Social Responsibility of Engineers and Scientists in the Military-Industrial Complex

1. 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

2. 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 Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

3. Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

4. Worldwide Military Spending: $1700 billion Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

5. Historical trend in U.S. military spending Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

6. Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

7. 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 Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

8. Contrast in spending: A bad omen for the future Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

9. 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 • About $2 billion a year for basic science research • The following are noteworthy: • Engineering overall 39% • Electrical Engineering 72% • Mechanical Engineering 75% • Metallurgy and Materials Science 35% • Math and Computer Sciences 53% • Physical Sciences 16% Sources : (1) DoD Basic Research Plan, February 2005, p.IV-3 (2) NSF Stats, NSF 12-313, March 2012. See “the Pentagon and the Universities” a fact sheet: http://demilitarize.org/fact-sheets/enfact-sheet-pentagon-universities/ Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

10. Marriage of Science and the Military • The Manhattan Project to develop the atomic bomb • 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 • 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 Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

11. DoD Funds Train Many Next-Gen Researchers at U.S. Universities 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 Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

12. 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 Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

13. “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 Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

14. 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. Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

15. 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 • Data was manipulated and used selectively to make the results look good Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

16. GAO Report was Politicized • Under pressure from the Pentagon, GAO stopped short of saying the obvious that: • the test had failed, and • 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!” Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

17. 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) Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

18. 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 • As a whistleblower I can speak from my own experience • Needs substantive restructuring Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

19. 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! Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

20. 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 • 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 Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

21. 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 Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

22. 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 Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016

23. THANK YOU!! Ghoshroy-IPB Congress 2016