|
|
|
| ||||||
|
Balancing Academic and Scientific Freedom with National Security |
| |||||||
|
|
News | |||||||
|
Articles
with a " *
" require a paid subscription. (UW
IPs have access)
RECENT
DEVELOPMENTS
(3 items)
U.S. Department of Defense considers tightening rules
regarding foreign researchers The
Department of Defense has proposed a series of rules regarding limiting
access of foreign nationals to all DOD-funded research. These
changes are partly in response to rule changes proposed earlier this year
by the Department of Commerce regarding "export-controlled information"
(see below "DOC considers tightening rules regarding foreign
researchers"). The proposed rules can be found in the Federal
Register from 12 July.
Links
on this topic: “Defense
Rules Would Pinch Foreign-Born Scientists” – Yudhijit Bhattacharjee.
Science 7/22/2005 After delay over security concerns, Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS)
publishes article related to
bioterrorism In
one of the most high-profile cases regarding the publication of
information that could potentially be used by terrorists, PNAS has decided
to publish an article regarding the milk supply in the United States and
how it could be targeted for poisoning by terrorists. This article, from
researchers at Stanford University, was published over the objections of
some government agencies including the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services.
Articles on this topic include: “Analyzing a bioterror attack on the
food supply: The case of botulinum toxin in milk” – Lawrence M.
Wein and Yifan Liu. PNAS 6/28/2005 DOC considers tightening rules regarding foreign
researchers The
United States Department of Commerce is considering new rules that would
require universities to more strictly control access to some controlled
technologies, such as genetically modified microorganisms. The
proposed changes to Commerce's export administration regulations would
impact on foreign nationals conducting research in universities or working
with government sponsored research. The
rule changes are being proposed by the Bureau of Industry and Security
(BIS) and are outlined in the Federal Register (3/28/2005, Volume 70, page
15607). The proposed changes are in response to the recommendations
contained in the U.S. Department of Commerce Office of Inspector General
Report entitled ``Deemed
Export Controls May Not Stop the Transfer of Sensitive Technology to
Foreign Nationals in the U.S.'' (pdf file, Final Inspection Report No.
IPE-16176-March 2004). More
information can be found at http://bxa.fedworld.gov/whatsnew.cgi/exportreq.asc
Recent
articles on this topic include: “Schools Fear Impact of Proposed License Changes” – Yudhijit Bhattacharjee. Science 5/13/2005
*****
The Debate on
Scientific/Academic Freedom vs. National Security To what degree are scientists “free” to pursue
their research? To what degree are they “free” to share their
findings with others? What about research in areas where the data
would be dangerous to public safety if accessed by the wrong people?
Clearly the needs of research to progress must be
balanced with issues of security. Exactly where that balance lies
and who should hold authority over monitoring and enforcing regulations
covering research is a matter of debate that has been brought to the
forefront in the aftermath of the attacks on Adding urgency to the debate is the fact that
information can be disseminated by just about anybody at a speed that was
unheard of even fifteen years ago. Whereas a recipe for a dangerous
agent in the past could only be distributed in print, it can now be posted
on a website for any person anywhere to read. Furthermore, once
posted on the internet, it is difficult if not impossible to trace who has
accessed the information. While the discussion used to focus primarily on
security issues regarding weapons research performed in government labs,
it has now expanded to cover research done in academic and industrial
settings, where scientists previously could do research relatively
unimpeded. Several scientists in academic institutions have balked
at recent attempts of the federal government to monitor and control the
activities in their laboratories. At Los Alamos National
Laboratories, where employees already operated under strict security,
repeated allegations of security breaches and subsequent crackdowns have
alienated scientists to the degree that many are leaving or taking early
retirement. This webpage is intended to link the reader to resources that cover the various issues regarding academic freedom and national security. As you will see below, there are many groups that have weighed in on this issue including virtually every organization whose membership is composed of researchers or academic institutions. Reports,
Documents, and Opinions About the Topic of National Security and
Academic/Scientific Freedom Academic
Freedom and National Security in a Time of Crisis – A report from the Special Committee on Academic
Freedom and National Security of the American Association of University
Professors. National
Academies statement: Science and Security in an Age of
Terrorism From Bruce Alberts, Wm. A. Wulf, and Harvey Fineberg,
Presidents of the National Academies (October 18,
2002) National
Academies study: Biotechnology Research in an Age of Terrorism:
Confronting the "Dual Use" Dilemma. A press release that
contains information about the book released by the National Research
Council on biotechnology and terrorisism (see
below). Biotechnology Research in an
Age of Terrorism – A publication of the National Research Council
that recommends that the government expand existing regulations and rely
on self-governance by scientists rather than adopt intrusive new policies
(book for purchase from National Academies Press). Position
Statement on Avoiding High-Tech Terrorism – From the Foresight Insitute that deals with
issues surrounding nanotechnology. One of the few sites that
addresses nanotech in particular. The War on Terrorism:
What Does it Mean for Science? – Shortly after the attacks of
September 2001, the AAAS hosted a symposium on this issue. A summary
report and real audio links of the symposium are found on this
website. Now a bit outdated but this site provides a historical
perspective as to what some scientists were thinking in the immediate
aftermath of the attacks.
Organizations With Useful
Information Regarding the Issue of Academic and Scientific Freedom vs.
National Security The following is a (far from complete) list of
organizations that have useful links regarding the issue of
academic/scientific freedom and national security. American
Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has two separate
webpages (see below) devoted to the topic of scientific freedom vs.
national security. They provide an excellent resource for anybody
wishing to research this topic and were the source of many of the links on
this site. (AAAS) Science and National Security in
the Post-9/11 Environment - This
fairly up-to-date site contains links to several issues regarding the war
on terrorism, national security, and how it affects researchers and their
work. (AAAS) Scientific Freedom vs. National
Security
- This site is a bit outdated but
contains some important information including a report on a symposium held
in December, 2001 entitled “The War on Terrorism: What Does it Mean for
Science?”, a report on the handling of the Wen Ho Lee case and statements
from the administration regarding science and
security. Association of American
Universities – The AAU
website contains a whole section dedicated to the issue of homeland
security. Center for
Biosecurity -
an independent, non-profit
organization of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC). The
Center works to prevent the development and use of biological weapons, to
catalyze advances in science and governance that diminish the power of
biological weapons as agents of mass lethality, and to lessen the illness,
death and civil disruption that would result if prevention efforts
fail. The Center draws upon the expertise of a multidisciplinary
professional staff with experience in the government, medicine, public
health and bioscience. Taking the Measure of Countermeasures: Leaders' Views on the Nation's Capacity to Develop Biodefense Countermeasures (10/12/04) Center for Strategic and
International Studies/National Academies Collaboration on Scientific
Communication and National Security – A site that stemmed from a
collaboration between the Center for Stratigic and International Studies
(CSIS) and the National Acadamies (NA) to address to undertake an
evaluation of the relationship between scientific communication and
national security in the post-September 11th threat
environment. Council On Government Relations
(COGR) – an
association of research universities with a primary function to provide
advice and information to its membership and to make certain that federal
agencies understand academic operations and the impact of proposed
regulations on colleges and universities. COGR helps to develop
policies and practices that fairly reflect the mutual interests and
separate obligations of federal agencies and universities in research and
graduate education. Federation of
American Scientists – Contains several pages devoted to national
security and how it affects research, particularly in the realm of nuclear
proliferation. The Federation of American Scientists is a
nonprofit organization founded in 1945 as the Federation of Atomic
Scientists. The founders were members of the Manhattan Project, creators
of the atom bomb. FAS is dedicated to ending the worldwide arms race and
avoiding the use of nuclear weapons for any purpose. The
Foresight Institute – The Foresight institute deals with issues,
including policy issues, surrounding nanotechnology. Foresight Institute's goal is to guide emerging
technologies to improve the human condition. Foresight focuses its efforts
upon nanotechnology, the coming ability to build products—of any size—with
atomic precision. The
National Academies – The National Academies bring together
committees of experts in all areas of scientific and technological
endeavor. These experts serve pro bono to address critical national issues
and give advice to the federal government and the public. Four
organizations comprise the Academies: the National Academy of
Sciences, the National Academy of
Engineering, the Institute of
Medicine and the National Research
Council. The National Academic
Consortium for Homeland Security – comprised of public and private
academic institutions engaged in scientific research, technology
development and transition, education and training, and service programs
concerned with current and future U.S. national security challenges,
issues, problems and solutions. The Sunshine
Project - an international non-profit organization with offices in
How heightened security
affects foreign researchers/students Researchers from other countries are the most
adversely affected by the hightened state of security. These
scientists face increased scrutiny in obtaining visas and are sometimes
barred from working on projects previously available to them. Many
“Foreign Students and
Scholars” – A very well put together summary of the issue of
foreign scientists and national security on the AAAS website by Allison
Chamberlain with many useful links. Highly recommended as a place to
start on this topic. Many of the links below were found on this
site. Reports,
Documents, and Opinions on the Subject of Foreign Researchers and National
Security Statement
and Recommendations on Visa Problems Harming America's Scientific,
Economic, and Security Interests – A pdf (Adobe Acrobat) file containing a joint
statement released by several scientific, engineering, and academic
organizations. Released on Deemed
Export Controls May Not Stop the Transfer of Sensitive Technology to
Foreign Nationals in the U.S. (pdf file) – A report from the U.S.
Department of Commerce Office of Inspector General that concludes that
current regulations may not prevent foreign nationals from “countries and
entities of concern” from accessing controlled information and
technology. The recommendations contained within the report may
directly affect foreign-born researchers, especially those from countries
like America Closes
the Door to Scientific Progress – An essay by Alan Lesher that
appeared in the Financial Times on Fear of "Foreigners" May Slow Scientific Progress – An article from AAAS. Remarks from John
Marburger III regarding scientific communication and national
security – From the
roundtable on Scientific Communication and National Security held by the
National Academy of Science on Comments
from John Marburger III regarding student visas – From the AAAS Colloquium on S&T
Policy. American
Institute of Physics report - Physics Students from Abroad in
the Post-9/11 Era (6/03) Other
Information and Resources Regarding Foreign Nationals The American Society
of Microbiology visa information page - Information regarding policies, laws and
regulations announced by
National Academies International Visitors Office American Physical Society visa
information page - Information regarding policies, laws and
regulations announced by U.S. government sources related to international
student or scholar visas. NAFSA:
Association of International Educators – A link to their
immigration advising resources.
New rules about the transfer
of select (dangerous) agents In response to the anthrax mail attacks in 2001,
the The new rules are costly to institutions choosing
to work on these agents. Not only are there additional costs to
increase security and monitor compliance, but facilities choosing to work
on these agents expose themselves to tremendous legal risk should their
employees fail to follow these rules. For these reasons many
laboratories, including researchers at
The legal risks institutions face with working on
these agents are serious. In the most famous case so far, Thomas
Butler, a researcher at “Select Agent Rules”
– A very well put together summary of the issue of select agents on the
AAAS website by Allison Chamberlain with many useful links. Highly
recommended as a place to start on this topic. Many of the links
below were found on this site.
Reports,
Documents, and Opinions About the Rules on Select Agents *"Biosecurity
and Research: Minimizing Adverse Impacts" By Jennifer Gaudioso and
Reynolds M. Salerno. Science. Vol. 304. Information
and Resources on Select Agents CDC Select
Agents Program - Information regarding the Select Agents Program
including application information, current regulations and additional
resources. HHS Final Rule
on Possession, Use, and Transfer of Biological Agents and Toxins,
Federal Register, USDA Final
Rule on Possession, Use, and Transfer of Biological Agents and
Toxins, Federal Register, The new category of
“sensitive but unclassified” (SBU) information Before September 11th, the line between
classified and unclassified information was relatively clear. The National Security
Decision Directive 189 (NSDD-189) stated that there would be "no
restrictions…upon the conduct or reporting of federally-funded fundamental
research that has not received national security classification."
This directive, issued during the Regan Administration, basically allowed
the free use of any information that was not specifically deemed
“classified” by the government. In response to the terror attacks in 2001, the
Bush Administration issued a memorandum to government agencies on
safeguarding "sensitive but unclassified" (SBU) information, also known as
"Sensitive Homeland Security Information. The memo directed
recipients to “undertake an immediate reexamination of current measures
for identifying and safeguarding” Government information in their
respective department or agency “regarding weapons of mass destruction, as
well as other information that could be misused to harm the security of
our nation and the safety of our people.” The SBU category was
included in the Homeland
Security Act of 2002. This directive has already been used to
block public access to a variety of documents relating to chemical and
biological warfare. Some have accused the administration of being too
vague in the definition of SBU and of applying it recklessly and
ineffectively to suppress information that has either no value to
terrorists or that terrorists could easily obtain elsewhere. The
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has noted that
“The establishment of such a category as "sensitive but unclassified"
information has significant implications for scientific research and
communication because of potential restrictions on information exchange
between scientists, the government, and the public.” “Sensitive but Unclassified
Information” – A very well put together commentary about SBU
information on the AAAS website by Ryan Ricks with excellent links to the
subject of “sensitive but unclassified” information. Highly
recommended as a place to start on this topic. Many of the links
below were found on this site. SBU
Resource Center on OpenTheGovernment.org – Another site that
contains links to several resources regarding SBU. If you can’t tell
by the name, this site is a tad partisan but it has several useful links
that the AAAS site does not. SBU info on "OMB Watch"
site – A fairly thorough, yet somewhat partisan, site with several
links and a useful description of the SBU controversy. OMB Watch is a watchdog organization
interested in removing secrecy from the government. Reports,
Documents, and Opinions Regarding SBU National Security
Decision Directive 189: National Policy on the Transfer of
Scientific, Technical and Engineering Information ( The
Homeland Security Act of 2002 Definitions and Regulations
Involved in the Classified-Sensitive Information-Unclassified
Debate a large table that defines all the terms regarding
sensitive but unclassified information. Compiled by the Association
of American Universities ( Letter from higher education
community on scientific openness – A letter regarding scientific openness from the
presidents of the Association of American Universities (AAU), the Council
on Governmental Relations (COGR) and the National Association of State
Universities and Land-Grant Colleges (NASULGC) to John Marburger, the
Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy ( Remarks from John
Marburger III regarding scientific communication and national
security – From the
roundtable on Scientific Communication and National Security held by the
National Academy of Science on The following three government reports are rather
large PDF files (read with Adobe Acrobat) but offer a detailed analysis of
the controversies surrounding SBU and a related category SSI (sensitive
security information). Congressional Research
Service report RL31845 – "Sensitive But Unclassified" and Other
Federal Security Controls on Scientific and Technical Information: History
and Current Controversy ( Congressional Research
Service Report RL32425 – Sensitive Security Information and
Transportation Security: Issues and Congressional Options ( The Library of Congress
Federal Research Division report – "Laws and Regulations Governing
the Protection of Sensitive But Unclassified Information" (9/04; PDF)
How security issues have
affected federal grants and contracts Since 9/11 there has been a significant change in
the regulations regarding how contracts are awarded. Clauses have
been added to some grants that require background checks of foreign
researchers or that give the government the ability to review the research
before it is sent out for publication. Many Universities have
successfully renegotiated some of the terms of these grant contracts to
lessen the effects of these rules. However, in case regarding
military funding of basic research, several computer scientists at UCLA
opted out of receiving funding since one stipulation was that no foreign
researchers be allowed to work in the laboratory. This topic
overlaps significantly with the topic of security and how it affects
foreign researchers, and the topic of “sensitive but unclassified”
information. “Federal Grants and
Contracts” – A very well put together commentary about SBU
information on the AAAS website written by Allison Chamberlain with
excellent links to many reports and opinions on this issue. Highly
recommended as a place to start on this topic. Many of the links
below were found on this site. Reports,
Documents, and Opinions Regarding Federal Grants and
Contracts “Pentagon
Redirects its Research Dollars” – An article covering how the
Pentagon is diverting funds away from academic institutions and basic
research in part due to secrecy and security issues. By John
Markoff, New York Times, Remarks from John
Marburger III regarding scientific communication and national
security – From the
roundtable on Scientific Communication and National Security held by the
National Academy of Science on MIT/COGR list
of troublesome clauses in government research award contracts – A
summary of the troublesome clauses that appear in research award
contracts, particularly from awards originating from the Department of
Defense. This list was compiled by MIT and COGR. A Microsoft
word document. Also includes a related background
memo. AAU/COGR Task Force report “Restrictions on Research Awards: Troublesome Clauses” – The report from the Joint AAU/COGR Task Force on Restrictions on Research Awards and Troublesome Research Clauses. Appears as enclosure along with a letter to John Marburger III, the Director of the Office on Science and Techology Policy (OSTP).
This page created and maintained by William Navarre, Ph.D., FOSEP member
and Senior
Postdoctoral Fellow in the Departments of
Laboratory Medicine and
Microbiology at the |
News on National Security and Academic/Scientific Freedom
"Defense
Rules Would Pinch Foreign-Born Scientists" - by Yudhijit Bhattacharjee. Science
7/22/05 “Pentagon
Redirects its Research Dollars” - An article covering how the Pentagon
is diverting funds away from academic institutions and basic research, in
part due to secrecy and security issues. by John Markoff, -
New York Times, 4/2/2005 (registration may be
required) "Ethics:
A Weapon to Counter Bioterrorism"- by Margaret A. Somerville and
Ronald M. Atlas. Science 3/25/05 "Unnoticed
Amendment Bans Synthesis of Smallpox Virus" - by Martin Enserink.
Science "Has
Biodefense Gone Overboard?" - by Martin Enserink and Jocelyn Kaiser.
Science "Microbiologist
on a Mission" - by Jocelyn Kaiser. Science Select
Agents "Researchers
Relieved by Final Biosecurity Rules" - by Jocelyn
Kaiser - Science Foreign
Researchers "Defense
Rules Would Pinch Foreign-Born Scientists" - by Yudhijit Bhattacharjee. Science
7/22/05 U.S.
Sponsors More Students - by Syeda Sultana Rizvi. The Daily Targum
"New
Rules Ease Scientific Exchanges" - by Yudhijit Bhattacharjee. Science
The Crisis at
"A
Bidding War for Los Alamos" - by Eli Kintisch. Science "Los
Alamos Appoints Interim Director" - by Eli Kintisch. Science "Battelle
Bows Out of Race to Run Los Alamos Lab" - by Eli Kintisch. Science
Issues Regarding Sensitive
Research at Academic Institutions The Pathology of
Government-Funded Research - The University's Biocontainment Lab: Coming
to a Neighborhood Near You! – by Zbignew Zingh, Dissident Voice
UW defends
proposal to build biomedical research lab in city. But neighbors say
they fear escape of deadly agents – by Jake Ellison, Seattle
Post-Intelligencer "Biosafety
Lab Fallout in Boston" - by Andrew Lawler. Science "Boston
University Under Fire for Pathogen Mishap" by Andrew Lawler – Science
UW defends
proposal to build biomedical research lab in city. But neighbors say
they fear escape of deadly agents
| |||||||
