Science and Secrecy: NSDD 189 Prologue to A New Dialogue - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 38
About This Presentation
Title:

Science and Secrecy: NSDD 189 Prologue to A New Dialogue

Description:

The tensions between science and national security during World War II are well ... Interagency review (National Security Decision Directive 14-82, NSDD 1-830) ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:98
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 39
Provided by: charle56
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Science and Secrecy: NSDD 189 Prologue to A New Dialogue


1
Science and SecrecyNSDD 189 - Prologue to A
New Dialogue?
  • American Association for the Advancement of
    Science
  • RD Colloquium
  • April 10, 2003
  • John C. Crowley
  • Vice President for Federal Relations
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology

2
My Assignment
  • To tell briefly the story of a particular slice
    of recent science policy history as a possible
    prologue to the future. I will briefly look at
  • - the late 1940s
  • - the fears of the early 1980s and origins of
    NSDD 189
  • - the concerns of the post-911 era
  • - conclusion.

3
Little Is Truly New Here. The Tensions Between
Science and Security Are Deeply Rooted.
  • The tensions between science and national
    security during World War II are well documented
    and widely known.
  • Following the war, in 1947, the Presidents
    Scientific Research Board report on Science and
    Public Policy included the following statement

4
  • Strict military security in the narrow sense is
    not entirely consistent with the broader
    requirements of national security. To be secure
    as a Nation we must maintain a climate conducive
    to the full flowering of free inquiry. However
    important secrecy about military weapons may be,
    the fundamental discoveries of researchers must
    circulate freely to have full beneficial effect.
    Security regulations, therefore should be applied
    only when strictly necessary and then limited to
    specific instruments, machines or processes.
    They should not attempt to cover basic principles
    of fundamental knowledge.

5
AAAS Special Committee on Civil Liberties for
Scientists19 August 1949
  • Executive Order No. 9835 -- The Loyalty Order -
    no person shall be employed in a federal post if
    he is believed to be disloyal to the government
    of the United States.
  • The E.O. goal complete and unswerving loyalty
    to the United States of all in its service.
  • AAAS Committee urged a focus on behavior not
    beliefs.

6
The AAAS Committee Quoted Judge Cardozo
  • Experimentation there may be in many things of
    deep concern, but not in setting boundaries to
    thought, for thought freely communicated is the
    indispensable condition of intelligent
    experimentation, the one test of its validity.

7
They Concluded by Quoting President Truman
  • Continuous research by our best scientists is
    the key to American leadership and true national
    security. This work may be made impossible by
    the creation of an atmosphere in which no man
    feels safe against the public airing of unfounded
    rumors, gossip and vilification.

8
Then, We Endured The Fifties
  • The House UnAmerican Activities Committee
  • The McCarthy era
  • Duck and Cover drills in schools.

9
Thirty Years Later, After.
  • The Korean War
  • The Space Race
  • Viet Nam

10
The Fears of 1980s Openness Vulnerability to
Soviet Threat
  • The U.S. - Soviet relationship deteriorated to
    the levels of the Cold War of the 1950s. Fears-
  • - Loss of militarily significant technology and
    superiority
  • - Loss of technological leadership and know-how
  • - Loss of industrial competitiveness.
  • Universities were seen as targets, points of
    leakage and hemorrhage of technology, as the
    Nations soft underbelly.

11
National Academies Suspended Bi-Lateral Exchanges
  • The only appropriate way for the scientific
    community to deal with any kind of problem,
    scientific or human, is through reason and
    discussionIf we cannot learn how to rationalize
    our differences, how to resolve then by argument
    rather than by threats and by cutting off
    relations, then we are really lost. Weisskopf
    and Wilson, Science, 5-30-1980

12
The Election of 1980 and the DOD-University
Forum, 1981
  • April 3, 2001, HASC Hearing.
  • Richard D. DeLauer, Under Secretary, RE.
  • HASC Mandate- A new DSB Report University
    Responsiveness to National Security Requirements.
  • Dr. DeLauer asked AAU for a report (done 11-81).
  • DSB report released January, 1982.
  • Each report recommended a mechanism for dialogue
    be established.
  • President Paul Gray and Walter Milne of MIT first
    made the proposal to AAU.

13
DOD-University Forum
  • Co-chairs
  • Under Secretary DeLauer
  • Dr. Donald Kennedy, President, Stanford
    University
  • Members
  • - 7 university CEOs
  • - 6 senior DOD officials and 3 DBS Members
  • Dr. DeLauer established three technical working
    groups
  • Foreign languages and area studies
  • Science and engineering education
  • Technology Export Controls, David A. Wilson, U.
    Ca. Co-chair
  • Met May, 1982 2-year FACA charter, 12-15-83
  • Staff OSD, AAU (on behalf of AAU, ACE, NASULGC)
  • Dr. DeLauer retired in1985 the Forum expired.

14
The Government, Secrecy, and University
Research, D. Kennedy, 4-23-1982
  • Promising signs of change.
  • Apply visa controls.
  • Classify the technology.
  • Enable universities to decide in advance.
  • New burdensome regulations will cost the nation
    more than it can be worth.

15
Contemporary Incidents
  • April, 1982, E.O. 12356, broadened authority to
    classify information included
  • - Basic scientific research information not
    clearly related to national security may not be
    classified.
  • - The meaning of this was widely debated.
  • August, 1982, Raid at San Diego The first 2
    papers were withdrawn from 26th annual Society
    for Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers
    (SPIE) conference in all, more than 100 papers
    were withdrawn at government request.

16
Wm. D. Carey Handcuffing Science, 9-24-1982
  • When a proper concern for the national security
    is burdened by clumsy execution, something is
    subtracted from the fundamental respect that is
    owed the necessary goal of safeguarding defense
    secrets. Once confidence in the judgment and the
    management of the security process is shaken, its
    integrity is served badly. The defense
    authorities have very good reason to know that
    the scientific community has proved its respect
    for the national security through three hot wars
    and a long cold one. That respect must be
    reciprocated.

17
Corson Panel of NAS/NRC, Spring 1982
  • Mandate
  • - Examine evidence of technology leakage and
    methods of controlling it
  • - Seek policy measures by which competing
    national goals of defense and intellectual
    freedom could be accommodated satisfactorily.
  • A Distinguished Panel.
  • The Panel Reviewed Classified Information.

18
Corson Panel Scientific Communication and
National Security, 9-30-1982
  • Security by Secrecy will weaken U.S.
    technological capabilities.
  • There is no practical way to restrict
    international scientific communication without
    also disrupting domestic scientific
    communication.
  • Build high walls around narrow areas in pursuit
    of security by accomplishment.
  • Identify and devise controls only for Gray
    Areas.

19
18 Months After Corson Report, May 1984
  • After four attempts to formulate a new policy,
    hope has faded. M. Wallerstein, Science, May 4,
    1984
  • Interagency review (National Security Decision
    Directive 14-82, NSDD 1-830), remained incomplete
    and the process itself classified
  • DOD internal reviews continued
  • Incidents of forced withdrawal of papers
    continued.

20
DOD Forum Working Group
  • From 1982 to 1984 the Working Group tried to
    define and then implement a category
    unclassified but sensitive i.e.., Corson Panel
    gray areas.
  • April 17, 1984 effort abandoned in favor of only
    two categories classified and unclassified.
  • May 24, 1984 DOD announced a draft national
    policy agreed to by DOD and OSTP.
  • Dialogue produced changes agreed to on 9-14-84.
  • October 1, 1984 DeLauer memorandum to the
    Services and DARPA - the basis for NSDD 189.
  • Forum hoped for a new era of closer cooperation.

21
Scientific Communications and National Security
R. DeLauer
  • Must distinguish science from technology
    technology from know-how.
  • Nature yields her secrets to anyone.
  • Ideas cannot be stopped at national borders.
  • Benefits of open publication far outweigh the
    risks.
  • Ultimately the relationships among academia,
    government and industry will depend on the trust
    and understanding among the people who work
    together and depend on one another. Science,
    10-5-84

22
Tested Throughout ThePrinciples of Universities
  • When the rubber hits the road, some will take
    the money with new restrictions attached.
  • AAUP has thought it inappropriate to condemn
    faculties and universities for making such
    arrangements per se, but it has regularly
    expressed concern that inconsistency with respect
    to academic freedom is a genuine danger that all
    academic institutions should weigh carefully in
    the research and the restrictions they accept.
    Report October 1982 Science, 1-21-1983

23
Groucho Expressed The Possibilities His Way
  • These are my principles. If you dont like
    them, I have others!
  • Once you give up your integrity, everything else
    is a piece of cake.

24
NSDD 189 September 21, 1985
  • It is the policy of this Administration that, to
    the maximum extent possible, the products of
    fundamental research remain unrestricted. that
    where the national security requires control, the
    mechanism for control of information generated
    during federally-funded fundamental research in
    science, technology, and engineering at colleges,
    universities and laboratories is classification.

25
NSDD 189, cont
  • Each federal government agency is responsible
    for a)determining whether classification is
    appropriate prior to the award of a research
    grant, contract, or cooperative agreement and, if
    so, controlling the research results through
    standard classification procedures b)
    periodically reviewing all research grants,
    contracts, or cooperative agreements for
    potential classification.

26
NSDD 189 cont
  • No restrictions may be placed upon the conduct or
    reporting of federally-funded fundamental
    research that has not received national security
    classification, except as provided in applicable
    U.S. Statutes.
  • Ronald Reagan, September 21, 1985

27
Why The Loophole?
  • The final clause represents
  • political compromise necessary to obtain it
  • the seeds of continuing controversy.

28
Todays Fears The Hart-Rudman Commission,
March 2001
  • Second only to a weapon of mass destruction
    detonating in an American city, we can think of
    nothing more dangerous than a failure to manage
    properly science, technology, and education for
    the common good over the next quarter century.

29
Homeland Security Presidential Directive-2,
10-29-01
  • 3. Abuse of International Student Status
  • The program shall identify sensitive courses of
    study, and shall include measures whereby DOS,
    DOJ, and U.S. academic institutions, working
    together, can identify problematic applicants for
    student visas and deny their applicationsthe
    Sec.State, AG, Sec.Ed shall consult with the
    academic community and other interested parties.

30
Dr. Rice Letter to Dr. Harold Brown, CSIS, 11-1-01
  • In the context of broad-based review of our
    technology transfer controls that will begin this
    year, this Administration will review and update
    as appropriate the export control policies that
    affect basic research in the United States. In
    the interim, the policy on the transfer of
    scientific, technical and engineering information
    set forth in NSDD-189 shall remain in effect, and
    we will ensure that this policy is followed.
  • Dr. John Marburger has reaffirmed this at NAS
    and in congressional testimony.

31
Three New Statutes
  • USA Patriot Act, P.L. 107-56, 10-26-01
  • The Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry
    Reform Act of 2002, P.L. 107-173, 5-14-02
  • The Public Health Security and Bioterrorism
    Preparedness and Response Act of 2002, P.L.
    107-188, 6-12-2002
  • Problems appear to be greater in
    implementation than in statute.

32
The Growing Effects of Post-911 Fears
  • Access by foreign students and scholars to U.S.
    institutions, organizations and conferences
    denied.
  • Last October, almost 100 scientists were
    prevented from attending the World Space Congress
    in Houston due to visa delays.
  • Objectionable clauses are inserted into
    contracts.
  • First-time security concerns in the life
    sciences e.g.., select agents, inventory
    controls, approved persons, laboratory security.
  • sensitive but unclassified again is bubbling up.

33
Effects, cont
  • Students and researchers denied return visas.
  • Classes, laboratories disrupted.
  • Enforcement mechanisms are slowly but steadily
    being broadened bottom up without consultation.
  • Technology Alert List is a creeping blanket
    across science, engineering e.g., civil
    engineering, urban planning, landscape
    architecture.
  • SEVIS implementation is plagued with problems.
  • Well-intentioned individuals in the system are
    making self-protective conservative decisions.

34
Context 2003
  • The Nations security, our global leadership,
    the growth of our economy (50) and our health
    depend on the excellence of our ST.
  • Rapidly advancing research and education still
    depend on openness within our institutions and
    across borders.
  • Science and technology are global.
  • Looking ahead, the U.S. must remain the first
    destination of choice for the worlds best minds
    they now have unprecedented options.

35
Recent Initiatives
  • More meetings on this than one can possibly
    attend.
  • House Committee on Science just requested a GAO
    study of visa backlog.
  • CSIS-National Academies 2-year collaboration
  • how to manage risks of malevolent use of
    sensitive unclassified information
  • how to address international peer-to-peer
    contacts and visits while ensuring a thriving and
    secure scientific environment
  • - fostering dialogue analysis - science and
    security
  • - co-chairs Harold Brown, David Baltimore.

36
In Conclusion, This Is Not The 1960s
  • The Nations research universities
  • - strongly support appropriate homeland security
    efforts
  • - they are prepared to cooperate as partners
    with government.

37
New Policy Mechanisms Are Needed
  • It is time for government to bring universities
    and industry to the policy table.
  • New, clear government-wide policy direction is
    needed from the top.
  • Informed, workable policy will require new
    mechanisms of consultation and deep commitments
    to collaborative problem solving by universities,
    researchers and government.
  • On April 14, Secretary Ridge will address the
    AAU.
  • A new chapter of this story may begin.

38
Thank You (in order of appearance)
  • Paul Gray
  • Walter Milne
  • Richard DeLauer
  • Donald Kennedy
  • Robert Rosenzweig
  • Leo Young
  • Jeanne Carney
  • David A. Wilson
  • Mitchell Wallerstein
  • John McTague
  • Rosemary Chalk
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com