Social Responsibility of Engineers and Scientists in the Military-Industrial Complex Subrata Ghoshroy Massachusetts Institute of Technology USA IPB Disarm Congress Berlin, Germany October 1, 2016

Agenda  Focusing on the U.S.  US military spending ($600B- $700B)  Spending on military R&D ($70B - $80B)  Military R&D is where most civilian scientists and engineers contribute to the war machine  How can we stop this pipeline from our universities to the war machine?  My personal story in blowing the whistle 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 20162

1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 20163

1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress Worldwide Military Spending: $1700 billion

Historical trend in U.S. military spending 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 20165

1 October 20166Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

A few points about the spending on military R&D  It deprives the civilian science research of much needed funds  It perpetuates the weapons pipeline and reinforces the role of the use of force in US foreign policy  There is a great deal of waste in military R&D  It is not producing much good science 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 20167

Contrast in spending: A bad omen for the future Clean Energy and Climate Science: $2 billion Missile Defense: $10 billion Combined Science Budget for NSF, DOE, and NIST: 14 billion Nuclear Weapons: $30 billion/year ($1000 billion in the next 30 years) Education: $140 billion Military R&D and Weapons procurement: $190 billion Source: various 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 20168

The universities are central to the military-industrial complex and the weapons pipeline  The Pentagon supports most academic research in engineering and physical sciences In total, universities get about $12 billion In total, universities get about $12 billion About $2 billion a year for basic science research About $2 billion a year for basic science research The following are noteworthy: The following are noteworthy: Engineering overall 39% Engineering overall 39% Electrical Engineering 72% Electrical Engineering 72% Mechanical Engineering 75% Mechanical Engineering 75% Metallurgy and Materials Science35% Metallurgy and Materials Science35% Math and Computer Sciences53% Math and Computer Sciences53% Physical Sciences 16% Physical Sciences 16% Sources : (1) DoD Basic Research Plan, February 2005, p.IV-3 (2) NSF Stats, NSF , March (2) NSF Stats, NSF , March See “the Pentagon and the Universities” a fact sheet: sheet-pentagon-universities/ sheet-pentagon-universities/ sheet-pentagon-universities/ 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 20169

Marriage of Science and the Military  The Manhattan Project to develop the atomic bomb Marshaling science for war Marshaling science for war  Cold-War emphasis on science to maintain an edge over the Soviet Union  Massive spending on science and technology spurred innovation Emergence of “Big Science” and the science lobby Emergence of “Big Science” and the science lobby  Public assumed all the risks in funding cutting-edge research and private companies reaped huge profits Electronics, computers, biotechnology, and military systems including aircraft and ships Electronics, computers, biotechnology, and military systems including aircraft and ships 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress

DoD Funds Train Many Next-Gen Researchers at U.S. Universities 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress For example at MIT: Other top schools like Johns Hopkins, Columbia, Cal Tech or University of Wisconsin also get pentagon funds to support graduate students

Challenges Faced by Researchers in the Military-Industrial Complex  Military culture of respect for hierarchy and lack of questioning  Secrecy tends to impede good science and also makes it easy to hide problems  Little opportunity for individuals to refuse to work on a particular project for moral reasons  Raising moral objections seen as unpatriotic and one is branded as a “bad element,” or worse, a “Commie” sympathizer 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress

“Star Wars” Program and the Power of the Military-Industrial Complex “Star Wars” Program and the Power of the Military-Industrial Complex  SDI a.k.a. “Star Wars” spent about $140,000 million over ten years  The current missile defense program spends nearly $10,000 million a year  It has yet to overcome basic technical flaws and produced no new technology  However, the program continues with bipartisan support in Congress 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress

Allegations of fraud  In 1996 Dr. Nira Schwartz – an Engineer at TRW, Inc. complained that TRW was lying to the government about a signal processing algorithm  In 1997, she complained that Boeing/TRW lied to the government about the results of a flight test  2000, Prof. Ted Postol of MIT joined in the fray by adding another dimension – MIT’s role in an alleged cover-up. 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress

Findings of a Congressional Investigation of her Allegations  Key to successful discrimination is an infrared (IR) sensor that operates at a super-cooled temperature 10 degrees Kelvin  The sensor did not perform as expected due a failure in the cooling system  Collected data was mostly of poor quality Only 16 seconds of data were analyzed from 60 seconds or more collected Only 16 seconds of data were analyzed from 60 seconds or more collected  Data was manipulated and used selectively to make the results look good 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress

GAO Report was Politicized  Under pressure from the Pentagon, GAO stopped short of saying the obvious that: the test had failed, and the test had failed, and the contractors misrepresented the results the contractors misrepresented the results  As a result, no actions could be brought against Boeing, Hughes Aircraft, etc.  GAO Report did not include any recommendations whatsoever  A senior GAO manager told me: “We let the Pentagon off the hook this time!”“We let the Pentagon off the hook this time!” 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress

GAO Report and my Role  I was the leader of the technical team, but not the report itself  I tried very hard internally to change the report to be at least technically honest, but failed  There were several “independent” investigations that found nothing wrong  Four years later I blew the whistle by going public and leaving the agency (New York Times, 2 April 2006) 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress

Defense R&D is hugely wasteful  A slush fund for military contractors  Full of boondoggles and outright fraud An extreme example is the missile defense program An extreme example is the missile defense program As a whistleblower I can speak from my own experience As a whistleblower I can speak from my own experience  Needs substantive restructuring 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress

Peer review missing  Most defense programs lack independent peer review  Classification often unjustifiable keeps information bottled up  Most defense department program officials totally depend on contractors for information  Program officials and contractors have one goal – keep the program funded! 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress

Degradation in the quality of science  Military-funded research of high quality drove innovation and discovery in physical sciences Quality of research was consistently high throughout the 50’s, 60’s and part of the 70’s Quality of research was consistently high throughout the 50’s, 60’s and part of the 70’s  The model was science-focused small projects  Starting in late 70’s gradual change to bigger projects with less science and more systems focus  Acceleration of this trend during the Star Wars in the mid-80’s and continued thereafter 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress

How do we change the situation?  We know from experience that even at places like MIT, change is possible when students and faculty unite to oppose militarism  Several universities in Germany have adopted a “civil clause” to prohibit military research  As a former participant in defense research, I appeal to scientists and engineers worldwide to support demilitarization of research at universities 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress

Need both individual and collective actions  Individual actions are important and could set notable examples like that of Daniel Ellsberg, and Edward Snowden  However, most people cannot afford to become “martyrs”  We need to build up institutions that can hold wrongdoers accountable and protect individuals from retaliation, loss of career  Scientific organizations must do much more to uphold integrity of science by demanding maximum transparency and accountability 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress

THANK YOU!! 1 October 2016Ghoshroy-IPB Congress