Abstract
Cientific cooperation should not be a by-product of the peace process. It should be a driving force,” observed Hani Mulki, the former Jordanian minister of foreign affairs, in January 2002. At the time, Mulki was head of the Jordanian Higher Council for Science and Technology. The occasion for his remark was a meeting at the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in Washington, D.C., attended by representatives from the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, the Palestine Academy for Science and Technology, and the Jordanian Higher Council for Science and Technology. These academies had been carrying out joint workshops and studies for more than a decade when political conditions permitted–which was not often. Nevertheless, in 1999 they jointly published a study titled “Water for the Future,” which discussed opportunities for the enhancement of water resources.
At the 2002 Washington meeting, the NAS was consulting its partners from the Middle East on how science academies could help reduce political friction in the region. Echoing Mulki, they responded that Mideast scientists should increase cooperation, given that science opens channels of international communication that are otherwise scarce, especially when tensions are high. Such communication can bring benefits beyond cooperative research. Some examples include the Pugwash Movement–formed in 1957 to foster meetings between Soviet scientists and their Western counterparts–and the NAS Committee on International Security and Arms Control, which met regularly with the Soviet Academy of Sciences throughout the Cold War.
Similarly, during the Oslo peace process in the Middle East, bilateral and multinational organizations funded “Second Track” initiatives for regional scientific cooperation throughout the 1990s. Sponsored research programs continue today, and scientific organizations such as the Interacademy Panel, the International Council for Science, and some U.S. universities, include senior scientists from the region in their activities. Many of these senior Israeli, Palestinian, and Jordanian scientists know each other, but it can be difficult for them to meet or even to speak without the cover of a foreign organization. Younger scientists unknown to foreign organizations have fewer opportunities to collaborate with their peers.
Is it possible that the elusive formula for peace might come not from politicians and governments, but from young scientists working together?
The conditions for free and effective collaboration are not met when all activities are sponsored exclusively by foreign organizations. At present, no formal framework exists for direct cooperation, even though scientists in the Middle East may be only driving distance apart. What are required are national or regional scientific organizations that can independently convene meetings, provide an umbrella for collaborative research, and even issue public statements on scientific matters. These activities are normally the work of science academies, and those of Israel, Jordan, and Palestine have demonstrated that they can work together effectively. Strengthening these institutions, especially the relatively new Palestine Academy for Science and Technology, should be a high priority. Foreign scientific organizations operating in the Middle East should make an effort to cosponsor activities with them, emphasizing their regional roles as conveners and scientific advisers.
One of the fruitful activities of the academies in the Middle East is called Frontiers of Science and Engineering. It is a symposium for young PhD-level scientists and engineers of the region who generally have few opportunities to participate in international activities. It features topical sessions organized by the participants, on subjects ranging from astrophysics to nanotechnol-ogy research to environmental studies of the Dead Sea. It has been convened twice, in Istanbul in 2003 and in Seville in March 2007. Politics is formally excluded, but informal discussions are sometimes free ranging.
A Science magazine writer reported the gestation period for an ad hoc peace plan at a Frontiers lunch table was about two hours. Is it possible that the elusive formula for peace might come not from politicians and governments, but from young scientists working together?