Secrecy and Freedom

"TRUST BUT verify," President Reagan said before signing an arms reduction treaty with the Soviet Union. It is ironic that many at Harvard are not willing to give the CIA--a body of our own government--the same chance.

Some have criticized this month's announcement that the Kennedy School would administer a new research project funded by the CIA. They believe that the link between the University and America's intelligence gathering arm would somehow "legitimize" the CIA--whatever that means--and sully Harvard's reputation as a "liberal institution."

"How gross," said a friend of mine who has at times been found protesting at University-sponsored dinners and living in cardboard boxes in the Yard. "The CIA KILLS people."

So has the American government and most other governments in the course of waging wars and policing crimes. Is Harvard then to refuse money from all federal agencies, since the government has done things in the past which do not jive with Harvard's supposed mission as liberal institution? The CIA is not South Africa, from which many American companies have divested in order to protest the actions of the apartheid regime. There is no moral basis, then, for rejecting money from the CIA but accepting it basically without restriction from all other sectors in society--industries, other government agencies, foundations and wealthy donors.

TURNING DOWN the CIA does nothing to pressure the intelligence agency to change its ways. Instead, it would slap the CIA in the face--as it, ironically, moves toward greater openness.

Naive critics of the CIA link would like to make the university an Ivory Tower hidden from the pressures of the nation and the nation a similar tower hidden from the pressures of the world. But in this dangerous international environment, we must play the game of the Soviet bloc--which has used all forms of espionage and covert action in its perpetual competition with the United States for world predominance--in order to preserve the freedoms and liberties we enjoy. To think otherwise would be foolhardy and unrealistic, something not unusual to many hiding from the real world behind ivy-covered walls.

By accepting funding from the CIA, Harvard is not risking its academic freedom through association with a secret and covert wing of government. The contract has been checked and double-checked to ensure that the University's rules--the strictest in academia--forbidding censorship and requiring the publication of all results are preserved. "The contract has no leaks," said Vice President for Government and Community Affairs John Shattuck, a national authority on academic freedom and the problems of government secrecy.

WHAT RADICAL critics would like is a ban on research funding from the CIA and other "secretive" government agencies such as the Defense Department. But would not such a ban be as great a threat to academic freedom as any fears arising from a connection with the CIA? In a time when all universities are finding it harder and harder to acquire research funds, rejecting money from the CIA and other government agencies would in the long run threaten the universities' financial--and consequently academic--independence.

Professors would not be free to seek the sponsors they want nor would they be able to study the subjects they want. Ironically, by yielding to to anti-CIA sentiment, the University would be in effect caving into pressures from the outside world.

Instead of condemnation, the University should be commended for being bold enough to reject knee-jerk sentiment and come to terms with the CIA. Two years ago, it was revealed that in exchange for research funds. Harvard professors Nadav Safran and Samuel P. Huntington had allowed the CIA to review their work before publication. The new K-School contract represents an amazing evolution from the secrecy and deception surrounding those incidents.

The CIA-Harvard relationship represents a landmark in the history of relations between academia and the government. All of higher education will watch its progress, viewing it as an example of how academic freedom and working with a secret agency can be reconciled to the benefit of the university. It's just too bad that many at Harvard won't give the CIA that same chance.