84.12 The Annual General Meeting On March 31, 1984

The Annual General Meeting was held on Saturday, March 31 in the Combinations Room of Trinity College in Toronto. After the minutes of the previous meeting were approved, the outgoing president, Professor Fawcett, gave his report (see 84.13).

It was announced that legislation will be soon brought to Parliament enabling the setting up of the Canadian Institute for Peace and Security. The membership of our organization now stands at 682. The treasurer presented his report (attached). The Education Director reported that about 40 people attended the Inter-University Workshop at York University. He also announced a fall course to be given by the University of Toronto School for Continuing Studies in which eight members of our organization will take part; it is hoped to follow this up with another course in the spring. The British Columbia Chapter, in conjunction with Physicians for Social Responsibility, is planning a major conference in October. The Research Director reported on a number of items: the failure of two proposals to be accepted for Ford Foundation support, the need to establish widespread contacts in Ottawa, limitations on chemical and space weapons, and a conference on Mutual Balanced Force Reductions to be held in May, 1985 at York University. M. Fernandez announced a one—day workshop on April 27 under the auspices of the Institute for Environmental Studies at the University of Toronto. Rod Byers pointed out that Mr. Caccia, for the federal government, has commissioned Professor K. Hare to do a study of nuclear winter. The in-coming President, Professor Anatol Rapoport, was presented to the membership; his inaugural address is reproduced below (see 84.15). The new Board of Directors was elected and the firm of C1arkson-Gordon were approved as auditors.

84.13. The President’s Report for 1983-84

Development Science for Peace (SAP) is growing slowly but steadily as a National Organisation. No new Chapters have been formed, but the existing Chapters (British Columbia, New Brunswick and Waterloo Region) are active and new Chapters are forming in Montreal (at Concordia University) and at Guelph University.

S4P is now registered as a Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO) with the Public Information Division at the United Nations.

Research and Education

Members of S4P at the University of British Columbia and at the University of Toronto made substantial research proposals through their universities in early 1983 for funding by the Ford Foundation. Neither was successful but alternative funding sources are being sought and these continue to be the most ambitious research projects thus far promoted by S4P. The Inter—University Workshop on Peace Education held in November 1983 is to be followed by a similar meeting (organised by the Peace Research Institute, Dundas) at Brock University in May 1984. The organisation of peace education in the universities may well be the most effective mode of bringing the various Chapters of S4P into cooperative action. We can look to the Canadian Association of University Teachers for support in this activity: the April 1984 issue of the CAUT Bulletin carries a comprehensive article on University Peace Education.

Education of the public through the media is a responsibility that S4P should share with other professional organisations. A memorandum was submitted to the CBC Advisory Committee on Science and Technology in February 1984 at their invitation providing suggestions for TV and Radio programmes and also our Speakers Bureau (a list of about 50 speakers in the Toronto area).

Directory

President – Anatol Rapoport (416) 978-6930
Secretary – Derek Paul (416) 978-2971
Treasurer – Ray Kapral (416) 978-6106
Education Director – Terry Gardner (416) 978-3183
Research Director – Chandler Davis (416) 978-7164
Seminars Coordinator – Metta Spencer (416) 828-5316
Bulletin Editor – Ed Barbeau (416) 978-5164
Past President – Eric Fawcett (416) 978-5217
Assistant Treasurer – Archie Leitch
Assistant to the President – Gwen Rapoport (416) 646-5496

Chairmen of Chapters

  • British Columbia – George Spiegelman (604) 228-2036
  • Waterloo Region – John Hepburn (519) 885-1211 ×3785/3845
  • New Brunswick – Israel Unger (506) 453-4683
  • Guelph – Barry Millman (519) 824-4120 ×2797
  • Montreal – Fred Knelman (514) 879-8142

S4P thanks Doreen Morton for typing this Bulletin and Pearson-Garnet Press for printing it. Material for the editor should be sent to him at Room A102, University College, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A1

Government

As reported in the S4P Bulletin (Vol. 4 No. 1 – Winter 1984) we responded to Prime Minister Trudeau’s Peace Initiative with several proposals. The most important development for S4P possibly resulting from the Peace Initiative would be the formation of a publicly-funded Canadian Centre for Studies in International Peace.

S4P together with Physicians for Social Responsibility is sending to each MP a personal letter with a brief description of the Nuclear Winter scenario. We intend this to remind parliamentarians that the issues of war and peace are of supreme importance — a necessary reminder especially in election year when they might be distracted by domestic issues (see 84.26).

Financial

The registration of S4P as a charitable organisation in January has enabled us to embark on a serious fund-raising programme, first in support of ongoing educational activities and in due course in support of research projects.

Publicity

We intend to publish four editions per year of the S4P Bulletin, which is intended to provide a medium of communication to the members about the activities of the Chapters of S4P and of the National Organisation. We are also publishing a quarter-page article monthly in the Peace Calendar in order to inform a much wider readership of our activities.

— Eric Fawcett

84.14 Introducing The New President Of Science For Peace

Professor Anatol Rapoport was elected President of Science for Peace at the Annual General Meeting on March 31. But he COMES to Toronto to fill another position as well. From its founding, Science for Peace has been committed to bringing about the establishment of a Chair of Peace Studies at the University of Toronto. The work, though incomplete, is ongoing, and is marked by a series of heartening successes: University College has determined to establish the chair; the University has agreed; and although the chair has not yet been endowed, it is virtually occupied! — And by the world-renowned scholar we most hoped to attract when the funding was to have been secured: Professor Anatol Rapoport, Professor Emeritus of Psychology in the University of Toronto, former Director of the Institute of Advanced Study in Vienna, game theorist and Gaming Editor of the Journal of Conflict Resolution, author of such varied works as Strategy and-Conscience (1969), Clausewitz on War (ed.) (1968), N-Pearson Game Theory (1970), has become a Fellow of University College, taken an office in the College and made a gift to the College of his time and energy in forwarding peace studies there.

Science for Peace and University College will cooperate in attempting to secure funding for the Chair, so that Professor Rapoport may have a suitably qualified successor. His presence and reputation will make our task easier.

84.15 The Inaugural Address Of President Rapoport (March 31, 1984):

Notes provided by Professor Rapoport

I am deeply honored by being elected president of Science for Peace. I feel very strongly about both science and peace as ways of life and regard them as inseparable, because science extols truth, while war must be nurtured by deception or by self-deception. At times, in order to wage war, deception had to be perpetrated on entire populations to induce them to kill and to submit to being killed. With the advent of intercontinental missiles and nuclear warheads, such drum-beating, flag-waving, trumpet-blowing deception is no longer necessary. But now pervasive self-deception has come to the forefront, the self-perpetuating mutually supported self-deception of political leaders, who continue to think in terms of pre-nuclear geopolitics.

The activities of Science for Peace comprise peace research and peace education. These, too, are, to my way of thinking inseparable. The aim of research is to produce new knowledge, that is, to dissipate ignorance. In the early stage of peace research, there was a widespread notion among peace researchers that prevention of war could be facilitated by new knowledge, for example by development of conflict-resolving techniques or by removing identifiable “causes of wars”. In this conception, the products of peace research are to be made available to decision-makers who would thereby become better qualified to guide the international system along safer channels. In this approach, the dissipation of ignorance becomes the principal aim of peace research. But the role of deliberate deception and of self-deception is lost sight of. I would rather conceive the product of peace research as substantive materials providing content for programmes of peace education on a mass scale. The object of such programmes should be more than dissemination of knowledge. They should also open the way to enlightenment and to emancipation’from compulsive delusions.

I conceive of our organization as a fountainhead of resistance to the perversions of science somewhat analogous to certain movements intent on restoring spiritual and ethical force to religion perverted by greed for power and by ritualistic formalism. For those are the very perversions that erode the spiritual and ethical foundations of science — the misuse of science in the service of power and the misconception of science as an activity defined solely by correct rituals, be they techniques of observation or rules of logical deduction, or standards of statistical inference. Completely missing from this image is the enlightening and emancipating message of science — the original promise, whereby power applied to the shaping of the physical environment and cognitive procedures designed to protect against self-deception were supposed to be means of fulfilling that promise, not ends in themselves.

In our age, the mission of restoring the emancipating and enlightening promise of science is inseparable from the mission of resisting the preparation for war. War, the triumph of brutality over humanity, of base passions over reflection and self-knowledge has always been incompatible with the promise of enlightenment and emancipation inherent in science as a way of perceiving the world. Today war has assumed an even more ignominious role — that of subverting science, seducing scientists to serve in planning and designing the “final solution” to the human problem. It is against this subversion of science that peace education programmes designed by scientists should be directed. I see this as one of the main tasks of our organization.

This conception of peace education as the use of knowledge generated by peace research to enlighten and to emancipate as well as to inform and the conception of peace research as generation of substantive content of peace education answers the troublesome question of whether the scientist can with a clear conscience also be an activist. The answer is yes, of course, he can, indeed not merely in the role of a responsible citizen (which is usually conceded to be every one’s right in an open society) but also in the role of scientist, provided his activism is compatible with the role of scientist, that is, provided this activism is aimed at implementing the avowed aim of science — enlightenment and emancipation. In sum, for the scientist engaged in peace research, activism is co-extensive with peace education.

In closing, I would like to make a solemn pledge to do everything in my power to further the objectives of Science for Peace, which, I believe, coincide with the objectives of science as a whole as well as with the hopes of humanity as a whole.

— Anatol Rapoport

84.16 New Board Members

We welcome to the Board of Science for Peace the following new members: Arthur Forer (biology, York); Allan Griffin (physics, Toronto); Tom Hutchison (environmental studies, Toronto); Raymond Kapral (chemistry, Toronto); Fred Knelman (philosophy, Concordia); Robert Laxer (OISE); Michael Lanphier (York); Barry Millman (physics, Guelph); M.V. Naidu (Brandon). The following members have been re-elected: Ed Barbeau, Donald Betts, E. Margaret Fulton, Terry Gardner, Brydon Gombay, John Hewitt, J.W. McGowan, Derek Paul, John Polanyi, J.D. Prentice, David Suzuki, Lynn Trainor. About half the board will be entering its second year of office.

84.17 The Research Director’s Report For 1983-84

This report is confined to projects such as will require funding from outside Science for Peace. Many smaller efforts are in progress or have already resulted in publication of articles in newspapers and magazines. Such efforts, valuable as they are in the struggle for peace, are mainly individual and often do not depend at all on research coordination. Our efforts therefore have been channelled in two directions:

  1. to obtain funding from an agency through a university administration,
  2. to obtain funding directly from an agency.

It has been expressed several times that for major projects involving the hiring of research and secretarial staff the route through university channels is to be preferred, mainly because the infrastructure for handling pay, deductions, etc., already exists. Science for Peace currently has no employees and would have to set up such procedures in the event of hiring researchers. A second advantage of applying for major grants through a university is that the fact of existing infrastructure increases the chance of funds being granted. Two proposals, essentially of Science for Peace, were submitted to the Ford Foundation in 1983, but neither was granted.

The first entitled “Towards International Security” was submitted by Profs. Christian Bay and Lynn Trainor through the University of Toronto.

The Second, “A Study on the Facility of an International Arms Monitoring Agency” was submitted by members of the B.C. Chapter, M. Wallace et al., through the University of British Columbia.

Both of these projects remain relevant and could be pursued further.

During the same period one proposal was submitted to the Donner Foundation for funding, directly by Science for Peace. The topic was the causes of war since 1945, with a view to new insights into conflict control. I regret to report that this study was also not funded. One of the reasons given was the lack of infrastructure provided by Science for Peace at the present time. We were able to counter that objection with evidence of available facilities locally and the generous offer of cooperation by the Conflict Studies centre in Fredericton, N.B. However the project remains unfunded.

On the more positive side, a project on the consequences of nuclear war for Canada has been initiated by Professor Tom Hutchinson of the Institute of Environmental Studies, with cooperation and encouragement by Science for Peace. A major element in this study will be the Nuclear Winter. People wishing to take part in this study should contact Professor Hutchinson at the Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Toronto.

In the past year I have kept in as close touch as practicable with the Division of Arms Control and Disarmament, Department of External Affairs, where there are now adequate funds for the support for research on verification. Current priorities of the Division are Chemical Warfare Treaty verification and Comprehensive (nuclear) Test Ban Treaty (CTB) verification. We have jointly explored several areas where Science for Peace could usefully undertake new work, and there is a possible study pending on chemical warfare. This matter should be revisited upon receipt of a general study of verification which is being completed at Queen’s University and is due in May 1984. A Chemical Warfare Treaty is perhaps the most likely Arms Control Treaty which could be finalized in the next two years, and since such a Treaty would open the door to further detente, particularly in Europe, I feel that we should cooperate with the Department of External Affairs in the latter’s considerable efforts in this direction.

Verification is of importance internationally towards a CTB Treaty. Here there are several verification technologies:

  1. for explosions in the atmosphere: satellite observations and fallout
  2. for underground explosions: seismic detection, and fallout if there is a leak from the site of the explosion.

The Department of Energy, Mines and Resources (EMR) is managing the Canadian programme of seismic verification both technically and in its linkage world-wide through ISDE (International Seismic Data Exchange). The Division of Arms Control and Disarmament will be supporting two further staff members in this field, in addition to the one recently hired at their expense. What is needed currently are highly specialized experts, and these are being hired as they become available. We should continue to monitor this work in case an opportunity to be of service should arise.

Radioactive air monitoring has been entirely ignored by the Canadian arms control community. The Swedish Government has, however, called for an international data exchange on atmospheric radioactivity and has pointed its desirability for CTB Treaty verification. In Sweden an inexpensive air monitoring system has been in place for many years and operates routinely under their environmental protection branch. Two Soviet underground nuclear explosions have been detected by their system over a period of years. I have personally undertaken to look into the possibility of having a study carried out for Canada in routine radioactive monitoring for verification purposes.

Other fields of research in which grants have been or shortly will be sought are:

  1. Accidental nuclear war (M. Wallace, U.B.C.)
  2. Applied games theory (A. Rapoport, U.of T.) Also funding could be required in the next 12 months by A.A. Harms who is chairing a new committee on nuclear non-proliferation.

I note that there is no planned research in the vital fields of naval arms limitations or outer space.

The Brief which Science for Peace submitted to the Parliamentary Committee on External Affairs and National Defence in 1982 on the Internal Satellite Monitoring Agency’(ISMA) is still resting. The position of the Government in 1982 was that the project would require U.S. cooperation. One purpose of ISMA was to lift the monopoly of satellite monitoring from the superpowers and place part of the responsibility into U.N. hands, which should have the effect of strengthening the U.N. A copy of the ISMA Brief was recently placed in the hands of Mr. Joe Clark’s commission of enquiry on arms control etc.

I conclude with some comments on the Canadian Centre for Arms Control and Disarmament, a new research centre which Science for Peace cannot afford to ignore. We need to cooperate with this institute, and I recommend my successor as research coordinator to keep in close touch with its director Dr. John Lamb and his research director Mr. Larry Hagen.

Another development which could signify an important step forward is the proposed new institute for peace and security (as yet unnamed), which was promised in the throne speech in December 1983. We have since that time consistently supported the concept of such a federally supported peace institute, and have stressed to Mr. Geoffrey Pearson (who has been collecting and sorting suggestions regarding the new institute for the Government) that such an institute could cooperate with and complement Dr. Lamb’s Centre. (The contrary claim is that the two would inevitably become competitive.) I have also presented a Brief to Mr. Joe Clark’s commission of enquiry for the Conservative Party, in which I sought the Conservative Party’s commitment to support the new institute. In my Brief I made it clear that there were many roles for the new institute which complemented the limited research roles of Dr. Lamb’s Centre.

— Derek Paul

84.18 Education Director’s Report For 1983-84

University College. has appointed a Professor of Peace Studies, Anatol Rapoport. He will offer a course in Decision Making Processes, engage in research, and help to coordinate other peace studies activities. Still, the endowment for the Chair of Peace Studies has yet to be found. Some new planning is under way for the funding effort. We expect to find funds more easily on account of Rapoport’s incumbency, as well as some of our other visible successes, including:

  • Our continuing, excellent series of University College Lectures in Peace Studies;
  • The series of Inter-university Workshops in Peace Education, of which the first was in November at York, the second will be in May at Brock, and the third will be — we hope — even farther from Toronto;
  • Planned publication of both the University College Lectures in Peace Studies and the Proceedings of the Inter-university Workshops in Peace Education;

Our new course in The School of Continuing Studies.

Finally, a remark on the Education Budget. It provides for 1984-85 fundraising:

1984-85 University College Lectures in Peace Studies $16,500
May 1984 Inter-University Workshop in Peace Education $ 1,000
1984-85 Science for Peace Seminars $ 4,000
(Sub)-Total $22,300

This will be supplemented by other undertakings nationally.

Terry Gardner

84.19 The Activities Of The New Brunswick Chapter

The following is taken from the report of the president, Professor Israel Unger, presented to the membership at the annual general meeting at the University of New Brunswick on March 22, 1984: “The New Brunswick Chapter of Science for Peace has been in existence for nearly a year. At this juncture it seems appropriate to review our activities.

“Our membership stands at about 50 and is truly province wide. There are Science for Peace members at the four universities in New Brunswick; we boast amongst the membership students, faculty, lay people, scientists, engineers, social scientists, lawyers, and others.

“In no particular order, our activities last year included:

  1. Sponsorship of a talk by Professor D. Bates of the McGill University Medical Faculty, on the consequences of nuclear war to Canada.
  2. Co-sponsorship of a talk by Admiral Falls on NATO’s nuclear policy.
  3. Acquisition of two slide shows on the medical and other consequences of nuclear war. These are available to any member on request to view and show to others.
  4. Acquisition and dissemination of information on the nuclear arms race.
  5. Talks to student groups at Mount Allison University, Saint Thomas, and UNB (Bridges House, MacKenzie House, and McLeod House, Young Liberals Association).
  6. Several radio interviews of Professor Allan Sharp and myself.
  7. A talk to the Unitarian Fellowship in Fredericton.
  8. Participation by Professor Margarida Krause and me in a panel discussion in Nackawic following the showing of the film ‘If you Love This Planet’.
  9. Several responses to Daily Gleaner editorials which called for more nuclear arms.
  10. An address by Professor Allan Sharp to a Peace Festival in Fredericton on Hiroshima Day.

“Currently, we have invited the Most Reverend T.J. Gumbleton, one of the United States Catholic Bishops who participated in the drafting of the Pastoral Letter in the’Challenge of Peace’, to address a public meeting next fall in Fredericton. I am particularly grateful to Dr. James Downey, Bishop Gilbert, Father Martin, Archbishop MacNeil and Professor K. Wiesner who have supported this invitation, and to Mr. A.R. Doyle and Professor W. Poole for assistance with other aspects of this item.

“Professor Bruce Cumming has suggested that we should request the television stations in New Brunswick to replay the NFB film ‘If you love this planet’. The Executive is looking into the possibility of having a chair of Peace Studies established at UNB. Suggestions for other activities are always welcome and can be made at any time orally or in writing.

“I wish to express my appreciation to the other members of the Executive, Professors D. Coombs, M. Krause, and G.P. Semeluk for their help, encouragement and wise counsel.”

84.20 The Activities Of The Montreal Chapter

This report was prepared by Professor F.H. Knelman, Professor and Director, Science and Human Affairs, at Concordia University: “Several activities have already been initiated. These are as follows:

  1. The development of a proposal for a core curriculum 30-credit minor ‘War and peace in the nuclear age’ (Concordia is introducing a General Education Centre and all Arts and Science students will have required G.E. courses and minor options.)
  2. A miniseries of 6 lectures on nuclear war and its technical, social, psychological, psychic, environmental and ecological implications (this has been absorbed in a course taught by Professor F.H. Knelman and is a precursor of the minor discussed in #1.)
  3. A commission to Dr. F.H. Knelman to write an overview on the ‘Star Wars’ developments by the McGill Institute for Air and Space Law.
  4. An initiative to organize a conference on Unintentional Nuclear War in order to define problems, research tasks and ultimately safeguards, technical and institutional. This application will be made to External Affairs through GAMMA, 6-non-profit research institute in Montreal. Among the principals are Herb Fluwelling, Professor F.H. Knelman and Professor Paris Arnopoulos. We may be integrating this project with a similar initiative by the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation in Santa Barbara, California.
  5. A research proposal to study the politics of peace and ecology in Europe has been submitted to several granting agencies by Professors Knelman and Arnopoulos.
  6. In response to a student referendum which would make Concordia a military-free zone (i.e., no military research or recruitment), a group of professors have signed a letter of support written by Professor F.H. Knelman.
  7. Recruitment attempts for Science and Peace beginning with the 14 professors

(out of 60 polled) who signed #6.”

84.21 The Activities Of The British Columbia Chapter

Professor Vera Webb, of the Microbiology Department at U.B.C. submits the following description of events and projects undertaken by the B.C. Chapter:

“The following is a brief description of events that have occurred and projects currently undertaken by the B.C. Chapter of Science for Peace.

  1. We were addressed by Ferenc Mezei of the Hungarian National Academy of Science on East-West Conflict: Personal Perceptions.
  2. We are sponsoring with Educators for Nuclear Disarmament weekly talks and films. We are currently showing the War Series produced by the National Film Board.
  3. In May we are holding a mini symposium on Nuclear Winter at U.B.C.
  4. On April 28th we will join with thousands of other B.C. residents in the annual Walk for Peace. We will also man an information booth at the Rally grounds after the Walk as we have done in previous years.
  5. Members of the B.C. Chapter executive submitted a brief for Joe Clark’s disarmament committee. (See 84.23).
  6. Members have been involved in a number of speaking engagements, these include appearances on local television programs and participation in peace seminars.
  7. At our February meeting Harold Kazinsky spoke to us on Chemical and Biological Warfare: History and Current Problems. The results of an election held were:
    • President George Spiegelman
    • Vice-Presidents: Luis Sobrino, Paul Le Blond
    • Treasurer Brian Turrell
    • Secretary Vera Webb
    • Rep. to EAR Jim Foulks
  8. Our current projects include the following:
    1. preparation of briefing papers on disarmament issues for all candidates in the next election.
    2. participation in the organization of a major symposium on disarmament in October which will be held in conjunction with the Physicians for Social Responsibility annual general meeting”. (See 84.22).

84.22 Proposed Agenda For October Symposium In B.C.

On the week-end of October 19-21, the B.C. Chapter of Science for Peace and Physicians for Social Responsibility are planning a major symposium on disarmament. Sessions are planned on the topics:

  1. consequences of nuclear war: the “nuclear winter”;
  2. current arsenals and the balance of power;
  3. Canadian policy on arms control/ new weapon technologies;
  4. psychological aspects of the arms race/ peaceful alternatives.

Among the speakers taking part will be Dr. R.P. Turco (Stanford University), Dean Michael Pentz (Open University, U.K.) and retired Rear-Admiral Eugene J. Carroll (Centre for Defense Information, Washington). Further information: Dr. Vera Webb, Department of Microbiology, University of British Columbia.