The Other_ se Other Prose October 28, 1985 page 9 bution to Arma geddon ‘> SRS An ad hoc committee of representa- tives of the two universities told the parliamentary committee studying the issue on July 23 that the Star Wars proposal was not technologically feasible and morally sound. Petitions were also circulated at the University of British Columbia, Uni- versity of Toronto, McGill Uniyersity, Université du Québec 3 a Montréal, and McMaster University, where a single petition gathered 605 signatures in three days. Adam Hitchcock, a McMaster chemistry professor, said faculty “didn’t want any part of (Star Wars). We want to express our abhorrence of the programme.’’ The petition said Star Wars research would escalate the arms race and violate the U.S. - Soviet 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Suzuki said it is vital for Canadian scientists to stay clear of Star Wars contracts and other arms research programmes. ‘Once (the research) starts up, it’s impossible to stop,’” he said. “The university is not there to supply ideas to the government” ‘The military has lied through their teeth about how all this will work.’’ “There is nothing that will stop it. It has a life of its own. It’s too powerful.’’ Suzuki said the microelectronics community, well-known for signing extensive software contracts with the military, should join the boycott of Star Wars projects. “If the computer science faculty here is worth its salt, every member will sign a petition,’’ he said. ‘‘1 would hope Canadian university scientists would be reluctant to partic- ipate in Star Wars research,’’ Bates said. Scientists have a moral respons- ibility.”’ Star Wars critics say any participa- tion will tighten the connections Canada has with the U.S. military. Under the Defence Industry Produc- tivity Program the government pro- vides low-interest loans as well as grants to Canadian firms involved with the military. Canada is also required to buy one dollar of U.S. arms for every dollar the U.S. - Defence Department spends here. Petition signers and others say the forecasted economic spin-offs for the civilian sector from Star Wars re- search and development are unfound- ed. “It doesn’t translate into jobs and goodness for the private sector,’’ says Suzuki. ‘It translates into building weapons of destruction.”’ According to Regehr, five times as many jobs could be created for peaceful purposes for every one job Star Wars funding would create. Ahab Abdel-Assiz, as a graduate student at Waterloo, studied military research and development on Canad- ian campuses, and found that ‘‘the spinoffs benefitting the civilian economy have been few and_ far between.’” ' In a report first released Nov. 1983, and revised later with McMaster graduate student John Bacher, Abdel- Aziz said the ‘‘post war marriage of military, industry, and research has not lead to basic research and innova- tions.’’ Instead, he found that military research ‘‘concentrated on the details of singularly military devices with no conceivable (useful) applications.’’ As well, university researchers renting their expertise to the military have contributed to arms escalation and troubled international relations. “By bringing new technologies and theoretical advances to the military strategists, Military R & D defines, shapes and in essence determines the future of international political re- lations,’’ he said. For Ursula Franklin, a U of T metallurgist and member of the Science for Peace, a national academ- ic organization, ‘‘funding affects our funding.’’ Franklin says as more researchers turn to the military to finance their projects, the academic integrity of the university is diminished. “The military has lied through their teeth about how all this will work”. “The more military and military- related work that is done, the more internal censorship (there is),’’ she says. ‘‘The university should be an open place were all ideas and political (beliefs) are discussed. ‘Knowledge is not political pro- perty.’’ Franklin does not agree with col- leagues who say they depend on defence spending for their research. “The scientist has the choice. The choice may mean you won’t get research money, but you have a choice,’’ she says. ‘‘The university is not there to supply ideas to the government.’