Dear University, We Need to Talk About Militarization

The university is collaborating with the Ministries of Defence and Justice and Security. A concerning development, according to a group of Tilburg researchers. ‘By partnering with the military-industrial complex, Tilburg University enters ethically questionable territory.’

In its latest report, the Advisory Council for Science, Technology, and Innovation (AWTI) urges closer collaboration between Dutch universities, the Ministry of Defense, and companies in the defense industry—essentially, arms manufacturers. This recommendation is justified by pointing to a rapidly changing geopolitical context in which peace can no longer be taken for granted.

Universities, the AWTI claims, must simply deal with a new reality that is not only geopolitical, but financial. According to AWTI council member Jos Benschop, partnerships with the defense sector should be seen as an opportunity to secure new funding sources in the face of budget cuts.

The trend of universities being steered toward collaboration with the military-industrial complex is evident at Tilburg University. Last year, two special professors were appointed with sponsorship from the Dutch Ministry of Defense.

A currently advertised vacant position is sponsored by the Ministry of Justice and Security. Research is conducted on the development of AI-driven technology to control drone swarms in active combat zones, and Mindlabs counts the Ministry of Defense among its partners who maintain offices in the building.

This incremental militarization of Tilburg University has so far gone largely unnoticed. Many colleagues and students are unaware of the growing collaborations between the military-industrial complex and our university, and the university has not communicated these developments to our community.

Yet this is a highly significant trend, which threatens to alter the nature of research and education at this institution. With this letter, we aim to address two issues: first, the lack of transparency regarding partnerships with the defense sector, and second, the urgent need for a university-wide dialogue about these collaborations.

The need for such a dialogue is pressing, since partnerships with the military apparatus and arms companies raise significant ethical questions. Euphemistic terms such as “security,” “defense,” “innovation,” “technology,” and even “peace” are used to legitimize collaboration with the military, but what academics are truly participating in through these partnerships is a war machine that produces weapons.

Many colleagues and students are deeply committed not contributing to developing knowledge or technologies that, directly or indirectly, will be used to kill people. The university owes its workers and students full transparency as it pursues collaborations with the military-industrial complex.

Ethical considerations also arise regarding the companies involved in these collaborations. One company frequently mentioned is Thales. The CEO of Thales Netherlands is a member of AWTI, and Thales Netherlands is involved in at least one research project at our university. Thales presents itself as an innovative technology company but ranks 17th among the world’s largest arms manufacturers.

Thales cooperates with Israel and is a primary supplier of surveillance infrastructure for Europe’s highly lethal external borders. Collaborations such as these contradict the university’s cherished values of sustainability, diversity, and inclusion.

By partnering with the military-industrial complex, Tilburg University enters ethically questionable territory and further risks adopting a coercive narrative that undermines existing political plurality. When AWTI asserts that peace is no longer a given and concludes that participation in an arms race is necessary and unavoidable, this is not a scientific but a political stance – one that demands uncritical adherence to the agendas of armed forces, law enforcement, arms manufacturers, NATO, and the EU.

These institutions, particularly in an era of rising right-wing authoritarianism, should be approached with healthy and critical skepticism. The university is the place where such critique should be fostered, and where alternatives to the cycle of war should be conceived and debated. Increasing militarization threatens to erode this unique function of the university, which is now perhaps more essential than ever.

In addition to political plurality, academic freedom is also at stake. Academic knowledge is developed and advanced through exchange and collaboration. Yet, as AWTI council member Jos Benschop explicitly stated in the already mentioned interview: “You don’t share defense research with colleagues around the world (…)” The ideal of an internationally organized, open, and broadly accessible science is thus endangered.

Instead, we risk entering a shadowy realm where the line between military secrets and scientific results becomes increasingly blurred. This will inevitably lead to forms of research and education where the scope of what can be said and written is severely narrowed. Recruitment policies may also emerge in which certain factors such as political background, country of origin or security profile are scrutinized.

The concerns raised here are only some of the potential consequences of university militarization, and more objections and concerns can and will be articulated. We are aware that there are proponents of collaboration with the defense sector, and acknowledge this diversity of opinion.

However, precisely because so much is at stake, these conflicting perspectives must be openly discussed and debated. What we want to prevent is the quiet and incremental imposition of a single vision for the university, which cajoles many of our colleagues and students into supporting violence against which they are firmly opposed.

_Advertentie.