrapolate the behavior you understand into someone else's culture. And when they deviate from that expected behavior pattern, suspicion sets in.
So what you have to do is put yourself into the other person's frame of reference. And a number of these experiences taught us that we've got to be very sensitive and careful.
And the Russians, by the same token, learned a little more about our culture. So it was very tense for the early years, but you could understand how nations could go to war. And that's one of the real benefits that's happening here.
People come into other people's homes. They break bread. They have wine together. They socialize. They get to know each other.
Let me give you one more point. We irritate the Russians. The Russians have a tendency to start a program, put someone in charge, put a team together, and hold the team in place till they're done with the program. In America, we keep moving people around. We didn't realize how much irritation we were causing to the Russians.
They were getting almost dysfunctional because they need to get to know someone to have confidence in them, before they'll open up. So we kept sending leaders in there every two or three months, and changing them. We caused an enormous communications problem that led to errors and other issues that caused delays. Yuri told me you can't do this anymore, and he was right. So we then changed it.
Do you think those lessons learned will work their way out of the space agencies and into other international interactions?
I certainly hope so, because if America intends to be a leader globally in the 21st century, we just can't stick with our approach and our techniques.
No, I'm not saying Americans have to make themselves over.
But when you go into a different culture, before you go negotiating contracts you need to spend time to understand that culture, to be able to put yourself in the other person's shoes.
And then you don't get into this projection of expectation and get frustrated. America will lose business internationally. It is crucial that we understand culture.
Do you believe that the fate of the ISS will define your legacy as head of NASA?
I'm not interested in legacy. I came to the government because I think it's important to have a healthy space program. My only contribution that I see is I empowered the brilliant people we had here. The people at NASA were terrific before I came.
They're terrific now, and they'll be terrific after I leave. And if I was able to empower them, cut back bureaucracy a little bit, help them to dream and not look inward, but to look outward, I'm satisfied. I don't have a checklist of what's going to make me great. I didn't come here to get wealthy.
I didn't come here to get power. I didn't serve in the military. And I'm serving my country now, and that's satisfaction enough for me.
What advice will you give to your successor?
Whoever replaces me, at whatever point in time that occurs, they need to work their own way. I do not intend to be a kibitzer.
I do not intend to tell my successor what to do. This is a great agency. Great people will come in, and they don't need to have their own freedom of thought on how to run this place. And how to deal with things.
They don't need Dan Goldin telling them what to do.
Anything else?
We only talked about Russia. I feel so privileged and so honored to work with the leaders of the European Space Agency, including Anthony Rodotá. To work with the head of the Japanese Space Agency, the Canadian Space Agency.
These are just outstanding people. They're committed people, and I feel they have enriched my life. I feel that this truly is an international effort without people bullying each other. We need each other. And I learned from them that America doesn't have an infinite reservoir of knowledge, and the only reservoir of knowledge.
And I think there are places where we'll compete with other countries, and there are places we'll cooperate. And I think the cooperation on this space station -- not just from the heads of the space agencies but from the leaders of these countries -- has convinced me that our world is a better place to live. And I take that away from this job.
advertisement
