Military's Social Science Grants Raise Alarm

Thomas Mahnken, a deputy assistant defense secretary for policy planning, said Minerva is "not about supporting combat operations." He said Gates seeks to fill a void in funding for basic social science scholarship that would improve understanding of issues that bear on national security.

"This is the first significant effort in 30 or 40 years to engage social sciences on a large scale by the Department of Defense," Mahnken said, citing the unsuccessful Project Camelot as a contributor to a rift between the military and many anthropologists.

"There was an effort during [the Vietnam era] that ended up being ill-conceived and burned bridges on both sides, and, unfortunately, these attitudes have persisted," Mahnken said. "This effort is about rebuilding those bridges."

In his April speech, Gates recalled U.S. efforts to raise math and science education after the Soviet Union's launch of Sputnik I, the first artificial satellite, in 1957. He quoted the late historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. as saying that the United States should "return to the acceptance of eggheads and ideas if it is to meet the Russian challenge."

Minerva will fund research on five topics, including the development of China's military and technological prowess and how religion, culture, economics and politics in the Islamic world "interact to foster political violence, terrorism or insurgent behavior."

The Pentagon also wants insights into Saddam Hussein's rule and into terrorist groups. Citing the development of game theory and Kremlinology in the Cold War, the Pentagon is asking the brightest minds to come up with new ways of thinking about national security. Universities around the world are eligible for Minerva funding. Officials said $50 million will be awarded over five years.

David Vine, an American University anthropologist, criticized the initiative, saying the research would be limited by the Pentagon's worldview.

"Research about a potential conflict with China, I feel, may be part of a large self-fulfilling prophecy," Vine said. "That kind of research could lead up to an increasing escalation of military tensions and military preparations for war."

The Network of Concerned Anthropologists, which describes itself as an advocate for ethical anthropology, said the research topics could "contribute to creating more national and human insecurity by trafficking in the construction of . . . a connection between Islam and violence."

Vine said he would apply for funding. His topic: how overseas military bases affect relations with other nations, "how they've damaged our international reputation and how they've damaged the lives of people around the world."

Other academics embrace the Pentagon project.

"Hopefully, a project like Minerva will provide some historical perspective before, rather than after, it is needed," said Robert B. Townsend, acting executive director of the American Historical Association.

Graham B. Spanier, president of Penn State University, said researchers there will eagerly seek funding for work to bring insight and nuance to policymaking.

Spanier, noting Gates's experience as a university president, expressed confidence in the defense secretary's commitment to academic freedom. In his April speech, Gates said Minerva would solicit diverse views, regardless of whether they are critical of the military.

But Maximilian C. Forte, an anthropologist at Concordia University in Montreal, said he worries that the project could damage an important asset for anthropologists: trust.

Forte, who has been doing research in the Caribbean region, said debate over Minerva has made some of his subjects suspicious of his motives. They want to know who is really backing him "because they are concerned I might be some kind of intelligence agent. We're all going to be seen as potentially serving the state, as being the eyes and ears of American foreign policy."