2000 budget could finally kill Ukrainian science

There are various forms of research organization in the Western world. For example, the US has gigantic laboratories pooling advanced scientific, including fundamental, research. In Germany, research is mainly concentrated in the networks of the Max Planck and Fraunhofer Institutes. And those who unleashed the Ukrainian campaign to reform research were only too well aware of this. But they seem to have had the goal to ruin, fragment, and tame the research collectives, rather than try to reform research. Nobody seemed to be worried that this reform could make us unable to solve the truly important problems this country faces. Today, fundamental science research is very costly, and only very rich countries or consortia of countries are able to gain any new results in the fundamental sciences. This can be exemplified by the US putting in orbit a new $1.5 billion Chandra telescope or the launching of a new international space station worth $100 billion. Our paltry Fund for Fundamental Research is simply incapable of supporting basic research. It cannot even make independent decisions because it is subordinated to the State Committee on Science and Intellectual Property. It is high time we transformed the fund into a self-sufficient organization run by a board appointed by the President of Ukraine as in the outside world.

Recently there have been frequent reports in the press that Ukraine has too many researchers 1000 more than France has per million people. But these are deceptive figures. Fortunately, UNESCO keeps this kind of statistics. We must orient ourselves toward such countries as France, Britain, and Germany, which have a scientific and technological potential comparable to ours. They have 70 scientists per 10,000 of population (107 in the US), while we now have 26 and are going to have even fewer tomorrow. Research in Ukraine should be developed, not reduced.

Another way of destroying Ukrainian research — economically — has proven even more effective. In our eight years of independence, the funds allocated for research have in fact dropped from 3.5% to 0.15% of GDP against the backdrop of a drastic fall in GDP itself. Simultaneously, it is common knowledge that appropriating less than 1% of GDP leads to collapse in research. All the warnings of scientists accomplished nothing. Meanwhile, the US President decided to show America’s path to the twenty-first century by starting to conduct science lectures right in the White House on the eve of a new millennium. It is noteworthy that the first lecture was delivered by renowned British physicist, Professor Stephen Hawking, the brain of science both in the literal and figurative senses of the word. Prof. Hawking deals with such a fundamental science as the problem of time. This brilliant scientist holds a Newton Chair and leads quite active life: he writes books, delivers lectures, and travels all over the world. Meanwhile, he is very ill, and what still remains active in him is his brain and unbending willpower, for he even speaks through a special speech synthesizer. He demonstrates to the whole world the willpower of a strong personality and the quest of man for new knowledge. The Clinton example is a typical illustration of how the US political elite understands the role of science.

But we approach the twenty-first century with a different “achievement,” after which perhaps it will be no utterly senseless to speak of science in Ukraine. When Verkhovna Rada passed the law On Scientific Research, Ukraine’s academics heaved a sigh of relief. This law provides that 1% of GDP be earmarked for research in 1999. But the ink had hardly dried on the signatures under this law, when the Cabinet of Ministers put forward a draft budget whereby this figure was reduced to 0.41%, down from 0.54% last year. And our lawmakers approved without a murmur precisely this version of the budget. Why, then, did they pass the Law on Scientific Research, by a constitutional majority at that, only to immediately violate it? Moreover, Mr. Pustovoitenko, answering the legitimate concerns of People’s Deputies about the law on research being violated, came out with what seems to me a self- destructive phrase: not all laws can be fulfilled. In that case, what moral right does a government espousing such views have to demand that citizens obey the law?

In retrospect, we can now firmly say that the Cabinet’s proposed 0.41% was nothing but an attempt to suppress the vigilance of scientists and all those who understand the role and importance of science. It happened precisely this way: very soon the budget was sequestered, de facto reducing this figure to 0.15%, when we take inflation and the hryvnia devaluation into account.

What was cut most was scientific research — by 23% — with overall cuts in budget expenditures being 10%. Those who did so were aware that research institutions were unable to pay for heat consumed in 1998-1999, so there will be no heat this winter. These institutions will have to stop working for four months. The period is going to see arbitration court proceedings, probable bankruptcies of research institutions, and the disintegration of research teams. In fact, this is already happening. In the spring, researchers will be busy cleaning-up their stables: does this mean Ukrainian science will cease to exist on the eve of a new millennium?

Speaking on the occasion of the eightieth anniversary of the National Academy of Sciences, our President said no independent and powerful state is feasible without science. These words drew the applause of the 3500 people sitting in Ukrayina Palace. But only a little time later it became clear that just the opposite is going on in this country. Appropriations for research have been reduced so much that even libraries are not being updated, research materials are not purchased, and the material basis of research is not being modernized. Our northern neighbor, Russia, found it possible to take out a DM 100 million loan from Germany in order to buy up-to-date research equipment, while our government does not even think of this and, instead, cynically suggests that heating arrears be paid off at the expense of research associates’ salaries, already reduced to 60% of the fixed rate. The Cabinet of Ministers did allow institutions to pay additional degree-related sums to researchers, provided back salaries had been paid. But it is common knowledge that the latter will never be paid under current conditions. All this makes research work lose prestige. Young people are unwilling to take up research, while those young scientists who have already opted for research leave this country after being awarded their degrees never to return. Scientists and Verkhovna Rada Deputies have sent the President an open letter published in Holos Ukrayiny, dealing with the disastrous situation in scientific research, but they got in reply only silence accompanied by mounting pressure on research institutions over payment for heating, including summonses to public prosecutors, arbitration courts, and threats of bankruptcy. Meanwhile, the Cabinet has given the President an impossible task: to create in his next five- year presidential term an economically strong and independent state of Ukraine without scientific research. However, all participants of this Operation Ukrainian Science should remember the words of former US President Ronald Reagan: “We don’t give money for research because we are rich, we are rich because we give money for research.”

As this article was being written, the 2000 draft budget came out. It envisions spending 0.36% of GDP on research. We do not know who exactly proposed this figure in contravention of the law On Scientific Research and a Verkhovna Rada resolution, but what we do know is that the Cabinet is in fact doing everything possible to turn us into a backward state. They might as well forget about that 0.36%, for in 2000 Ukraine will have practically no more scientific research as such.