Special session of the online conference "Academician Sakharov Intellectual Heritage and Strategic Stability Issues"

Summary of the online Conference of the Luxembourg Forum

On July 15, 2020 the International Luxembourg Forum gathered a prominent assembly of scientists, experts, public figures and statesmen to take part in an online conference “The Intellectual Legacy of Academician Andrey Sakharov and Problems of Strategic Stability”, which is regarded as one of the first events, timed to 100th Anniversary of the birth of Andrey Sakharov – world renowned Soviet physicist, thinker and fighter for human rights. Among the participants were: Viatcheslav Kantor, President of the International Luxembourg Forum; Academician RAS Alexander Sergeev (Russia); William Perry (USA); Prof. Vladimir Lukin (Russia); Ernest Moniz (USA); Amb. Michael Fedotov (Russia); Sam Nunn (USA); Amb. Michael Shvydkoi (Russia); Prof. Frank von Hippel (USA), David Holloway (USA); Jerry Brown (USA); Corresponding Member of RAS Alexander Chernyshev (Russia); Academician RAS Alexander Dynkin (Russia); Academician RAS Radiy Ilkaev (Russia); Sergey Oznobishchev (Russia); Corresponding Member of RAS Victor Selemir (Russia); Prof. Angela Stent (USA).[i] The meeting was moderated by Deputy Chairman of the Organizing Committee of the International Luxembourg Forum, Academician RAS Alexey Arbatov, who also conveyed greetings to the participants of the Forum and wishes of fruitful work from former US Secretary of State Henry Kissenger.[ii]

In his opening remarks Viatcheslav Kantor pointed out that life, scientific accomplishments and human rights activism of Andrey Sakharov are a subject of numerous articles, books and other media. He reminded the participants, that Sakharov once wrote “My biggest dream is for thermonuclear weapons to deter war, but never be used” – and this, in essence, is an early precursor to the theory and principles of strategic stability.

Academician Alexander Sergeev, who took the floor next, shared with the audience a plan to conduct in 2021 a multitude of events timed to 100th Anniversary of the birth of Andrey Sakharov. He also emphasized how important it is to strengthen the movement for stability – particularly today, when vigilance towards the conduct of warfare is diminishing and many politicians allow themselves to speak carelessly about the war. A good illustration of the fragility of human civilization could be the silence of the universe – despite all discoveries of exoplanets and the panspermic theory. Dangers of uncontrolled warfare must be discussed.

Developing the projection of intellectual legacy of Sakharov on the notion of strategic stability, Academician Alexey Arbatov quoted, that “Sakharov repeated more than once that the balance of nuclear forces of superpowers and the threat of ‘mutual assured destruction’ was for many years the most important factor that prevented the outbreak of the Third World War; on the other hand, however, the accumulation of nuclear arsenals made this equilibrium more and more unstable.” This had been said a long time ago, and despite this, it accurately captures the essence of strategic stability.

Prof. William Perry put Sakharov in one row with Solzhenitsyn and Pasternak – naming them as the Russians, who had the most influence on his thinking during the Cold War. Although their careers were different, they had one thing in common – a love of freedom, which they defended despite opposition and even personal danger. Sakharov lived in an era when the hostility between the United States and the Soviet Union was intense and dangerous, and he was a voice of sanity and decency at a time when it was desperately needed. While it had been thought that such days are behind us, current state of relations between the two countries proves otherwise. The danger of nuclear confrontation has returned to the Cold War levels, but there is no Sakharov with us today to speak of these dangers. It is not enough to admire Sakharov – we should seek to emulate him.

In the view of Deputy chair of the Sakharov’s centennial preparatory committee Prof. Vladimir Lukin, this conference is a step towards resuming public dialogue between Russia and the US on a multifactoral entirety of strategic issues. Such dialogue commenced during the harshest times of the Cold War, and its benefit and relevance today is out of doubt. Vladimir Lukin identified four sides of Sakharov’s life. Firstly, he was a phenomenon in natural science and greatly contributed to both theory and practice of nuclear physics. Secondly, he acted as a political thinker. His convergence theory does include some utopian features, but today the idea of strengthening the regional and global security frameworks looks more feasible than “the end of history”. Thirdly, he was a human rights activist. Fourthly, his ideas gave rise to one of the pillars of nuclear stability. At that, concentration of 90% of nuclear weapon in the hands of two powers remains one of the most important factors of strategic equilibrium. It seems that it should be matched by a corresponding level of responsibility of Russia and the US for maintaining of global peace and security.

Ernest Moniz underlined, that, unfortunately, in this time of tense relations between Russia and the US, there is no necessary level of dialogue, transparency and problem-solving mentality that would help resolve the issues at hand and continue the shared responsibility in terms of eluding nuclear dangers. Scientists in all countries must be as courageous as Sakharov in advising their leaders against the dangerous and unnecessary nuclear activities, including the resumption of nuclear testing, and advocate for the extension of New START and going into new arms control arrangements.

Amb. Michael Fedotov in his remarks focused on Sakharov’s mission as a great thinker and political activist. He raised a question – why Sakharov, a man of a very prosperous fate, swapped it for a mission of defense of human rights – a mission of a dissident. The answer lies with Sakharov himself – he understood his responsibility for creation of thermonuclear weapons, which he called weapons of collective suicide. If countries possess such weapons, they must understand their responsibility before humanity as a whole. Sakharov started the fight for greater responsibility of scientists for the results of their work, and today this fight must go on. This concerns not only the sphere of nuclear physics, but genetic engineering, artificial intelligence, ICTs. Humanity can be endangered in a multitude of ways.

Sam Nunn developed the notion of responsibility by emphasizing once again the special role of Russia and the US in the matters of global security. New risks, like cyber threats and false warnings should be considered and addressed – they are more likely than premeditated nuclear attacks. Several suggestions to remedy the current situation include: to move away from the notion that diplomacy is a reward for a good behavior; to work to improve security in the Euro-Atlantic region; rebuild cooperation and communication; to re-articulate the Gorbachev-Reagan formula that there can be no winners in a nuclear war and it should never be unleashed; to extend the New START and begin to discuss what comes next; to develop red line understandings for cyber and space; to work to increase decision time for decision makers; to use technology to reduce, not increase risk; to redouble diplomatic efforts to address nuclear proliferation challenges.

Amb. Michael Shvydkoi shared his personal experience of interaction with Andrey Sakharov, who in 1987 was asked to write a review for a theatrical play “The heart of a dog” by Mikhail Bulgakov, staged at the Moscow Young Generation Theater. The review was more than that – it was a philosophical essay, which, in a way, reflected Sakharov’s own path of life – the responsibility of a creator for his own doing. A scientist cannot always predict the results of his work, but nonetheless bears responsibility. Sakharov understood the ethical consequences of the changes and today the voice of scientists must sound louder, as in many spheres, such as autonomous weapons and cyberspace, ethics is eroding.

Prof. Frank von Hippel, who also knew Andrey Sakharov in person, shared one of the topics he discussed with Sakharov in February of 1987, just before the International Scientific forum on Nuclear arms reduction. Their talk was about Strategic Defense Initiative. Sakharov understood that SDI was not feasible technically– so it was unnecessary to demand its cancellation during negotiations on strategic arms limitation. Today the topic of strategic missile defense is once again relevant, and instability is rising – so scientists must once again explain the limitations of missile defense.

A historian’s insight into aspects of Sakharov’s thinking on strategic stability was provided by Prof. David Holloway, who had an opportunity to meet Andrey Sakharov in person. The first aspect is the conception of strategic stability, which he saw as essential – as long as nuclear weapons exist. He made a point that anti-ballistic missile defense would be destabilizing and urged the soviet leadership to agree to an ABM moratorium with the US. Second is Sakharov’s insistence on an informed public dialogue about nuclear issues. Scientists can help educate the public about the great challenges, notably – of war and peace. The third point is about progress of science and technology. Sakharov’s enthusiasm was balanced by trepidation about the future. “Progress will not bring happiness if it is not complemented by extraordinarily profound changes in the social moral and cultural life of humankind”.

The main presentations were followed by a brief discussion and remarks form a number of notable participants: Prof. Vladimir Dvorkin (Russia); Academician RAS Roald Sagdeev (Russia/USA); Prof. William Potter (USA); Siegfried Hecker (USA); Richard Garwin (USA); Rodric Braithwaite (Great Britain); and Rose Gottemoeller (USA).[iii] Summing up the meeting, the participants once again emphasized the importance of intellectual legacy of Academician Andrey Sakharov and its relevance especially today, when mankind needs to be reminded of its fragility.

---

[i] Viatcheslav Kantor is the president of the International Luxembourg Forum on Preventing Nuclear Catastrophe; Academician RAS Alexander Sergeev, President of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Director of the Institute of applied physics of the Russian Academy of Sciences; William Perry, Professor at the Stanford University (former Secretary of Defense); Vladimir Lukin, Deputy Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Council of the Federation of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation; Professor, National Research University – Higher School of Economics, Member of the Supervisory Board of the International Luxembourg Forum (former Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee and Deputy Chairman of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation; Commissioner on Human Rights for the Russian Federation; Ambassador of the Russian Federation to the United States of America), Ph.D.; Ernest Moniz, Co-Chair and Chief Executive Officer, Nuclear Threat Initiative, Member of the Supervisory Board of the International Luxembourg Forum (former US Secretary of Energy); Michael Fedotov, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Russian Federation (former Chairman of the Presidential Council for Civil Society Development and Human Rights, Adviser to the President of the Russian Federation); Sam Nunn, Co-Chairman of the Board of Directors, Nuclear Threat Initiative; Member of the Supervisory Board of the International Luxembourg Forum (former Chairman of the Armed Services Committee and the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the US Senate); Michael Shvydkoi, Special Representative of the President of the Russian Federation for international cultural cooperation, Ambassador-at-Large; Frank von Hippel, Professor and Co-Director of Program on Science and Global Security at Princeton University and Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs; Ph.D.; David Holloway David Holloway, Senior Fellow Emeritus; Raymond A. Spruance Professor of International History, Center for International Security and Cooperation, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford University, Ph.D; Jerry Brown, Former Governor of the State of California; Alexander Chernyshev, Deputy Director of Science, Head of the Integrated Research (Theoretical) Department, Russian Federal Nuclear Center – All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Experimental Physics (Sarov), Ph.D., Corresponding Member, Russian Academy of Science; Alexander Dynkin, President of IMEMO, Chair of the Russian Pugwash Committee at RAS, Chairman and Founder of the Primakov Readings, Academician, RAS; Radiy Ilkaev, Director of Science, Russian Federal Nuclear Center – All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Experimental Physics (Sarov), Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Academician, Ph.D.; Sergey Oznobishchev, Deputy Chairman of the Organizing Committee of the International Luxembourg Forum, Director of the Institute for Strategic Assessments, Head of the Division at IMEMO; Victor Selemir, Head of the Department at the Russian Federal Nuclear Сenter–Research Institute of Experimental Physics (Sarov); Professor, Corresponding Member, Russian Academy of Science; Angela Stent, Director of Center for Eurasian, Russian, and East European Studies at Georgetown University, Professor of Government and Foreign Service, non-resident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

[ii] Academician RAS Alexey Arbatov, Head of the Center for International Security, IMEMO.

[iii] Vladimir Dvorkin, Chairman of the Organizing Committee of the International Luxembourg Forum, Principal Researcher, Center for International Security, IMEMO, former Director of the 4th Central Scientific Research Institute, Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, Professor, Ph.D.; Roald Sagdeev, Distinguished Professor of the Department of Physics, University of Maryland; Director Emeritus, Space Research Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Member of the Supervisory Board of the International Luxembourg Forum, Academician, RAS; William Potter, Director, James Martin Center for Non-Proliferation Studies; Professor of Non-Proliferation Studies, Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, Foreign Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Member of the Supervisory Board of the International Luxembourg Forum, Ph.D.; Siegfried Hecker, Senior Fellow; Emeritus Research Professor, Management Science and Engineering, Center for International Security and Cooperation; Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford University, Ph.D.; Richard Garwin, Emeritus Fellow, Thomas J. Watson Research Laboratory, International Business Machines Corporation (IBM); Member, National Academy of Sciences, Ph.D.; Rodric Braithwaite, Honorary Doctor and Professor at the University of Birmingham, (former British Ambassador to the USSR/RF, Prime Minister's foreign policy adviser and chairman of the UK Joint Intelligence Committee); Rose Gottemoeller, Frank E. and Arthur W. Payne Distinguished Lecturer, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford University, Member of the Supervisory Board of the International Luxembourg Forum (former Deputy Secretary General of NATO, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security at the US State Department; Chief US Negotiator for the New START Treaty).