Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 101 references

Science for Peace and the need for Civil Clauses at universities and civilian research institutions

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that Civil Clauses—institutional commitments to purely civilian research—are under coordinated political pressure, and that defending them is essential to keeping science open, universal, and peaceful.

desk verdict A coherent and well-documented position paper arguing to preserve civil clauses; the policy claim rests on plausible but unproven causal premises, and the historical/documentary material is its real strength. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.22476 v1 pith:T723IIMM submitted 2025-05-28 physics.soc-ph hep-exhep-ph

J. Altmann , U. Amaldi , M. Barone , A. Bassalat , M. Bona , J. Beullens , H. Brand , S. Brentjes
show 22 more authors
D. Britzger J. Ellis S. Franchoo A. Giammanco A. Glazov C. Heck H. Jung S. Kraml L. Lönnblad M. Mangano M. Renneberg Th. Riebe A. Sabio-Vera R. Sanders J. Scheffran M. Schmelling T. Schucker T. Suzuki A. Tanasijczuk I. Tsakov D. Valls-Gabaud M. Walker
This is my paper
classification physics.soc-phhep-exhep-ph
keywords civilclausesdual-useresearchmilitaryscienceforpeaceopensanctionspolicyinternationalscientificcooperation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

After World War II, many universities and research centres adopted Civil Clauses: formal commitments to pursue only civilian and peaceful research. This paper argues that those commitments are now under coordinated pressure from EU and national policies that promote dual-use and military research, notably the EU White Paper and ReArm Europe plan, and from German policy documents and coalition agreements calling for civil-military cooperation. The authors contend that opening civilian institutions to military work would erode open access, deter international partners, turn laboratories into military targets, and ultimately damage science's ability to address climate change, poverty, and war. They also argue that science sanctions against Russian and Belarusian researchers are unprecedented and counterproductive, and that expelled scientists will be slow to return. The paper's positive claim is that preserving the civilian character of public research is a practical condition for universal, open, and peaceful science, not merely a symbolic gesture.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Civil Clause, a formal, often self-imposed commitment by a university or research institution to limit research and teaching to civilian and peaceful purposes. The paper treats the 1946 founding of the Technical University of Berlin, Japan's 1950 Science Council pledge, and the 1954 CERN Convention ('no concern with work for military requirements') as the templates. The mechanism doing the work is institutional: a Civil Clause creates a transparent, generalizable criterion for international collaboration, keeps results open, and gives scientists and students a collective basis to resist political pressure to take military funding. The paper argues that removing or weakening these clauses removes a barrier that has protected openness and trust for seventy years.

What would settle it

Compare institutions that have dropped or weakened Civil Clauses, such as Flanders after 2018, Bavaria after 2024, and Japan's Ministry of Defence funding scheme, with matched civilian-only institutions over five to ten years; if openness, foreign collaborations, and researcher retention do not measurably decline in the dual-use group, the paper's central causal claim would be undercut.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the strict separation between civilian and military research, embodied in Civil Clauses, is a load-bearing institution for science and peace. The paper documents the spread of these clauses since 1946, their current legal and political erosion in Germany, Belgium, Japan, Spain, and at the European Union level, and argues that the shift toward dual-use research would irreversibly change the character of laboratories such as DESY and CERN. It holds that international, open, civilian research builds trust between nations, that sanctions against scientists from Russia and Belarus break that trust, and that allowing military research into civilian facilities would restrict access, endanger staff and infrastructure, and drive away the researchers who chose fundamental science precisely because it is non-military. The authors do not claim that the civil-military boundary is always clean, but they maintain that it is worth defending and that the burden of proof lies on those who would blur it.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that purely civilian, open, international scientific cooperation itself builds trust between nations, and that admitting military research into a civilian laboratory would actually restrict openness, deter partners, and endanger staff; the paper argues this by plausibility and historical analogy rather than direct evidence.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If Civil Clauses are abandoned or weakened, public research institutions will face pressure to accept military and dual-use funding, shifting resources away from civilian research on climate, health, and poverty.
  • Open access and international collaboration will shrink, because military and dual-use projects require secrecy, export controls, and restricted participation.
  • Laboratories that host military research become attractive cyber and physical targets in conflicts, endangering staff and nearby civilian populations.
  • Science sanctions against Russian and Belarusian researchers will deepen mistrust and make it harder to rebuild cooperation after the war, and may push affected scientists toward military work.
  • The universality and credibility of science will be damaged if science is seen as a geopolitical tool rather than a shared human enterprise.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A testable extension would track institutions that removed or weakened Civil Clauses, such as Flanders after 2018, Bavaria after 2024, and Japan with Ministry of Defence funding, against matched civilian-only institutions to measure changes in open-access output, foreign collaboration, and researcher retention.
  • The paper's trust-building claim implies an empirical prediction: if scientific contact between researchers from rival states increases, cooperation and reduced hostility should follow, a pattern that could be studied with bibliometric data from Cold War and post-Cold War collaborations.
  • Even if the immediate threat is limited to a few laboratories, the cited policy documents create a norm shift that may be hard to reverse, so the relevant comparison is long-run rather than today's funding flows.
  • The paper's framing suggests an alternative policy path: instead of opening civilian laboratories, governments could fund dedicated defense research institutes with clear security arrangements, preserving the civilian character of universities.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper, authored by members of the Science4Peace Forum, argues for preserving Civil Clauses—commitments by universities and research institutions to pursue only peaceful, civilian research—in the face of recent European and German policy initiatives that promote dual-use and military research. It reviews the historical origins of Civil Clauses in postwar Germany and Japan, surveys the current status of civilian-military research separation across several countries, discusses the risks of opening institutions such as DESY to military research, and criticizes sanctions against Russian and Belarusian scientists. The paper concludes that relaxing Civil Clauses is a major threat to universal, peaceful, and international research.

Significance. As a documented position statement, the paper usefully assembles primary policy documents (EU White Paper, ReArm Europe Plan, German coalition agreements, institutional charters) and historical material on Civil Clauses, and it explicitly acknowledges nuance, including acceptable cooperation for arms control and the existence of fenced separations at CERN partner institutes. Its main weakness is that the central empirical claims—that military involvement necessarily restricts openness, deters partners, and endangers staff, and that purely civilian international science builds peace—are asserted from plausibility rather than demonstrated with comparative evidence. The paper provides no machine-checked proofs or new quantitative data; its value is as a policy-oriented synthesis and normative argument. If the causal premises are accepted, the policy recommendations are coherent; if not, the recommendations lack evidentiary support.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sections 4.3 and 5.1] The load-bearing causal premise is unsupported. Section 4.3 asserts 'Those who talk with each other are less likely to shoot at each other,' and Section 5.1 claims that introducing military research 'would necessarily' restrict open access, deter international partners, increase cyber threats, and make DESY a military target. No comparative evidence is provided for these mechanisms. The authors should either supply empirical evidence—for example, by examining institutions that relaxed similar restrictions, such as Flanders after 2018, Japan's ATLA-funded university research, or Sweden's Campus Total Defense collaboration—or explicitly reframe the argument as a value-based position that does not depend on contested causal claims. As written, Section 7's conclusion that this is 'a major threat to universal, peaceful and international research' rests on assertion rather than evidence.
  2. [Section 3] The factual claim that 'Now is the first occasion that sanctions are imposed against scientists in national and international institutions without the mandate of the UN Security Council' is stated without citation and is contestable. The paper later notes the 1993 CERN case under a UN mandate, but the unqualified 'first occasion' claim needs a precise definition of scope (which institutions, which sanctions, which historical period) and supporting evidence, or it should be softened to 'to our knowledge.' Because this claim anchors the sanctions critique, its accuracy is important.
  3. [Sections 5.1 and 5.2] There is an internal tension between the claim that military research necessarily harms civilian institutions and the acknowledgment in Section 5.2 that CERN collaborates with institutes that fence off military research. If a fence is sufficient to preserve the civilian character of collaboration, then the harms described in Section 5.1 (restricted access, security risks, partner deterrence) are not inevitable consequences of co-location but depend on specific organizational arrangements. The authors should reconcile these positions and specify the conditions under which military co-location would actually produce the predicted harms.
  4. [Section 5.4 and references [16], [17]] The paper cites its own earlier position papers (refs. [16] and [17]) as support for central arguments, and Section 5.4 reproduces a FONAS statement co-authored by two of the present authors. This self-referential material should be explicitly identified as position statements rather than independent evidence, and the authors should supplement it with external sources where available. The circularity is not fatal because the argument also relies on external documents, but it should be disclosed for the reader.
minor comments (5)
  1. [General] There are numerous typographical errors, including 'Civilan' in the Section 5.3 title, 'Commision' in references [1] and [4], 'Nucelar' in reference [18], 'CERN?s' in Section 5.2, and an unclosed parenthesis in Section 5.1 after '[76]'. A careful proofreading pass is needed.
  2. [Sections 2 and 4.3] The opening speech by Major-General Nares is dated 1949 in Section 2 but appears to be associated with the 1946 reopening in Section 4.3. Please verify the date and make the narrative consistent.
  3. [Section 6.2] The first bullet in the call to action has a subject-verb agreement error: 'using scientific results obtained in public universities and research institutions are used' should be 'that scientific results obtained in public universities and research institutions are used.'
  4. [Section 4.6] The country survey is necessarily selective, but the criteria for inclusion are not stated. For example, Palestine is represented by a single mention of 'research topic priorities' without a reference, while other countries receive detailed discussion. Please indicate the basis of selection or mark the section as illustrative rather than systematic.
  5. [References] Many references lack access dates, document numbers, or stable identifiers (e.g., refs. [5], [79], [81], [82]). For a paper intended to document policy developments, full bibliographic details would strengthen verifiability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: central claims rest on external policy documents and historical charters; self-citations are present but not load-bearing.

full rationale

This is an advocacy and policy-review paper, not a mathematical or empirical derivation, so there is no equation-level reduction to inspect. The central claims—that Civil Clauses protect open, peaceful research and that opening civilian institutions to military or dual-use research is a threat—are anchored in external public documents: the EU White Paper [1], the ReArm Europe Plan [4], the BMBF Position Paper [2], the CERN Convention [7], the DESY mission statement [8], institutional charters, and historical records. The causal premises in Sections 4.3 and 5.1 (e.g., that open dialogue reduces conflict or that military research would restrict access) are argued by plausibility and anecdote rather than derived from the paper's own inputs; weak empirical support is a correctness risk, not circularity. The only self-referential elements are citations to the Science4Peace Forum's own earlier position papers [16,17] and the reproduction of a FONAS statement in Section 5.4 authored by two of the present paper's co-authors. These are used as supporting statements, not as premises that force the conclusions; even Section 5.2 acknowledges that CERN collaborates with institutes having internal fences separating military researchers, complicating any claim that contamination is inevitable. No fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction, no result is defined into existence, and no uniqueness theorem from the authors is invoked. The score of 2 reflects the minor self-referential citations, not load-bearing circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The free-parameter and invented-entity categories do not apply to this paper, which contains no fitted numbers and postulates no new entities. The axioms listed are the load-bearing empirical and normative premises on which the policy argument depends. The central claim of the paper is a value judgment, so this ledger captures the supporting assumptions rather than a derivation.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Sanctions and restrictions in science are counter-productive and lead only to further separation and confrontation, rather than helping to resolve international conflicts.
    Stated in the Introduction and argued in Section 3; it underpins the critique of CERN and DESY sanctions on Russian and Belarusian scientists. No comparative evidence is supplied.
  • domain assumption Open scientific exchange between nations reduces the likelihood of conflict, expressed as 'Those who talk with each other are less likely to shoot at each other'.
    Section 4.3. This is the causal mechanism connecting civilian-only research to peace; it is asserted rhetorically rather than demonstrated.
  • domain assumption Introducing military research into a civilian facility would restrict open access, deter international partners, and make the facility a military target, damaging long-term sustainability.
    Section 5.1. Argued by plausibility (cyber threats, the location of DESY in Hamburg, loss of Russian co-funding for the European XFEL) rather than established evidence; this premise carries much of the paper's policy weight.
  • ad hoc to paper Scientists and science institutions bear responsibility for the applications of research results, and public research should serve only peaceful ends.
    Section 6.2. This is the normative premise the paper defends; it is presented as a call to action, not derived from evidence.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Science for Peace and the need for Civil Clauses at universities and civilian research institutions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/T723IIMM

@misc{pith2026250522476,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Science for Peace and the need for Civil Clauses at universities and civilian research institutions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/T723IIMM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.22476}
}
read the original abstract

After the end of World War II, the commitment to confine scientific activities in universities and research institutions to peaceful and civilian purposes has entered, in the form of {\it Civil Clauses}, the charters of many research institutions and universities. In the wake of recent world events, the relevance and scope of such Civil Clauses has been questioned in reports issued by some governments and by the EU Commission, a development that opens the door to a possible blurring of the distinction between peaceful and military research. This paper documents the reflections stimulated by a panel discussion on this issue recently organized by the Science4Peace Forum. We review the adoptions of Civil Clauses in research organizations and institutions in various countries, present evidence of the challenges that are emerging to such Civil Clauses, and collect arguments in favour of maintaining the purely civilian and peaceful focus of public (non-military) research.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

101 extracted references · 80 canonical work pages

  1. [16]

    Beyond a Year of Sanctions in Science

    M. Albrecht et al., “Beyond a Year of Sanctions in Science”, 2023. arXiv:2311.02141

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  2. [17]

    A Science4Peace initiative: Alleviating the consequences of sanctions in international scientific cooperation

    A. Ali et al., “A Science4Peace initiative: Alleviating the consequences of sanctions in international scientific cooperation”,arXiv:2403.07833

    work page Pith review arXiv

  3. [1]

    On options for enhancing support for research and development involving technologies with dual-use potential

    EU Commision, “On options for enhancing support for research and development involving technologies with dual-use potential”, Jan, 2024

    2024

  4. [2]

    Positionspapier des Bundesministeriums für Bildung und Forschung zur Forschungssicherheit im Lichte der Zeitenwende

    BMBF, “Positionspapier des Bundesministeriums für Bildung und Forschung zur Forschungssicherheit im Lichte der Zeitenwende”, 2024

    2024

  5. [3]

    Gutachten zu Forschung, Innovation und Technologischer Leistungsfaehigkeit Deutschlands 2024

    Expertenkommission Forschung und Innovation, “Gutachten zu Forschung, Innovation und Technologischer Leistungsfaehigkeit Deutschlands 2024”, 2024

    2024

  6. [4]

    White Paper for European Defence and the ReArm Europe Plan/Readiness 2030

    EU Commision and High Representative, “White Paper for European Defence and the ReArm Europe Plan/Readiness 2030”

  7. [5]

    Speech delivered by the General Officer Commanding British Troops Berlin on the Occasion of the Opening of the Technical University Berlin – Charlottenburg

    E. P . Nares, “Speech delivered by the General Officer Commanding British Troops Berlin on the Occasion of the Opening of the Technical University Berlin – Charlottenburg”,

  8. [6]

    Statement on Research for Military Security

    Science Council of Japan, “Statement on Research for Military Security”, 2017

    2017

Show all 101 references
  1. [7]

    Convention for the establishment of a European organization for nuclear research

    CERN, “Convention for the establishment of a European organization for nuclear research”. CERN document server, 1953

    1953

  2. [8]

    Mission and guiding principles of DESY

    DESY, “Mission and guiding principles of DESY”, 2013

    2013

  3. [9]

    No to warmongering! Science for peace! Yes to civil clauses!

    Closing statement of the nationwide Civil Clause Congress, “No to warmongering! Science for peace! Yes to civil clauses!”, 2024

    2024

  4. [10]

    Stellungnahme der Hochschulrektorenkonferenz (HRK) zum Weißbuch „Technologien mit doppeltem Verwendungszweck – Optionen für die Unterstützung“ der Europäischen Kommission

    “Stellungnahme der Hochschulrektorenkonferenz (HRK) zum Weißbuch „Technologien mit doppeltem Verwendungszweck – Optionen für die Unterstützung“ der Europäischen Kommission”, 2024

    2024

  5. [11]

    Militärforschung am DESY? Mitarbeiter in Sorge

    N. Gessner, “Militärforschung am DESY? Mitarbeiter in Sorge”. Hamburger Morgenpost (MoPo), 06, 2024

    2024

  6. [12]

    Opening civil research facilities to military projects is NOT IN OUR NAME !

    Science4Peace@DESY, “Opening civil research facilities to military projects is NOT IN OUR NAME !”, August, 2024. 25

    2024

  7. [13]

    Zeitenwende in der Wissenschaft - Krieg und Forschung

    M. Hasse and M. Schlak, “Zeitenwende in der Wissenschaft - Krieg und Forschung”. Der Spiegel, Jan, 2025

    2025

  8. [14]

    Will Europe ramp up defence research? War prompts major rethink

    E. Gibney, “Will Europe ramp up defence research? War prompts major rethink”, Jan, 2025

    2025

  9. [15]

    Measures taken by DESY in response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine

    DESY directorate, “Measures taken by DESY in response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine”, 4. Aug, 2022

    2022

  10. [18]

    Joint Institute of Nucelar Research

    “Joint Institute of Nucelar Research”

  11. [19]

    CERN and the UN Embargo against Serbia and Montenegro

    CERN, “CERN and the UN Embargo against Serbia and Montenegro”, 1993

    1993

  12. [20]

    CERN expels four Serbs to meet UN sanctions

    A. Abbott, “CERN expels four Serbs to meet UN sanctions”. Nature, 1993

    1993

  13. [21]

    Security, Resilience and Sustainability (acatech IMPULSE)

    J.-D. Wörner and C. Schmidt, “Security, Resilience and Sustainability (acatech IMPULSE)”, 2022

    2022

  14. [22]

    Scientific Freedom and Security Interests in Times of Geopolitical Polarisation: Fifth Report of the Joint Committee of DFG and Leopoldina on November 1, 2024

    German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina and Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, “Scientific Freedom and Security Interests in Times of Geopolitical Polarisation: Fifth Report of the Joint Committee of DFG and Leopoldina on November 1, 2024”, Nov, 2024

    2024

  15. [23]

    Chinese AI start-ups overhaul business models after DeepSeek’s success

    E. Olcott, R. McMorrow, and Z. Wu, “Chinese AI start-ups overhaul business models after DeepSeek’s success”. Financial Times, March, 2025

    2025

  16. [24]

    Hochschulen für den Frieden – Ja zur Zivilklausel

    Initiative "Hochschulen für den Frieden – Ja zur Zivilklausel", “Bestehende Zivilklauseln”, 2024

    2024

  17. [25]

    Zivilklauseln für Forschung, Lehre und Studium (Civil Clauses for Research, Education and Study – Universities Obligated Toward Peace)

    Nielebock, Thomas and Meisch, Simon and Harms, Volker, “Zivilklauseln für Forschung, Lehre und Studium (Civil Clauses for Research, Education and Study – Universities Obligated Toward Peace)”. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, 2012

    2012

  18. [26]

    Science, Technology, and National Socialism

    M. Renneberg and M. Walker, “Science, Technology, and National Socialism”. Cambridge University Press, 1994

    1994

  19. [27]

    The Kaiser Wilhelm Society under National Socialism

    S. Heim, C. Sachse, and M. Walker, “The Kaiser Wilhelm Society under National Socialism”. Cambridge University Press, 2009

    2009

  20. [28]

    Hitler’s Atomic Bomb: History, Legend, and the Twin Legacies of Auschwitz and Hiroshima

    M. Walker, “Hitler’s Atomic Bomb: History, Legend, and the Twin Legacies of Auschwitz and Hiroshima”. Cambridge University Press, 2024. 26

    2024

  21. [29]

    National Security Technology Research Promotion

    Acquisition, Technology & Logistics, “National Security Technology Research Promotion”

  22. [30]

    Report on Military Security Research April 13, 2017

    Japan Academic Conference Security and Academic Study Committee, “Report on Military Security Research April 13, 2017”

    2017

  23. [31]

    Raumordnung im Nationalsozialismus : Der

    I. Heinemann, “Raumordnung im Nationalsozialismus : Der "Generalplan Ost"”. Nachrichten der ARL 1, 25, 2021

    2021

  24. [33]

    Geschichte der Technischen Universität Berlin

    “Geschichte der Technischen Universität Berlin”

  25. [34]

    The Rocket and the Reich. Peenemünde and the Coming of the Ballistic Missile Era

    M. J. Neufeld, “The Rocket and the Reich. Peenemünde and the Coming of the Ballistic Missile Era”, 1995

    1995

  26. [35]

    Zivilklausel der TU Berlin

    “Zivilklausel der TU Berlin”

  27. [36]

    Universal Declaration of Human Rights

    “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”

  28. [37]

    Constitution of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

    “Constitution of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization”

  29. [38]

    Sollten deutsche Hochschulen zu militärischen Zwecken forschen dürfen?

    Jan Wörner, Geraldine Rauch, “Sollten deutsche Hochschulen zu militärischen Zwecken forschen dürfen?”, Oct, 2022

    2022

  30. [39]

    Zivilklausel@KHM - Kunst- und Medienbildung für den Frieden

    C. Heck, “Zivilklausel@KHM - Kunst- und Medienbildung für den Frieden”, May, 2025

    2025

  31. [40]

    Grundordnung mit Zivilklausel-Beschluss des Senats der Kunsthochschule

    Kunsthochschule für Medien Köln (KHM), “Grundordnung mit Zivilklausel-Beschluss des Senats der Kunsthochschule”, Dec, 2024

    2024

  32. [41]

    Verantwortung fur Deutschland

    CDU, CSU, SPD, “Verantwortung fur Deutschland”, April, 2025

    2025

  33. [42]

    Joint Committee on the Handling of Security-Relevant Research - Progress report

    German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina and Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, “Joint Committee on the Handling of Security-Relevant Research - Progress report”, Oct, 2018

    2018

  34. [43]

    Fourth Progress Report (German Research Foundation & National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina, Eds.). Joint Committee on the Handling of Security-Relevant Research

    German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina and Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, “Fourth Progress Report (German Research Foundation & National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina, Eds.). Joint Committee on the Handling of Security-Relevant Research.”, 2022

    2022

  35. [44]

    Scientific Freedom and Scientific Responsibility – Recommendations for Handling of Security-Relevant Research

    German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina and Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, “Scientific Freedom and Scientific Responsibility – Recommendations for Handling of Security-Relevant Research”, 2022. 27

    2022

  36. [45]

    Ethics charter

    University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, “Ethics charter”, March, 2015

    2015

  37. [46]

    Commision for cooperation with the Austrian Ministry of Defence

    Austrian Academy of Sciences, “Commision for cooperation with the Austrian Ministry of Defence”

  38. [47]

    Wissenschaft – Forschung – Landesverteidigung - Zehn Jahre Kooperation zwischen ÖAW und BMLV

    E. Apfelknab, “Wissenschaft – Forschung – Landesverteidigung - Zehn Jahre Kooperation zwischen ÖAW und BMLV”. Der Soldat Nr 12, June, 2004

    2004

  39. [48]

    New guideline for support for research with possible military affinity

    Department of Economy, Science & Innovation, Flanders, “New guideline for support for research with possible military affinity”

  40. [49]

    Muyters eases support for military research

    “Muyters eases support for military research”. DeTijd, 2018

    2018

  41. [50]

    More flexible rules for state aid military research:

    “More flexible rules for state aid military research: "Military research also often has civil application"”, July, 2018

    2018

  42. [51]

    Universities need to work more with defense: how do universities look at this?

    “Universities need to work more with defense: how do universities look at this?”. VRT - Radio

  43. [52]

    Belgian Ministry of Defence to invest 1.8 billion Euro in R&D

    “Belgian Ministry of Defence to invest 1.8 billion Euro in R&D”. The Brussels Times, June, 2022

    2022

  44. [53]

    Flemish universities to limit cooperation with Israeli partners

    “Flemish universities to limit cooperation with Israeli partners”. The Brussels Times, Jan, 2025

    2025

  45. [54]

    Application of the human rights test by Flemish universities

    “Application of the human rights test by Flemish universities”. Flemish Interuniversity Council (VLIR)

  46. [55]

    Universities call for suspension of EU-Israel association agreement

    “Universities call for suspension of EU-Israel association agreement”. Belga News Agency, May, 2025

    2025

  47. [56]

    UCLouvain Charter for Responsible Partnerships

    “UCLouvain Charter for Responsible Partnerships”, Dec, 2024

    2024

  48. [57]

    University and Military

    S. Franchoo, “University and Military”. private communciation

  49. [58]

    Code de la recherche

    R. Francaise, “Code de la recherche”. LegiFrance, Jan, 2024

    2024

  50. [59]

    Doctorate Oath in France

    “Doctorate Oath in France”, 2022

    2022

  51. [60]

    Fraunhofer-Leistungsbereich Verteidigung, Vorbeugung und Sicherheit VVS

    “Fraunhofer-Leistungsbereich Verteidigung, Vorbeugung und Sicherheit VVS”, 2025

    2025

  52. [61]

    Gesellschaftsvertrag der GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung GmbH Darmstadt

    “Gesellschaftsvertrag der GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung GmbH Darmstadt”, April, 2013

    2013

  53. [62]

    Zivilklausel Karlsruher Institut für Technologie

    “Zivilklausel Karlsruher Institut für Technologie”, 2009

    2009

  54. [63]

    Gesetz zur Förderung der Bundeswehr in Bayern

    Landtag des Freistaates Bayern, “Gesetz zur Förderung der Bundeswehr in Bayern”, July, 2024. 28

    2024

  55. [65]

    For the 1st Time at an Israeli University: Air and Space Power Center

    Tel Aviv University, “For the 1st Time at an Israeli University: Air and Space Power Center”, Jan, 2022

    2022

  56. [66]

    IAAC - Supporting Companies

    Israeli Association for Automatic Control, “IAAC - Supporting Companies”

  57. [67]

    University and Military

    M. Barone, “University and Military”. private communciation, 2025

    2025

  58. [68]

    About Campus Total Defense

    Campus Totalförsvar, “About Campus Total Defense”, March, 2025

    2025

  59. [69]

    New Centre for Preparedness and Resilience to be established

    Internal Faculty of Social Sciences Lund University, “New Centre for Preparedness and Resilience to be established”, Feb, 2025

    2025

  60. [70]

    Our researchers contribute to a safer society

    Swedish Defense University, “Our researchers contribute to a safer society”, 2025

    2025

  61. [71]

    Research and development in the Defence Committee’s area of responsibility

    Swedish Parliament, “Research and development in the Defence Committee’s area of responsibility”. Report from Parliament 2007/08:R28, 2008

    2007

  62. [72]

    UKRI - UK Research and Innovation

    “UKRI - UK Research and Innovation”. Accessed: 2025-05-27

    2025

  63. [73]

    Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC)

    “Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC)”. Accessed: 2025-05-27

    2025

  64. [74]

    Ko Energy-kasokuki Kenkyukiko (KEK) - High Energy Accelerator Research Organization

    “Ko Energy-kasokuki Kenkyukiko (KEK) - High Energy Accelerator Research Organization”

  65. [75]

    Photon Science at DESY

    “Photon Science at DESY”

  66. [76]

    Kurchatov Institute becomes shareholder of European XFEL

    “Kurchatov Institute becomes shareholder of European XFEL”, 2016

    2016

  67. [77]

    Memorandum of Understanding for the Terrestrial Very Long Baseline Atom Interferometer Study

    “Memorandum of Understanding for the Terrestrial Very Long Baseline Atom Interferometer Study”. Accessed: 2024-11-11

    2024

  68. [78]

    Memorandum of Understanding for the Future Circular Collider (FCC) Feasibility Study hosted by CERN

    “Memorandum of Understanding for the Future Circular Collider (FCC) Feasibility Study hosted by CERN”. Accessed: 2024-11-11

    2024

  69. [79]

    Collaboration agreement between the Air Force and the CSIC within the framework of the BACS project

    “Collaboration agreement between the Air Force and the CSIC within the framework of the BACS project”

  70. [80]

    Agreement with the University of Salamanca for research in sustainability and energy efficiency

    ISDEFE-Defence and Security, “Agreement with the University of Salamanca for research in sustainability and energy efficiency.”, June, 2023

    2023

  71. [81]

    Spanish investigations with European funding end up in Israeli weapons companies

    S. D. Moreno, “Spanish investigations with European funding end up in Israeli weapons companies”. elDiario.es, May, 2024

    2024

  72. [82]

    The University of Oviedo will maintain the military research project in which Israel participates

    “The University of Oviedo will maintain the military research project in which Israel participates.”, July, 2024. 29

    2024

  73. [83]

    European Defence Fund, Defence Research and Development. The EDF Work Programme 2025

    European Commission, “European Defence Fund, Defence Research and Development. The EDF Work Programme 2025”, 2025

    2025

  74. [84]

    Horizon Europe Programme Guide - Horizon 2020

    European Commission, “Horizon Europe Programme Guide - Horizon 2020”, 2014

    2020

  75. [85]

    European Union, “Regulation (EU) 2021/821 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2021 setting up a Union regime for the control of exports, brokering, technical assistance, transit and transfer of dual-use items”, 2021

    2021

  76. [86]

    Dual-use products and technologies: export

    Ministry of Economy, Trade and Enterprise, Spain, “Dual-use products and technologies: export”, 2019

    2019

  77. [87]

    FONAS statement against undermining the separation of civilian and military research

    “FONAS statement against undermining the separation of civilian and military research”, 2025

    2025

  78. [88]

    Naturwissenschaft - Rüstung - Frieden

    J. Altmannet al., “Naturwissenschaft - Rüstung - Frieden”. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, 2017

    2017

  79. [89]

    Civil-Military Interactions, Dual-Use and Preventive Arms Control in Science and Technology

    J. Scheffran, “Civil-Military Interactions, Dual-Use and Preventive Arms Control in Science and Technology”. In: Science Peace Security, eds. Ch. Reuter, J. Altmann, M. Göttsche, M. Himmel, 2019

    2019

  80. [90]

    Militarisierung oder Zivilisierung? Ambivalenz der Wissenschaft in der Krise

    J. Scheffran, “Militarisierung oder Zivilisierung? Ambivalenz der Wissenschaft in der Krise”. Wissenschaft und Frieden (W& F), 2018

    2018

  81. [91]

    Die Janusköpfigkeit von Forschung und Technik. Zum Problem der zivil-militärischen Ambivalenz

    W. Liebert, R. Rilling, and J. Scheffran, “Die Janusköpfigkeit von Forschung und Technik. Zum Problem der zivil-militärischen Ambivalenz”, 1994

    1994

  82. [92]

    Die Janusköpfigkeit von Forschung und Technik - Zum Problem der zivil-militärischen Ambivalenz

    IANUS, “Die Janusköpfigkeit von Forschung und Technik - Zum Problem der zivil-militärischen Ambivalenz”. Wissenschaft & Frieden, 1993

    1993

  83. [93]

    Controlling the Development and Spread of Military Technology

    H. G. Brauch et al., “Controlling the Development and Spread of Military Technology”. Amsterdam. VU University Press, 1992

    1992

  84. [94]

    The revolution in military affairs: Its driving forces, elements, and complexity

    Neuneck, Götz, “The revolution in military affairs: Its driving forces, elements, and complexity”. In: Complexity 14 (2008) 50

    2008

  85. [95]

    Information Technology for Peace and Security: IT Applications and Infrastructures in Conflicts, Crises, War, and Peace

    C. Reuter, “Information Technology for Peace and Security: IT Applications and Infrastructures in Conflicts, Crises, War, and Peace”. Technology, Peace and Security I Technologie, Frieden und Sicherheit - Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, 2024

    2024

  86. [96]

    Outsourcing War to Machines: The Military Robotics Revolution

    P . J. Springer, “Outsourcing War to Machines: The Military Robotics Revolution”. Praeger Security International, 2018

    2018

  87. [97]

    Wissenschaft für und gegen Aufrüstung: Zwischen geopolitischen Konflikten und internationaler Kooperation

    J. Scheffran, “Wissenschaft für und gegen Aufrüstung: Zwischen geopolitischen Konflikten und internationaler Kooperation”. In: Umkämpfte Wissenschaftsfreiheit, vol 14, 45 BdWi-Studienheft, 2024. 30

    2024

  88. [98]

    Boris Pistorius: Wir müssen bis 2029 kriegstüchtig sein

    B. Pistorius, “Boris Pistorius: Wir müssen bis 2029 kriegstüchtig sein”, 2024

    2024

  89. [99]

    Kollidiert die Forschungsministerin mit der Wissenschaftsfreiheit?

    K. Müller-Lancé, “Kollidiert die Forschungsministerin mit der Wissenschaftsfreiheit?”. Süddeutsche Zeitung, June, 2024

    2024

  90. [100]

    Zivilklauseln - Lernen und Forschen für den Frieden

    R. Braunet al., “Zivilklauseln - Lernen und Forschen für den Frieden”. Wissenschaft und Frieden (W&F) Dossier No. 78., 2015

    2015

  91. [101]

    Preventive Arms Control as a Prerequisite for Conversion of Military-Related R&D

    J. Altmann, W. Liebert, G. Neuneck, and J. Scheffran, “Preventive Arms Control as a Prerequisite for Conversion of Military-Related R&D”. In: Conversion of Military R & D, p. 255, 1998

    1998

  92. [102]

    The Russell-Einstein Manifesto

    “The Russell-Einstein Manifesto”, July, 1955

    1955

  93. [103]

    Manifesto of the Göttinger 18

    F. Boppet al., “Manifesto of the Göttinger 18”. Webpage of Göttingen University, April, 1957. 31

    1957

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.