This document was made available to members of the UO Senate in advance of the debate on US05/06-2. It is presented only for archival purposes.
Arguments
regarding Motion US05/06-2 for members of the UO Senate in preparation for
Wednesday's discussion of New Business:
Arguments in favor:
There are numerous reasons for conducting unclassified, Defense
Department-funded research on the UO campus, including the following:
Much of the DoD-funded research conducted on the UO campus, although
"mission-directed", is arguably basic, and some of this research is
likely to have important civil applications (including medical and educational
ones). Furthermore, DoD-funded research provides financial benefits to
the University in the form of income from overhead and from the licensing of
patented discoveries/inventions, summer salaries for faculty, funds for
research staff and for student stipends. Additionally, it has been argued
that any University-imposed limitations on research activities constitute
unwarranted limitation on academic freedom.
On the other hand, the following facts challenge the wisdom of increasing the
power of the Pentagon under the circumstances prevailing in our country at this
time:
The US economy, which is driven by the military-industrial-congressional
complex, benefits global corporate business at the expense of the People --
their education, health care, the health of our planet, etc. This economy
thrives on the proliferation of arms and armed conflict in which the People
suffer disproportionately.
Furthermore, the concentration of power and corporate wealth in the hands of a
small group of people creates a governing class that can by-pass Democracy, and
the armed conflict required for corporate profit further helps to keep the
People so fearful that they consent to increasing losses of civil liberties and
democratic process.
The reality of the above statements is validated by the stated goal of the
people presently in control of the Department of Defense (DoD) -- "global
dominance" of the world's resources to be achieved by military superiority
(Project for a New American Century; National Defense Strategy -- footnote 1).
This professed goal is in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution and the
principles of democracy -- in the minds of many, the dependence on corporate
support characterizing the majority of our elected officials, regardless of
party affiliation, has already silenced the voice of the People.
Research universities must confront the possibility that acceptance of DoD
research funds, combined with ignorance or denial of the context in which DoD
operates, makes them complicit in war crimes and/or violations of the
Constitution.
The UO faculty is commited (footnote 2) to ". . question critically, ...
act creatively, and live ethically . . . develop creators and innovators who
will generate new knowledge and shape experience for the benefit of humanity .
. .welcoming and guiding change rather than reacting to it . . . international
awareness and understanding, and to the development of a faculty and student
body that are capable of participating effectively in a global society. .
." The further education of the Senate and the
University Community through Senate-sponsored public forum(s) will serve these
ends, enabling the University to act responsibly in this important area.
1 Abstracted in:
http://www.911truth.org/readingroom/whole_document.php?article_id=86
Analyzed in:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1665.htm
Updated in:
http://www.newamericancentury.org/defensenationalsecurity.htm
2 http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~uosenate/UOmissionstatement.html
SUGGESTIONS FOR CONTENT OF HEARING(S)
To fulfill its obligation to its constituents, the UO Senate needs to make an
informed decision as to whether the AAU and President Frohnmayer's position
http://www.aau.edu/budget/Defense.pdf
in support of increased DoD-funded research represents that of the
University of Oregon. This process of education necessarily
includes an understanding of the present ties between UO and DoD. Hence,
it might be appropriate for the UO Senate to request, as part of the hearings
process, an Administration report that includes (but need not be limited to)
the following:
… Copies of summary sections of DoD grant applications and of sections
that identify possible applications of the research findings.
… Summaries of the aims of the DoD programs under which grants have been
given or are being sought.
… Identification of areas in which knowledge gained might plausibly lead
to restrictions on publication of the research performed under the grant.
… Description of procedures ensuring the implementation of the Faculty
Legislation of May 10, 1967, which states that: no research, any portion of
which is likely to become classified, is conducted on campus.
… Description of procedures that ensure that no weapons research is
ongoing in the Riverfront Research Park (as specified by the land lease granted
by the UO to the developer). This description should include an operational
definition of "weapon."
It is important for the forums also to include contributed presentations by DoD
researchers and others favoring DoD-funding as well as by those who question
its role on our campus.
SENATE ACTIONS THAT MIGHT FOLLOW THE FORUM(S)
Possible outcomes of this educational process could include:
1. UO Senate might direct UO President to persuade the AAU to lobby for
research money aimed at a culture of life rather than death. Should
either the President or the AAU respond unfavorably to this proposal, the
Senate might like to sever the relationship between UO and AAU.
2. A publicly stated policy that UO will make no new applications for DoD
funds and will seek alternative funding for those campus projects currently
funded by DoD.
Louise Westling
Professor of English
University of Oregon
Eugene, OR 97403-1286
Telephone 541-346-3938
Fax 541-346-1509