This presentation will address the scientific and techno-logical dimensions of the Gulf war and their impact on the situation in the Arab world as well as in the Third World which accounts for 80% of the world population. Of the numerous reasons which lie behind the war, the following five deserve special emphasis:
1. There is no respect for the rule of law in the Arab countries, or in the Third World, in general. In other words, there is no respect for human rights or democracy. We are currently paying the price for these deficiencies and will still do for the five to ten years to come.
2. There is widespread ignorance. The illiteracy rate exceeds 56% in the Arab world in spite the fact that it is an Islamic region and that the Holy Quran in its very first verse, enjoins Muslims to "read" (learn) in the name of God. Therefore, one wonders whether we really live in a Muslim society.
3. There is no consensus on the type of society we wish to build. The absence of such a project is related to the first cause cited above, namely the absence of a civil society which provides for free expression of aspirations and dreams.
4. Development models applied over the last thirty years by Third World countries, particularly in the Arab world, were based on blind imitation of the West. The result has been increased dependence and a decline in self-confidence.
5. There are no scientific and technological policies or strategies and no real commitment to invest in scientific research.
Given the above, it is easy to understand the current situation in the Arab world and in the Third World in general. The prevailing state of morbid weakness has caused gaping rifts in the Third World and made it an easy prey for colonialist powers.
Development may be achieved only when science becomes part and parcel of culture and of the value systems governing society. However, it seems that our countries have just failed to grasp the importance of science and technology. This is all the more regrettable since we have a distinct civilization and a religion which highly values knowledge. In fact, no revealed book mentions the term "science" as often as the Quran. In addition, our Holy Book teems with scientific references and concepts which we have not so far managed to decipher entirely.
Hence the need for re-reading the Quran. However, by "re-reading" I do not mean the questioning of the foundations and basic rules of Islam. What I mean rather is the need for a new approach in reading the Holy Book which remains fully valid regardless of time and place; an approach which is by no means antinomic, but rather compatible, with the progress of science and technology. With this new approach, the more one grasps the meanings of Quranic verses, the easier one understands science and technology. Many prominent scholars, such as Abdus Salam, have written extensively on the Quran and science.
One of the basic virtues advocated by Islam is positive open-mindedness and diversity of opinion ("Ikhtilaf") as ingredients of pluralism and progress. Whereas the first rule, in science is that what is true today may not be so tomorrow, in the Quran, there is a set of unquestionable facts and eternal truths. There are other facts which cannot be envisaged nor interpreted in the same way from one century to another. It is not possible to read the Quran on the eve of the 21st century in the same way as it was read in the 7th or 8th century.
The most serious error ever made in Islamic history and which resulted in the decline of our society, was the suspension of "Ijtihad" activities (critical investigation) in the 11th century, on the grounds that everything was clear in the Quran, the Sunna (traditions of the Prophet) and the Shari'a (canonical law). However, the Quran can only be apprehended through a dynamic approach which takes the factor of change into consideration. This is only natural since the Quran is a vehicle for change and change is not confined to a particular moment but is necessarily an on-going process. No Muslim, I think, can accept the idea that the Quran may be read today in the same way as tomorrow!
Let us therefore re-read the Quran. This reading should not, however, focus on its basic principles, rites and tenets, but rather on those elements which contribute to better understanding of its content in the light of the new scientific data which were not available to our predecessors. Yet, certain people are so ignorant that they are not even conscious of their ignorance; they not only resent any criticism but they would even deny the new status reached by knowledge.
Let us go back to the Gulf war. One of the fundamental lessons to be drawn from this conflict is the cardinal role played by science and technology. Each one of us, adults and young alike, has understood that it is a war of a different kind and that its fulcrum is science and technology. To hear of an "Al-Hussein" or an " Al-Abbas" missile is in itself a revolution in that Arab names have become associated with new technologies. It also implies an endogenous control of these technologies, and a decline in the habit of importing turn-key products. Iraq is the Arab country which has invested most in scientific research for several years and that is something the West does seem prepared to accept.
The year 1976 witnessed the holding, in Rabat, of the First UNESCO sponsored Conference on Science and Technology in the Arab World (CASTARAB). During this Conference, it was proposed to establish an Arab fund for financing scientific research. A target of $ 500 million dollars was set for this purpose in the relevant recommendation adopted by the Ministers (less than the cost of one day of the Gulf war). A working group, of which I was member, was entrusted to carry out a feasibility study for this fund. Although the study came up with positive conclusions, the project was never been implemented because of disagreements on relatively minor issues such as the choice of the host country! Some Gulf countries had refused the establishment of the fund's headquarters in Iraq although the latter hosted the Union of Arab National Scientific Councils.
Furthermore, no country in the Arab world invested more than Iraq in scientific research. While that country invested about 2% of its GNP in scientific research, the rest of the Arab world, including the Gulf countries with their huge resources, earmarked less than 0.3% for this purpose.
A fact worth noting is that Iraq unlike the other Arab or Third World countries has understood the value of science and thereby used soundly the resources allocated to this sector. It may be said, therefore, that Iraq, like China, India, Korea, Brazil and Mexico, has followed a development model based on self-reliance and the use, as much as possible, of local human and material resources.
The Gulf War came to corroborate, on the scientific and technological levels, what I said to Radio France International, on September 27th, 1990, a few months before the flare up of the conflict, namely that war was inevitable.(2)
My argument was that the United States and its satellites, including Israel, the United Kingdom and France, had made considerable investments in the military field and held a vast array of new highly sophisticated weapons that had to be tested at all costs. During the cold war, they were afraid of experimenting these weapons lest the Soviet Union should discover some of their secrets through its modern spying techniques (satellites). The end of the cold war, however, provided the United States with the opportunity of testing its arsenal. To conduct such an experiment, it needed a macro-laboratory; the Gulf offered an ideal opportunity in this respect.
This is a scientific and technological war. In a "Time" magazine study,
the chances to hit a target by means of the sophisticated weapons used
in modern wars (missiles and other) were evaluated at 30% maximum. This
means that when laser-guided or conventional missiles or bombs are launched
or unloaded, only one-third hit the objective and 70% are lost. Accuracy
rate for the 1939-1945 war hardly reached 3%.
It should therefore be kept in mind that these weapons are experimented for the first time in order to determine their efficiency. The countries involved in these experiments, such as the United States and Israel, are conducting ambitious projects in the field of scientific research. We have to understand the close relationship between, on the one hand, science, technology, war and massive destruction weapons and, on the other, the Western value systems. It is a well-known fact that over 200 million persons are currently working in the military industry and that 60% of them were recruited from among the top-ranking scientists in the world. This means that two out of three scientists in the West work in the military industrial sector, that is in the "destruction" industry. This is how scientific research is financed in the most renowned universities.
In fact, some prestigious universities, such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), the CALTECH California Institute, are under contract with the American Government for the implementation of such projects. Some of these agreements concern common research fields such as biology, physics, space technologies, informatics, and artificial intelligence. A good part of this research is directly related to military objectives.
Over 40% of America's industrial production is of military nature; the military industry thus mobilizes millions of workers, 60% of whom are scientists, as indicated earlier. These weapons need, therefore, to be tested and sold. Once they are sold, they need to be destroyed to be subsequently replaced so that the production cycle may go on. Concerning the Gulf countries, for instance, that is Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman, they have spent, during the last decade, between $150 and $ 200 billion dollars to purchase weapons.
One thing to be underscored is that after purchasing weapons, these countries did not undertake any research work to improve them or to master their technology. These weapons were acquired, in fact, as trivial commodities without any attempt to probe their secrets and unpack their technologies. However, 15% to 20% of the bill paid on armament by these Arab countries goes to scientific research in the United States and other Western countries. Thus, out of $10 paid by Third World countries on armament, two dollars are directly invested in scientific research in the West.
Since 1945, over 250 armed conflicts broke out in the world and more specifically in the Third World. Most weapons used in these conflicts came from the West. The scenario continues today as these countries purchase weapons to fight one another or for internal security purposes. Never before have these weapons been used against the West, except in Korea, Vietnam and, today, in Iraq.
The only objective behind the destruction of the Iraqi potential is to punish this country for daring to design its own development model and for having had the "insolence" of giving priority to scientific research and technology. Super powers cannot admit that a State, particularly an Arab one, have full command of science and technology and, thereby, compete with Israel, for then it would threaten the "security" (stability) of the whole region, including that of Israel.
These are but a few aspects of the scientific and cultural dimensions of the Gulf war. There is, however, room for hope on the medium-term in view of the progress achieved by the Arab world in these particular fields. During the last decade, 30 to 40 thousand pages were published in the field of scientific research by Arab citizens living in Arab countries. Yet, who has read and taken due interest in them? If we are to implement the projects they propose, each page will require an average of 5 to 10 thousand dollars in the form of subsidies allocated to scientific research by the States of the region.
Unfortunately, while substantial amounts are disbursed on trivia, hardly anything is invested in the field of science and technology. Antoine Zahlane, a prominent Arab scientist, estimated the number of engineers in the Arab world to stand at 500,000 at least, in addition to 250,000 working abroad - a total of 750,000 Arab engineers! This figure exceeds by far the number of engineers in Germany or France. However, one out of three such engineers, one works abroad, not always for base material reasons but because of the lack, in his own country, of adequate means likely to enable him to bring his research to fruition, or because the general conditions prevailing there are hardly auspicious. Neither the scientist nor the researcher can discharge his duties unless he can enjoy all the freedom needed: freedom of speech and of opinion and the possibility of publishing his findings with no apprehension whatsoever.
The lack of freedom of research and of expression constitutes a stumbling block in the way of scientific research. This is undoubtedly the reason behind the deliberate emigration of such a staggering number of Arab engineers. To take but one example, there are over 700 Moroccan researchers, of doctoral or post-doctoral level, working at the French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) alone. It should also be kept in mind that the training of a single scientist costs Moroccan taxpayers over $100,000. Conversely, France dispatches to Morocco, as part of its "technical assistance" program, second-rate experts while some of our brightest elements are working there. Who is assisting whom ?
During a symposium on science and technology in the Arab World,(3) held in Cairo last year, we noted that 85% of scientific research work in Egypt was funded by four foreign institutions. What a difference between Egypt and Iraq! 85% of scientific research work in Egypt is conducted thanks to generous assistance from foreign institutions, including three well-known American foundations. I have some suspicions about the motives lying behind foreign interest in Egypt's scientific research. What is the reason for such generosity? This is a highly strategic question, as Egypt is the largest Arab country.
The same problems prevail in the rest of the Arab world, including the Arab Maghreb countries in which scientific research is financed to a large extent through bilateral or multilateral cooperation programmes. One wonders whether it would not be advisable to reject, in certain cases, this type of funding so long as our governments do not give due priority to research. "Cooperation," especially in the scientific field, is never an innocent unselfish exercise. It is often more profitable to "donors" than to "recipients" as it enables the former to collect useful data, monitor the progress made in research and steer it in the desired direction as well as identify potential recruits. Provision of funding for our scientific research remains, therefore, one of the major problems facing us even though it does not figure yet on our political agenda.
Should we make a survey of Iraq's scientific and technological research - a matter in which I have taken a keen interest right from the start - we will find that over 90% of funds allocated to this purpose come from government sources, unlike the rest of the Arab world where such funding proceeds from foreign assistance as is the case of Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt.
There is, therefore, a need to be vigilant in order to draw, from the Gulf war, a useful lesson to pass on to the coming generations and to ensure in the future that due priority is given to scientific research. Perhaps one day we will understand that it is a sector which is more important than tourism, for instance. Such mistakes cannot be corrected unless we stop depending on development patterns imported from the West.
Why bother to build 5-star hotels when we hardly manage to cope with more pressing needs? Tourism is one of the most unpredictible activities in a country's economy. It takes only rumors that a cholera epidemic has broken out some 500 km away from Morocco to deter a potential tourist from coming to this country. Let us rather build 2 or 3-star hotels that would be accessible to our fellow countrymen, and opt for tourism as a cooperative activity open for all countries of the world, including those which are comparable to ours. Perhaps the Gulf war will enlighten us here too so that we may develop better plans in the future and attune our tourism industry to our economic and socio-cultural realities and needs.
The Gulf war sheds ample light on the crisis arising from the moral
and ethical implications of science and technology in the West. This was
bound to happen as the humane aspects as well as the socio-cultural consequences
were ignored by an over-materialistic system which produced not only ecological
pollution, but also a pollution of ethical and civilizational values.
Of special relevance in this respect is the initiative taken by such great thinkers as Albert Einstein and Bertrand Russel who set up the "Pugwash" Movement after the first atomic bomb had been dropped on Hiroshima. The main objective of this international non-governmental organization is to investigate the political, socio-cultural and moral implications of scientific and technological developments.
It is obvious that the Western economy derives material profit from scientific progress, notwithstanding its major repercussions on health for example. An in-depth analysis of the history of science and technology shows that the progress achieved in the fields of medicine, computer science, etc., is mostly the work of military industries. In fact, 80% of the satellites orbiting around the earth were launched for military and spying purposes. There is, therefore, a close relationship between science and technology, on the one hand, and destruction, on the other. One wonders about the real objectives of scientific and technological progress. The "show" offered by the Gulf war, regardless of political, ideological, military and religious considerations, provides an indisputable proof of a novel scientific and technocratic barbarianism, at a time when mankind is boasting an unprecedented knowledge boom.
An eloquent example of the consequences of this knowledge revolution is the immaterialization of the economy. Solid matter is receding in market products as it is increasingly replaced by grey matter. As a result, there is a gradual shift towards products miniaturization. The most striking examples are those of radios, television sets and computers. Forty years ago, the first computer used by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) was installed in a room three times the size of a classroom; its memory capacity was, however, less than that of a modern portable computer.
Economy is less "material" because it uses more efficient and less cumbersome materials, such as synthetic products. Another example is the telephone. Just a decade ago, it took tons and tons of copper wire to install telephones in a medium size city; today hundreds of kilograms of optic fiber suffice to replace all of that copper. Instead of going to Zimbabwe or Zaire to fetch and process copper, optic fiber is produced in laboratories at a much lower cost.
One of the consequences of the "immaterialization" of the economy is a marked decline in the strategic and economic importance of mining production. In Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emirates), I stated in 1981 that natural resources might be a curse for those who possessed it unless they kept abreast of the latest knowledge and know-how.
Natural resources should certainly not be overlooked. However, it is essential to focus on science and knowledge, for there is much more to be derived from brain than from matter. In fact, the difference between old and new computer generations does not lie in their components, but rather in the creative work of the brain which made this technological breakthrough possible. Economy, which used to depend heavily on material products, is increasingly relying on immaterial elements.
Another highly important factor in the development of new science (quantum physics, astrophysics, biogenetics, etc.) is the increasing correlation between the "material" and the "immaterial." Such a relationship can be explained from scientific as well as philosophical and metaphysical viewpoints. Suffice it to say that the new sciences have signalled the end of mechanical physics and of certain Newtonian assumptions, just as it has watered down the dogma of "scientific rationalism" into a more relative notion.(4)
From a philosophical standpoint, this represents a major revolution of which no one can predict the impact on the future. It certainly means a great challenge for research teams in all fields. The Muslim community must therefore take up these challenges by enhancing all forms of "Ijtihad" (research), and by rejecting such assumptions as proven erroneous by science -this does not affect in the least the basic tenets of religion -as well as by encouraging and stimulating creativeness and innovation.
It is a long and exacting battle, which is quite different from popular demonstrations and the display of slogans. These are symbolic reactions to particular events. No matter how important they may be, they do not replace diligent work on research, science and technology, which are indispensable to take up challenges such as the Gulf war. The latter is only the first episode in a series of events awaiting us ahead.
For over fifteen years now, I have never ceased to protest against the danger underlying the concept of "transfer of technology." It is an illusory notion inconsistent with the inner meanings of technology as an innovative "process." Technology is not transferrable. Industrial processes, machines, turnkey firms and other equipment cannot be purchased like any consumer goods. Simple acquisition is not sufficient to grasp the functioning, design and operational mechanisms of these technologies in order to subsequently improve them through local research, and adjust them to the needs and possibilities of a given society.
That Iraq should grasp these considerations was intolerable for the
West because of strategic, political and economic reasons. Iraq embarked
on research on advanced technologies which are closely associated with
military applications. Not only did the country develop its own natural
and human resources, but it also stimulated scientific research in all
fields and, unlike the other Arab countries, ceased to purchase turnkey
firms.
The "transfer of technology" is furthermore one of the most corruption-prone activities. Acquisition of sophisticated equipment under "cooperation" agreements involving foreign loans does encourage corruption practices. According to a "New York Times" editorial, published in 1988 or 1989, bribery accounted for an estimated 40% of the total amounts earmarked for technical assistance and development funding by bilateral and multilateral institutions. Furthermore, a sizeable portion of this amount is injected into personal accounts in Western banks. We also know from official sources that 80% of the amounts disbursed to the Third World countries make their way back to the United States in one way or another.
This situation cannot improve without a change in mental structures,
thinking patterns and a stronger commitment to moral rectitude as well
as intensified efforts in science and technology with a view to reducing
our external dependence and its effects. The aim is to ward off tragedies
similar to the one being inflicted on Iraq in reprisal for its attempt
to reverse the order of things. In spite of all solidarity and unity slogans,
the fact is that today Iraq is utterly lonesome in this tragedy.
Lecture given at the Ecole Nationale des Industries Minières;
Rabat, February 19th, 1991.
3. 3See "Al Mustaqbal Al Arabi," issue n 143, Beyrouth: January 1991.
4. 4See 3rd Vancouver Declaration, published in "Futuribles," pp. 16-18, issue n 138, Paris: December 1989.