The University Senate did the right thing when it voted this week to hold public hearings regarding U.S. Department of Defense funding on campus. As a University, we are an institution of learning, exploration and investigation, so involving the community in a more in-depth conversation about one of the most hot-button topics of the current academic year is logical.
These public hearings have the power to illuminate a subject that is largely misunderstood by the general student population and to involve the research faculty in the debate. We firmly stand with those who wish to prevent the University from engaging in any unethical research, but we believe many of the allegations that have defined this controversy are misdirected.
We have found little evidence that sinister connections exist between the source of the research funding and its application.
DoD funding on this campus, while widespread, represents a drop in the bucket of our total research funding.
Currently, 19 DoD grants are being used in many departments, including psychology, economics and physics. These grants compose only about 1.8 percent of the University’s total research budget of nearly $84 million for the 2004-2005 fiscal year. With some fluctuations, DoD grants have accounted for about 5 percent of University research funding over the past 40 years (“Campus military research under fire” ODE Nov. 30, 2005).
This is an almost insignificant amount when compared to the vast pools of funds donated by other organizations with sunnier public images, like the National Science Foundation.
All this fear is based on the conception – we would argue a misconception – that military money is funding research that directly benefits the military, or that military funding makes the University complicit with military actions.
A small but vocal minority on campus has used this conception to argue that the University should not accept funds from the department.
The removal of military funding does not guarantee that University research won’t be used for military applications. While it is possible that DoD-funded University research may be used in deadly applications, it is possible that any and all research done at the University might be used for unethical purposes. A University researcher’s well-intentioned experiment could someday be used as the basis for a weapon of mass destruction, just as Marie Curie’s experiments in radioactivity would be used half a century later as part of the basis for the atomic bomb.
Should we cancel all research? Nix every scientific experiment? Fire the Physics Department?
Such solutions are brash and unreasonable, as is fretting about DoD funding. If faculty and community members wish to protest the military actions of this county, they should direct their attention toward those in the federal government who make the choices about what we do with our military, not the researchers who help us better understand our world.