What's a interesting about the article is what it doesn't describe: namely, the nature and details of the conflicts which led to the abort of the mission. I exp

What's a interesting about the article is what it doesn't describe: namely, the nature and details of the conflicts which led to the abort of the mission. I expect the writer is being polite, and considers this an open letter to both sides of the conflict(s). That said, with all the buildup, it feels a wee bit unsatisfying to not know what went wrong. Perhaps the writer doesn't quite know for sure, since everyone (themself included) is biased.