There is an old Chinese saying: the poor do not fight the rich, and the rich do not fight the officials. Today's reality in America once again confirms the wisdom of ancient Chinese thinkers; the money bag is utterly powerless in front of the printing press.
Who would have thought that just a few days ago, these two people, who were exchanging fierce words on social media, would suddenly stage a performance of 'plastic brotherhood'? Musk just retweeted Trump's tweet, praising his 'outstanding contribution' to mediating the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the comments section instantly erupted. A netizen joked: 'This change of face is faster than SpaceX's rocket recovery!'
But anyone with insight can see that the sudden 'reconciliation' hides deeper calculations. Just the week Musk sent out this friendly tweet, the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly passed the (big and beautiful bill). The most ruthless cut in this bill directly strikes Musk's long-cherished Mars program—$10 billion in funding is all directed to NASA's Artemis lunar landing program, while SpaceX's Mars roadmap is left on the sidelines.
This contest is far more complicated than it appears on the surface. It is not only a personal feud between two billionaires but also involves the direction of America's space strategy for the next decade. It's worth noting that Musk was sitting in the Trump administration's office last year, holding an important position as the Minister of Government Efficiency (DOGE). At that time, his proposed NASA reform plan focused on cutting traditional aerospace projects and fully supporting reusable rocket technology. Who would have thought that just a year later, this former 'Silicon Valley gatekeeper' would fall to the point of stabbing the president he once supported in the back?
The specific provisions of the bill read like a precise strike against SpaceX: $2.6 billion for the Lunar Gateway space station, $2 billion to expand the Orion spacecraft, $1.25 billion to extend the lifespan of the International Space Station, and $700 million to restart the canceled Mars sample return mission. The most ironic part is that SpaceX only received $325 million as a 'consolation prize'—to build the decommissioned spacecraft for the future space station. An unnamed NASA engineer privately remarked: 'This is like feeding a tiger cat food while expecting it to continue performing fire jumps.'
Musk's reaction is also interesting. He first angrily denounced the bill as 'absolutely insane' on the X platform, threatening to form a new political party; after Trump shot back, saying he would 'send him back to South Africa,' Musk suddenly shifted gears and began praising his opponent's diplomatic achievements. Washington Post senior political reporter Mark Thompson analyzed: 'This is clearly a political test before the House votes. Musk still holds key leverage for next year's election—he donated a whopping $300 million to the Republican Party last year.'
The essence of the conflict between the two is a confrontation between two development paths. The traditional aerospace route that Trump insists on is like a meticulous accountant—looking for tangible achievements and ensuring that every penny has visible results within his term. Therefore, he strongly promotes the Artemis program to return to the moon by 2026, a project that can display the flag on the moon's surface in news headlines, clearly more concrete than Musk's elusive dream of colonizing Mars.
Musk's logic for commercial space travel resembles that of a venture capitalist. He once calculated in an internal meeting: 'Launching the SLS rocket costs $2.5 billion each time, enough for us to send 30 cargo ships to Mars.' But now, this plan has been completely disrupted by the bill—originally planned for retirement in 2028, the International Space Station will be extended to 2029, the canceled Mars communication satellite project has been revived, and even the Mars sample return mission, which was questioned for its practicality by academia, has received a budget of $700 million.
What frustrates the SpaceX team the most is that the bill specifically emphasizes 'maintaining America's leadership in deep space exploration' but allocates the vast majority of resources to traditional contractors. Boeing and Lockheed Martin, these old arms dealers, are grinning from ear to ear; their engineers have already started working overtime to design new lunar landers. One SpaceX mid-level employee complained anonymously on a forum: 'We can complete the same task at one-tenth the cost, but they would rather spend ten times more to support those with connections.'
There is also an intriguing detail in this game. In the last memo before Musk resigned from his government position, he clearly suggested 'redirecting the ISS budget to Mars base construction.' Now this bill, personally approved by Trump, has almost completely vetoed all his proposals. Political observer Lisa Chen wrote in her column: 'This is like a carefully designed revenge; the White House has marked big crosses on Musk's space dreams with a red pen.'
However, it would be too early to say that Musk has admitted defeat. His latest tweet, 'It's very tempting to escalate things, but I won't do that for now,' clearly implies something. Internal sources indicate that SpaceX is accelerating the test flight plan for the 'Starship', intending to use actual results to prove the cost-effectiveness of commercial space travel. Meanwhile, Tesla's lobbying team is also busy, working hard in the House to revise the bill.
The most dramatic aspect of this space cold war is that it perfectly replicates the social rift in America today—the intense clash between tradition and innovation, national will and commercial power, short-term achievements and long-term visions. When Trump shouted 'Make America Great Again' at a campaign rally in Florida, Musk was at a launch site in Texas contemplating a model of a starship. One is focused on the mid-term election ballots, while the other gazes at the sunset on Mars; two completely different American dreams collide under this starry sky.
Now everyone is watching: how will those old men in the House weigh this bill? Can the votes and cash Musk holds still sway the Republican stance? More importantly, when political calculations meet technological ideals, which force can really send humanity further into the starry sky? These questions are probably more intriguing than the Artemis program itself.