Thursday, October 14, 2010

Military research should bear brunt of science cuts, say leading scientists

36 UK professors say science cuts should focus on military research projects, including finding a replacement for Trident.  This is in an open letter to David Cameron.   Generally, scientists are aghast at the cuts proposed for scientific research. They are keenly aware how it contributes to the fabric of society, so they jump to defend it. Just as librarians will shortly become aghast at the cuts proposed for libraries, being keenly aware how libraries contribute to the fabric of society.  And care workers. And so on. All are right to stand up to Cameron’s dismantling of the state. Don’t believe his this will hurt me more than it hurts you stuff. This is his agenda.  He relishes it. 

The scientists are concerned that while the government is threatening to cut public funding for research and development as a whole, it appears to be committed to maintaining high levels of military-related R&D. World-class research into health and global environmental problems is under threat, they say, yet the government continues to fund the vast research programme at the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston.

They note that the current defence ministry research budget is more than 20 times public funding for
research on renewable energy.

However, they say there are some areas of security-related
research that should be expanded. Such as monitoring of arms control agreements, non-violent conflict resolution, and tackling the roots of conflict and insecurity.

Full text of letter  It’s been co-ordinated by Scientists for Global Responsibility, an organisation I belong to as an associate member.

No comments:

Post a Comment