The Office of Homeland Security, created after Sept. 11, 2001 by
President Bush, requested last year that researchers limit
scientific publications. Many researchers fear this action will
strangle the open dissemination of science and academic
freedom.
University of California officials note the importance of open
exchange of scientific findings as a means of national defense. The
UC has responded by turning down research contracts it feels does
not allow for the open dissemination of findings, said UC Press
Aide Chuck McFadden.
McFadden said the UC is willing to work with defense agents but
“feels it must adhere to its policies for an open fundamental
teaching and research environment.”
Before Sept. 11 some governmental restrictions on research did
exist, but since then, the clamp has been greatly tightened.
UCLA Research Vice Chancellor Roberto Peccei attributed this to
an elevated concern with the potential use of publications once in
the hands of terrorists.
This concern is felt not just by security experts, but also by
scientists who might be prevented from performing research, knowing
it might be used for destructive purposes.
“It’s possible that if a biological attack occurred,
biologists could switch to some other scientific field,” said
UCLA Professor Ralph Robinson, who teaches an undergraduate course
on bioterrorism.
Robinson equated the fear of some biologists to that of
physicists in the 1940s.
“Before World War II, a lot of scientists were studying
physics. After they got together and built the atomic bomb, a lot
of scientists switched to biology,” Robinson said.
The U.S.A. PATRIOT Act was a large-scale legislative response to
Sept. 11. The act labels some 64 biological substances ““ such
as anthrax, ebola, and other biological weapons ““ as
“select agents.” Students from countries deemed
sponsors of terrorism by the State Department are prohibited from
using select agents.
UCLA, which has four labs that work with select agents, is not
significantly affected by this legislation. Regardless, Peccei said
the issue is very sensitive, and UCLA will have to use greater
discretion with who is employed in the university’s labs.
The UC performs basic research ““ involving fundamentals of
science ““ and applied research, which builds on the findings
of basic research. The consensus among researchers is that applied
research is the only type that should be classified.
“Basic research does not work well if it is not conducted
in an open environment. That is the scientific tradition,”
McFadden said.
Since the passage of the PATRIOT Act, UC Santa Cruz Chancellor
Marcy Greenwood pleaded in a testimony given to Congress that the
nation not forget the importance of academic freedom amid this
heightened fear of terrorism.
Greenwood, who was a member of the National Academies’
Committee on Science and Technology for Countering Terrorism, said
it is crucial that the U.S. government encourage “open and
collaborative basic research” if it wants to remain
technologically dominant.
Other scientists have argued that scientific openness, not
restrictiveness, is the best defense against terrorism. John Hamre,
president of the Center for Strategic and International Studies,
has emphasized a need for science and security to have a symbiotic
relationship.
In June 2002, the House Committee on Science released a report
titled “Making the Nation Safer: The Role of Science and
Technology in Countering Terrorism.” The report noted the
United States’ long tradition of using science as a terrorist
defense.
“America’s historical strength in science and
engineering is perhaps its most critical asset in countering
terrorism without degrading our quality of life,” the report
stated.