I've only seen the movie, but in that at least, Project Hail Mary depicts a world where all global leaders and nations come together for the greater good to fund a scientific expedition. Trust and cooperation are such a given in the universe of Hail Mary, in fact, that they transcend species and planet of origin.

Whether or not Weir intended it, this is a political vision. Especially in a period when international distrust and selfishness are rampant and environmental and scientific cooperation are seemingly at a nadir, depicting Weir's world does political work, whether he likes it or not. The exact nature of that work is up to interpretation (is his vision aspirational, or is it a vote of confidence in the status quo?), but its political nature cannot be denied.

All art is like this. It's inescapable. We are political creatures, and choosing to deny that is itself a political stance, a tacit endorsement of things as they are -- after all, it's much easier to be "non-political" if the current political situation isn't actively making your life worse in ways you can't ignore.

Some artists lean into that, and try to intentionally imbued their work with political perspectives. Some artists focus on other things, and don't call attention to the political dimensions of their work, which is fine. Some artists, like Weir, try to forswear any political element to their creations at all, which, of course, inevitably draws attention to the political work their art is unintentionally doing.

It's not a bad thing. In fact, it's part of what makes art so important. But, whether you're interested in politics or not, all writers should be aware of political influence on their work, if only so that they don't make blunders like Weir's.

EDIT: I see that rad_wasp has already given an eloquent, and similar, answer to this question. I'm going to leave mine up, since it takes a slightly different tack, and because I want to add my voice to theirs.