In the current era of increased geopolitical tensions, the Chang’e-6 mission is a rare example of constructive international collaboration. The probe carries instruments contributed by France, Italy, Pakistan and Sweden. The Swedish payload was developed with funding from the European Space Agency (ESA).
This may seem surprising given the current state of world affairs. But ESA and the Chinese Academy of Sciences share a history of joint space missions, although relations have withered somewhat in recent years.
A REFRESHING DEVELOPMENT
From a scientific perspective, Chang’e-6’s international engagement is a refreshing development. Scientists are driven by universal principles underpinning the scientific approach. We place great value on collaborative efforts, irrespective of one’s national origin. Science doesn’t know borders.
With space missions being just one example, Chinese scientists are rapidly gaining ground and increasingly leading global scientific achievements. Chinese prowess in science and technology has now reached levels that can no longer be ignored by international collaborators and competitors alike.
Yet real-world constraints in an increasingly geopolitically fraught environment do affect our work as scientists, influencing what can be shared between colleagues internationally, and must be factored into our practical decision making.
It’s important to strike a careful balance between protecting national interests and the free flow of ideas that may ultimately lead to scientific breakthroughs.
Not every scientific exchange reaches a level that warrants triggering national security or foreign interference alerts. To paraphrase the Australian government’s foreign relations policy, “collaborate where we can; exercise restraint where we must”. The Chang’e-6 mission is an excellent example of this kind of productive international partnership.
Richard de Grijs is Professor of Astrophysics, Macquarie University. This commentary first appeared in The Conversation.
