• Regional and Energy Security
• Informational security

13.11.2008

ON THE ISSUES OF SCIENCE

   

On November 5, 2008 in the Committee for Science and Educational of the National Assembly were held hearings devoted to science problems in the context of national security. A talk was given by “Noravank” Foundation Director, political scientist Gagik Harutyunyan.

---

In the context of today’s global systematic crisis occur changes of not only geographical and geopolitical character; first of all is changed global system of values. Virtual, speculative perceptions prevailing in the past have a tendency to turn into real values. In this sense knowledge is more than a real resource: it is noteworthy that some experts suggest accepting currencies named INFO or INTEL instead of dollar or euro. Another characteristic trait of up-to-date processes is the raise of state factor in all the fields which grounds application of not only liberal but first of all state-institutional approaches.

Up-to-date global moves remind 1990s and the Karabakh war, in which the victory of the Armenian party the western experts condition by our technical supremacy, as in the sense of material resources the enemy had considerable advantage (let’s mention that the term technology expresses the commonness of knowledge resources) and it is difficult not to agree with this situation: at that, the present realities are not that unequivocal.

In the past we talked about the problem that in the Soviet scientific system Armenia’s leading position was only conditioned by our traditional approaches to knowledge and our national peculiarities¹. It is known that today our scientists publish more works in authoritative scientific journals than in Georgia and Azerbaijan in spite of the fact that in those countries more resources are allocated for science. Thus, we can once again state as a fact that we have human resources of desirable quality and in the future we will be able to regain our position in the scientific field.

National science: In the Third Republic a lot of reforms have been effected in almost all the fields but the scientific one. This field seems to have been left out of the state system, become autonomic and the state-science dialogue has acquired a monotone character: representatives of science ask for means from the state, and the latter one refuses it to them. It has come to prove about lack of any strategy in science and in this sense let’s remember the postulate of strategy according to which if you don’t have your strategy, you are the subject another one’s strategy.

At that, scientific-educational field is the most important part of national security’s information segment. In this sense, perhaps it is worth interpreting the perception of national science, which is often perceived in quite a primitive way: one can hear that science is a universal conception. At that, the conception national science has a distinct definition: it is the science serving the national interests. In this sense not only scientific fields directly relating to Armenians and Armeniacy may be national, but also, for example, astrophysics or another fields where there are leading scientific schools and resounding success. Such a leadership raises our country’s rating and it is not a mere moral factor: these realities are taken into account in various structures and rating lists, which in its turn, raises confidence in the very country in the international community thus influencing its security and economy.

In this very context one should take into consideration that sometimes science is treated with mere economic criteria, which is inefficient not only because it is a thankless task to make such calculations: It is to be known that the very scientific-educational system ensures reproduction of national elite of necessary quality, thus, formation of compatible state and society, which is the main pledge of national security.

Let’s mention that our society thinks that it is possible to have a good educational system without the scientific one. It is also a mistake, as it is known that the whole educational hierarchy is based on the scientific level – from pre-school education to post-graduate course.

Methods of organizing science: There is no need to discuss the problems of collapse of the Soviet scientific system to which we have turned in our publications and devoted tens of analyses. To my regret I should state as a fact that the analysis of braking up of this system’s Armenian segment has appeared beyond the sight, it is sometimes forgotten that the imperial scientific system no longer exists and the poor means are used on, for example, studding gender problems of the Arabic world. These are the remnants of the Soviet science, which are to be got rid of and shaped a compact and compatible scientific system. At the same time, it is important to state as a fact that we don’t begin that process from a clear page as we have got the heritage of the very Soviet’s scientific system which by objective or subjective reasons we have treated roughly, however, there are still some resources remaining.

From this standpoint it is to be given brief description of organizing science.

1. The tradition of European “research universities” coming from Middle Ages to patronize only separate gifted scientists who were engaged in the problems they were interested in - the results were especially striking in Germany, however, it split up after the collapse of Nazi regime.
2. Institutional - state financing inherent to Soviet academic system. It was efficient till 1980s; however, it was degraded in parallel with the common system. Let’s mention that in the Communist Party Central Committee a special committee was made to reform the system, but the USSR collapsed. At present a new committee has been created in Russia to be engaged in that issues, the service reports of which Academician Sergeyev has kindly placed at the deposal of “Noravank.”
3. Grant system, which is especially efficient when the researches made are to be given logical end.
4. At present innovative structures have become widely spread, for example, there are 30 thousand innovative companies in the RF, however, according to the observations of Dan Medovnikov, they don’t work efficiently without institutional forms of organization. Innovative activity is the field of researches that have specific way of thinking, and it is considered nonsense to claim for innovative suggestions from academic institutions.
5. Today an opinion has been shaped that it is a methodical mistake to accentuate any separate way of organizing science. It has been very well perceived by Americans, who make a good use of all the ways of organization and their modifications. It is noteworthy that such approaches also win in Russia’s conception about science.
6. Thus, one can state as a fact that complex and synthetic approaches are formed in science organizing field and they are to be considered perceptible for organizing Armenian national science.

What to do and what not to do: At least the Academy of Science should not be split up – it contradicts our interests. From the one hand, one should get rid of the syndromes of the former scientific system and form a new one, however, one shouldn’t destroy the existing, but make use of what we have and make an up-to-date scientific system, where are to be used both institutional and liberal-commercial methods. To discuss these problems it is necessary to form an inter-departmental committee. As the first step it is necessary to improve the scientific infrastructure, qualitatively increase financing of the field, and raise the statues of a scientist. It is extremely important to have non-standard, innovative approaches in this field and not to expect any dividends in this most difficult first stage, otherwise, the losses will prevail.

Return