Speeches

Universities and the National Security Challenge

While national security may sound like a topic best relegated to the folks at the Pentagon, the reality is that in today's world our universities are playing an increasingly significant role in the quest for homeland security. At the same time, because research performed within our institutions can help prevent and counteract terrorism, it is feared that those same discoveries and advanced technologies could be used by terrorists or hostile governments.

In 1996, Congress enacted legislation to restrict visas for students from countries identified as "state sponsors of terrorism." It also prohibited certain fields of study for foreign students and faculty and authorized tracking of international students.

Congress is currently debating initiatives such as reforming the nation's visa system, faculty collaboration with scientists from other nations, and access to laboratories and technical information. The FBI has offices in many of the towns where our institutions are located. This is no coincidence. Our research universities, responsible for so many of the rapid advances in science and technology enjoyed by the United States, are home to a large population of foreign-born students and staff. The reported head of Iraq's nuclear weapons program earned a mechanical engineering degree at one of our land-grant institutions.

We offer education in fields designated as "sensitive areas of study" including nuclear technology, robotics, and chemical engineering; our faculty engage in research with deadly infectious agents; our labs contain hazardous biological and chemical substances; and our computer networks and the information stored within them could be vulnerable to cyberterrorism. So it is certainly not kidnappings that have caused the FBI to set up shop in so many of our backyards.

While the nation attempts to institute security measures that it hopes will deter terrorism, we in higher education must continue to raise our concerns and insert ourselves into the dialogue to help find the appropriate balance between security and academic freedom. We also must decide how we will deal with the unintended consequences that may result from any action that is taken. One of the biggest challenges we have faced since September 11 is the serious threat to the freedom of scientific information exchange and inquiry. The publication of scientific and technical information has long been a standard of academe. Publication of unclassified basic research has traditionally occurred without governmental control, but now Congress and the executive branch are contemplating the restriction of some scientific communication. While some of us might agree that restrictions are needed to protect our national security by shielding critical information, I suspect all of us believe we must find a way to accomplish this without compromising scientific inquiry and the public's right to information, or inhibiting the scientific progress of our nation.

A few of our universities, Penn State among them, perform classified research, which has always been controlled by well-defined protocols. The term "sensitive, but unclassified" information has now been added to the government's vocabulary of categories that could be restricted. "Sensitive, but unclassified" has not been defined and encompasses broader control of research results than we have seen in this country. This reclassification also goes beyond a 1985 presidential directive issued by Ronald Reagan in which he affirmed that the "products of fundamental research remain unrestricted." He also clearly stated that the mechanism for control of information was to label it classified. But already we are receiving contracts from federal agencies with publication restrictions attached, despite the fact that there has been no definition of "sensitive but unclassified" information. Agencies such as the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency, to name only two, have removed information from their public databases. The Library of Congress and the National Archives were ordered to deny public access to geological survey maps, and the Department of Health and Human Services, which traditionally does not classify information, was granted the power to label information as secret. In addition, reclassification of already released information is being permitted. Academic researchers themselves are already deciding to cut out substantial portions of their work before publishing.

These actions could have a chilling effect on scholarship, which thrives on the open exchange of information. Restrictions on publication will limit research, which engages graduate students, a central strategy to the way we conduct research. Ultimately, these new approaches could also deeply affect the future health, economic strength, and quality of life in America. Other areas of concern for our institutions, some of which I have already touched upon, include restrictions in the admission of international students and scholars. Questions about who should receive visas and whether we should limit what subjects foreign students can study must be answered, along with concerns about the creation of an unwelcoming campus environment for international visitors. Exchange of information and technology with scholars from outside the United States could put faculty members at risk if they are not aware of government restrictions related to the export of scientific information.

The control of dangerous chemical and biological agents is also a point of concern, bringing with it more questions about faculty knowledge of laws and safety measures related to possession, use, transport, or receipt of certain substances. Liability issues and the cost of maintaining and securing laboratories that house these types of potentially lethal materials will be a challenge. Unfortunately, there are no simple solutions to the question of security versus freedom. We must gain a full understanding of the issues before us and work toward a rational and balanced approach that will allow science and education to progress and our nation to remain safe.