In the months after Sept. 11, the Bush administration actively reminded Americans to continue their normal routines and to remain strong in the face of terror. We were famously told to go shopping in an attempt to keep the economy strong; we knew that to do otherwise would be "to let the terrorists win."
It appears that while America was at the shopping mall, our government was busy restricting the free flow of information among research universities.
A report released last Thursday by the National Research Council of the National Academies concluded that security measures put in place after Sept. 11 could begin to impede the development of university-level research and technological progress.
Contracts and grants awarded to universities now frequently contain clauses that restrict both who can participate in research and conditions on publication of work. The report also noted the weakening of National Security Decision Directive 189, which was enacted during the Reagan years to preserve the free flow of research information during the Cold War.
While it is true that a leak of sensitive material could pose serious harm to national security, the stagnation and obstruction of research could prove to be equally as dangerous. The solutions to many of the biggest challenges facing our society today, from global warming to bioterrorism, might lie in laboratories. The carefully controlled sharing of information will be essential to any progress made in these areas of research.
It's worth noting that with the poor performance of American students in math and science, our nation is particularly unprepared to "go it alone" when it comes to technological research. We rely heavily on foreign-born scholars who come to this country to work in our universities, and the current government's policies are leading us to foolishly throw away the wheat with the chaff in the effort to prevent terrorists from crossing our borders.
The only way to proceed in this situation is to rationally consider the pros and cons of controlling the flow of information and research. Blindly succumbing to fear is irresponsible and child-like.
There is not going to be one simple solution to this problem, but the National Research Council has put forth one very promising proposal: the creation of a science and security commission with guidance from both the national security advisor and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. Such a body might be instrumental in keeping the research pathways safe and free.
We're all aware that George Bush didn't take his university studies too seriously, but he had better realize that a similar attitude towards academia will be devastating for the country he leads. A C-average when it comes to cutting-edge research is nowhere near acceptable on the global stage.
