Concerns about academic freedom caused by the Russia–Ukraine War

Abstract

Russia’s war against Ukraine has raised concerns not about the fate of Ukrainian science and scientists but also academic freedom and international cooperation in science.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022 has caused a global turmoil and catalyzed a plethora of economic and sociopolitical events that have not been experienced for decades. It has prompted significant condemnation and reactions from Western governments and business in the form of sanctions and by severing affiliations with their Russia counterparts. Intense public discourse has mainly focused on the future of energy supplies and economic ties between the West and Russia.

One important issue that has largely fallen off the radar is the fate of academic institutions and the dangers that censorship and hostilities pose to academic freedom. Of course, Ukrainian scholars and research face great uncertainties, caused by the large‐scale destruction of scientific infrastructure and the displacement of faculty and students (Karly & Kehoe, 2022). But academic freedom is also threatened as Russian scientists’ freedom to comment on policies and hold beliefs that do not align with the current narrative are increasingly under attack from their government.

Many institutions and research organizations are offering research grants, scholarships, and work opportunities for Ukrainian scientists who have fled their war‐torn country (Burke, 2022; Pulverer, 2022). Perhaps most notably, the European Union’s “EURAXESS” platform helps at securing internships for individuals and research groups and supports for working and living in Europe. Other, yet unexplored forms of support could be offering positions in business incubators for Ukrainian scientists and thereby provide the means for retaining entrepreneurship and innovation within the country and secure foreign investment which could be used to rebuild research infrastructure. In this regard, the UK and internationally based incubators, including the European Union’s research and innovation framework program “Horizon Europe”, could play an important role by providing instruments and funding to support such ventures. This could also encourage Ukraine to invest more into research in the long term and limit the inevitable brain drain.

The criteria for support beyond scholarships or grant programs should reflect the highly specialized skills that researchers possess and encourage them to address practical needs. The topics should focus on areas of high importance for Ukraine’s post‐war recovery. Such fields may include, without being limited to, healthcare, infrastructure, biotechnology, financial and digital services. Lastly, the interested parties should agree that Ukraine will be the focus of their operations during at least a minimum period of time.

The inevitable influx of applications has a risk of overwhelming many of these programs both in terms of resources and the capacity of their review processes. However, many sponsorship schemes, such as the UK’s “Homes for Ukraine”, have been launched by governments around the world to help Ukraine nationals and provide them with basic needs and employment. These could be further utilized to provide resources specifically for accommodating and supporting Ukrainian students and scholars. It would also require specific criteria for reviewing applications as the focus is more on support and rebuilding, which could make it easier to rapidly and efficiently review these applications.

The academic dialogue has also been in turmoil. At the beginning of the war, Russian scientists published an open letter online in which they condemn the war. However, other prominent Russian scientists and educators signed the “Statement of the Russian Union of University Rectors (Provosts)”, which supports the invasions of Ukraine and calls for unwavering support of their country, their army, and their president (Matthews, 2022). Many academic institutes in the United States and Europe have discouraged ties with Russian partners or academic affiliations (Gaind, 2022). In particular, the German Research Foundation has decided to freeze all scientific cooperation with Russia, and the European Council for Nuclear Research has also suspended its links, prohibiting Russian scientists access to many of its programs (Naujokaitytė, 2022; Plackett, 2022). The German government followed by the Dutch, Danish, Latvian, and Lithuanian have urged to cease all educational, research, and innovation cooperation with institutions in Russia and Belarus (Upton, 2022). Most strikingly, the European Union has halted cooperation with Russian research entities, suspending payments to existing contracts and ceasing new agreements under Horizon Europe (O’Malley, 2022).

The decision to sever ties with Russian academics has been made to force the Russian government to reconsider the strategic disadvantages of academically isolating the country. It has also been made to prevent sensitive information from innovative research areas falling into the hands of what is now believed an untrustworthy government. While these considerations may be perceived as legitimate, it is also true that many individual scientists in Russia now bear the consequences for the actions of others.

If retaliation is the justification, it is unlikely that most individual scientists are the right target (Koonin, 2022). Likewise, if the instrumentalization of academic research is an issue, evident of the rigorous curtailing of academic freedom seen in Russia, there are plenty ways to safeguard ongoing academic communication. Horizontal sanctions are not sustainable, and it is therefore important to maintain the moral and practical distinction between government actions and individuals. Restrictive measures should be applied on a case‐by‐case basis and involve those teams affected rather than becoming an ultimatum. Long‐term strategies should focus on academic institutions that recognize security concerns and protect scientific integrity, while suspending links with Russian research groups and scholars which fail to comply.

The historic parallels to the Cold War are obvious, most notably the continued external pressure on administrations and faculty members to conform to political and ideological views, which increase polarization and isolationism within academia. However, academic cooperation and transmission of knowledge can only thrive during peace and on strong global networks. Any compromise of academic freedom will inevitably erode global research capacity with long‐term negative consequences on scientific and academic cooperation. A shared foundation of science and research can help maintain collaborative relationships between countries and preserve vital research that benefits societies and peoples across borders. Scientific conciliation shall prevail over scholarly ostracism in academia to avoid a state of bellum omnium contra omnes.

Disclosure and competing interests statement

The authors declare the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

EMBO reports (2022) 23: e55079.