At stake are not only the direction of the national laboratories and nuclear weapons, but also the role of universities in an increasingly corporatized United States. The University of Texas (UT) has allied with Lockheed Martin (LM), the world¹s largest defense contractor, in bidding for the LANL managing contract. UC is aligned with Bechtel, the world¹s largest building contractor, in an effort to retain work at LANL. Both Lockheed Martin and Bechtel have perfected the revolving door between corporations and government and are now blurring the lines between industry, politics and academia.

To make matters fuzzier, the UC/Bechtel team have signed on with the University of New Mexico, New Mexico State, and New Mexico Tech. UT/Lockheed have formed an academic network with Arizona State University, Carnegie Mellon University, Colorado School of Mines, Florida State University, Georgia Institute of Technology, Indiana University, Johns Hopkins University, Lehigh University, Michigan Technological University, Purdue University, Rice University, Texas A&M system, University of Arizona, University of Colorado system, University of Florida, University of Michigan, University of Utah, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and the University of Texas system.

Granted, these academic networks are for research and peer review that may not necessarily be for nuclear weapons work. Most universities have stated they will not do classified research or research on nuclear weapons. But at least 2/3 of the work at LANL, which has a $2.1 billion annual budget, is directly weapons-related activities. Much of the non-weapons work is classified. Regardless, will any university be able to totally disassociate itself from nuclear weapons while working at the world¹s best-known nuclear weapons laboratory? Students groups at University of Colorado and the University of California have asked their university to disassociate from LANL.

Currently the management at LANL is a not for profit venture. Universities will be part of a new focus at LANL, which is profit. The new contract could pay the winning team a fee of as much as $79 million a year, most of which
is performance-based. The new manager will be taking orders from Congress and the National Nuclear Security Administration, which are actually in charge of LANL¹s destiny, including any funding for research. When Iraq and
Katrina have placed severe financial restraints on government spending, one has to ask if there will there be any funding left for pure science research?

The universities have come up with many reasons to join LANL in an academic network. But universities have already been doing research at LANL without an academic network. Why start now?

Of further concern is the ability for the future managing team to utilize these academic networks as a recruitment tool. It is ethically wrong to marry institutions of learning with institutions of war. Inevitably, the youngest generations will suffer the ramifications of the most deceptive and manipulative forms of recruitment. This deteriorates the very core of the integrity of intellectual institutions. Currently without a network, 50% of the students that work at the summer intern program at LANL go on to work full time. Both bidders are looking for independent peer review. How independent can this review be if a university is dependent upon funding
from LANL?

In the end, both bidders are just using the other universities as window dressing to bolster their bid. To sign on with Lockheed or Bechtel is to say that one agrees with their checkered pasts. It's like marrying someone for
their money, ignoring everything else and then hoping it will all work out.

In turn, we, as residents of New Mexico, demand our State universities, the University of California, the University of Texas, and all other universities in the academic network pull out of these alliances to preserve academic integrity, intellectual freedom and the endorsement of a pedagogy that upholds life rather than annihilating it. It¹s time for the universities to open their eyes and show how they can use the principles of critical thinking that they purport to teach.

Sadaf Cameron, Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety, www.nuclearactive.org Scott Kovac, Nuclear Watch New Mexico, www.nukewatch.org