China’s Shenzhou-20 spacecraft took a hit from a piece of space debris floating through orbit, causing Chinese officials to delay the spacecraft’s return from its Tiangong space station in early November 2025.

In addition to stranding the three Chinese astronauts – called taikonauts – who were set to return to Earth, this incident highlights the increasing risks posed to China and the broader international community by the growing amount of space debris.

I study China’s space program. My research suggests that national pride plays an important role in China’s growing space ambitions. As China continues to invest in expensive space capabilities, it will also likely become increasingly sensitive to losing them. The rise in space debris may create incentives for Chinese officials to cooperate with the United States on measures that reduce the risk of collisions.

Space debris – a growing issue

Space debris is creating growing problems for space operations. It includes any artificial objects in orbit not operating as satellites or spacecraft. It ranges in size from a fleck of paint to large rocket bodies roughly the size of a school bus.

In the most commonly used orbit – low Earth orbit – this debris can move at speeds of roughly 18,000 mph, almost seven times the speed of a bullet. At such high speeds, even tiny pieces of space debris can be highly destructive, to the point that this debris might continue to multiply until one day it makes certain critical orbits unusable. When space debris collides with other objects and fragments, they can break into smaller pieces, generating even more debris.

It’s somewhat ironic that China’s spacecraft took a hit from space junk. The country is responsible for creating the majority of space debris. In 2007, China blew up a defunct Fengyun-1c weather satellite to test an anti-satellite weapon. It generated the most space debris in history – over 3,000 pieces are still orbiting today.

On several occasions, the International Space Station has had to maneuver to narrowly avoid being struck by debris from this test, including as recently as 2021.

Anti-satellite weapons

Why would China, or any other country, want to develop an anti-satellite weapon? Satellites provide significant benefits to militaries. They help with reconnaissance and intelligence, allow for the precise targeting and guidance of long-range munitions, support communication over large distances and supply weather data, to name just a few uses.

These advantages were showcased during the first Gulf War, often called the “first space war.” The United States used space technologies to quickly and decisively defeat the Iraqi military within weeks, and with far fewer casualties than expected. The Gulf War had a profound impact on Chinese military thinking, with analysts in the People’s Liberation Army recognizing the importance of space technologies in modern warfare.

Whereas the United States has been and remains highly dependent on space capabilities, China has historically been less dependent on them. This means that China has traditionally had far less to lose from striking satellites in orbit and comparatively more to gain from disabling an adversary’s satellites.

Since the 1990s, China has invested in technologies that can jam, disable or outright destroy another country’s satellites. This effort has been driven by a desire to counter what it sees as a key vulnerability of the U.S. military – its heavy reliance on space capabilities.

Yet much has changed since China’s first anti-satellite test in 2007.

China has gradually narrowed the gap with the United States in space capabilities and is now one of the most powerful spacefaring nations on Earth. As a result, China now has more at stake if it were to lose access to space.

Space debris is becoming a serious threat to Chinese interests in space. In 2022, for example, reports emerged that debris from Russia’s 2021 ASAT test came dangerously close to a Chinese satellite. Similarly, in 2021 China filed a claim at the United Nations that China’s Tiangong space station had to perform avoidance maneuvers due to “close encounters” with Starlink satellites. And now, in November 2025, China’s Shenzhou-20 spacecraft has actually been struck by space debris.

Recognizing the problem

It is too early to gauge how seriously Chinese officials view the threat of space debris. However, the high-profile nature of this recent incident may alert China’s public and officials to the risks posed by space debris.

China’s space station, its astronauts and its satellites are important to the Chinese Communist Party. If space debris permanently destroyed parts or all of China’s space station, or even killed a Chinese astronaut, it would likely lead to significant public outcry.

China’s space station is a project over three decades in the making and is the crown jewel of its space program. The Tiangong is set to become the only space station in orbit if the United States proceeds with its plans to deorbit the ISS in 2030.

Just as an owner of an expensive Lamborghini may become increasingly worried about dangerous road conditions that may damage their prized possession, Chinese officials may become anxious about China’s ability to operate its space station should space junk continue to clutter low Earth orbit.

Even if space debris does not damage China’s space station, it still poses a risk to Chinese satellites. And low Earth orbit is likely to become only more crowded, as SpaceX has announced plans to add up to 40,000 Starlink satellites in orbit, and China plans to add tens of thousands more satellites in low Earth orbit through its Guowang and Qianfan satellite megaconstellations.

China’s growing vulnerability to space debris creates an area of mutual concern where the United States and China may be able to work together to avoid future accidents.

Risk-reduction measures could include the two countries notifying each other about potential collisions. China and the United States could also open discussions around how to safely operate satellites or remove them from orbit when they’re no longer useful.

It remains to be seen what lessons Chinese decision-makers draw from this recent episode. But the problem of space debris is not going away.

R. Lincoln Hines, Assistant Professor of International Affairs, Georgia Institute of Technology

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

After 43 days, the U.S. government shutdown finally came to an end late on Nov. 12, 2025, when Congress voted through a long-overdue funding bill, which President Donald Trump promptly signed.

But the prolonged gap in government-as-usual has come at a cost to the economy.

The Conversation spoke with RIT economist Amitrajeet A. Batabyal on the short- and long-term impact that the shutdown may have had on consumers, on the gross domestic product and on international trust in U.S. stewardship of the global economy.

What is the short-term economic impact of the shutdown?

Having some 700,000 government workers furloughed has hit consumer spending. And a subset of those workers believed they may not have a job to come back to amid efforts by the Trump administration to lay them off permanently.

In fact, the University of Michigan’s monthly index on consumer sentiment tumbled to a near record low in November – a level not seen since the depth of the pandemic. Because lower consumer sentiment is related to reduced spending, that has a short-term impact on retailers, too.

And because parks and monuments have been closed throughout the shutdown, tourism activity has been down – a decline no doubt worsened by the reduction in flights enforced due to shortages in air traffic controllers.

The effect was particularly pronounced in places like Washington D.C. – one of the most popular destination for tourists – and Hawaii. This short-term effect will likely extend to secondary businesses, such as hotels. Indeed, prior to the shutdown, the U.S. Travel Association warned that such an event would cost the total travel industry around US$1 billion a week.

And the longer-term impact?

Estimates range, but the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said that the cost to America’s gross domestic product in lost productivity is in the range of $7 billion to $14 billion – and that is a cost from a self-imposed wound that will never be recovered.

And from an international macroeconomic point of view, trust in the U.S. has been hit. Even before the shutdown, political dysfunction in Washington contributed to a downgrade in the U.S. credit rating – something that could result in higher borrowing costs.

The shutdown further erodes the United States’ standing as the global leader of the free market and rules-based international order. Accompanied by the economic rise of China, this shutdown further erodes international investors’ impression of the U.S. as an arbiter and purveyor of the established trade and finance system – and that can only hurt Washington’s global economic standing.

Has the economic pain been felt evenly?

Certainly not. Large numbers of Americans have been hit, but the shutdown affected regions and demographics differently.

Those on the lower end of the income distribution have been hit harder. This is in large part due to the impact the shutdown has had on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as food stamps. Some 92% of SNAP benefits go to American households below the federal poverty line.

More than 42 million Americans rely on SNAP payments. And they were caught up in the political maelstrom – left not knowing if their SNAP payments will come, if they will be fully funded and when they will appear.

There is also research that shows Black Americans are affected more by shutdowns than other racial groups. This is because traditionally, Black workers have made up a higher percentage of the federal workforce than they do the private sector workforce.

Geographically, too, the impact of this shutdown has been patchy.

California, Washington D.C. and Virginia have the highest proportion of federal employees, so that means a larger chunk of the workers in those regions were furloughed. Hawaii has also been disproportionately hit due to the large number of military there. One analysis found that with 5.6% of people in the state federally employed, and a further 12% in nonprofit jobs supported by federal funding, Hawaii was the second-hardest-hit state during the shutdown.

How easy is it for the US to recover from a shutdown?

Because shutdowns are always temporary, recovery depends on how long it has gone on for. Traditionally, the long-term economic trend is not badly affected by the short-term pain of shutdowns.

But it may be slightly different this time around. This shutdown went on longer than any other shutdown in U.S. history.

Also, the nature of this shutdown raises some concerns. This was the first shutdown in which a president said that backpay was not a sure thing for all furloughed federal employees. And the uncertainty over those threatened with layoffs again broke from past precedent. Both matters seemed to have been settled with the deal ending the shutdown, but even so, the ongoing uncertainly may have affected the spending patterns of many affected.

And we also do not know what the economic impact of the reduction of domestic flights will be.

Have other economic factors exacerbated the shutdown affect?

While the shutdowns in Trump’s first administration did take place while tariffs were being used as a foreign policy and economic tool, this year is different.

Trump’s tariff war this time around is across the board, hitting both adversaries and allies. As a result, the U.S. economy has been more tentative, resulting in greater uncertainty on inflation.

Related to that is the rising grocery prices that have contributed to an upward tick in inflation.

This all makes the job of the Federal Reserve harder when it is trying to fine-tune monetary policy to meets its dual mandates of full employment and price stability. Add to that the lack of government data for over a month, and it means the Fed is grasping in the dark a little when it comes to charting the U.S. economy.

Amitrajeet A. Batabyal, Distinguished Professor, Arthur J. Gosnell Professor of Economics, & Head, Department of Sustainability, Rochester Institute of Technology

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.