logo
Scientists can't stay in their ivory tower

Scientists can't stay in their ivory tower

Japan Times21-07-2025
For decades, scientists were told to stay neutral, stay professional — and stay in the lab. But today, as U.S. researchers rally in the streets and lawmakers slash science budgets, one thing is clear: science can't stay in its ivory tower anymore.
In March, over 2,000 researchers, students and supporters gathered across the United States to protest sweeping science and technology budget cuts. The Trump administration's proposed budget for fiscal year 2026 — dubbed by some as a 'skinny' or 'beautiful' budget — proposes a 47% cut to NASA's science budget and a staggering 56% cut to the National Science Foundation (NSF). Funding for climate change research has been virtually eliminated. Unless Congress intervenes, the U.S. faces the most severe science and technology budget cuts in modern history.
In response, scientists across the country are beginning to speak out. NASA employees held peaceful protests opposing the proposed cuts, while nearly 2,000 leading U.S. scientists — including over 30 Nobel laureates and numerous members of the National Academies — signed an open letter warning that the nation's scientific enterprise is being 'decimated' and issued an 'SOS' to the public. The American Association for the Advancement of Science — the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society — also urged scientists to speak publicly and engage policymakers. As its CEO Sudip Parikh warned, 'If enacted, the FY2026 budget request would end America's global scientific leadership.'
This level of public mobilization by scientists is rare in the U.S., where most academics were trained to stay 'above politics.' But in this moment, they realized something critical: Silence can't protect science.
As a Japanese scientist who has lived in the United States for over two decades, I'm watching this unfold with deep concern — and a sense of deja vu. While Japan's science funding hasn't yet faced cuts on the scale of the U.S., the underlying threats are already present: public disengagement, institutional invisibility and a shrinking voice in policymaking.
In Japan, researchers are often taught that engaging in public debate or policy will jeopardize their credibility. We pride ourselves on being impartial and apolitical. These are admirable traits in scholarship — but dangerous in the public sphere. If scientists don't tell our story — of discovery, impact and public benefit — others will tell it for us. And not everyone has science's best interest in mind.
Already, we see mounting political and societal pressure around AI ethics, environmental policy and gender equity in STEM. These are areas where science should guide the conversation — not respond after the fact.
In the U.S., we're seeing a cultural shift. Scientists are not just publishing papers — they're writing op-eds, organizing briefings with lawmakers and speaking directly to the public. Their message is clear: Science is not separate from society — it serves society.
Japan, too, has ambitions to globalize its research base. Last month, the Cabinet Office launched J-RISE (Japan Research & Innovation for Scientific Excellence) — a ¥100 billion ($673 million) initiative to make Japan the world's most attractive destination for researchers. While the U.S. faces historic cuts to science and technology funding, Japan is signaling its commitment to global scientific leadership.
But there's a paradox: While the Japanese government actively seeks foreign talent, many domestic researchers still hesitate to engage with their own communities or shape the future of science policy.
One institutional tool the U.S. has embraced is the idea of 'Broader Impacts.' Every NSF proposal requires researchers to explain how their work will benefit society — whether through education, outreach or broader societal impacts. Outreach is not a side project; it is baked into the mission of science. This expectation reflects a core reality: Most scientific research is publicly funded and scientists have a responsibility to give back to society. Japan has no such requirement, and as a result, science communication and community connection are often seen as optional — or even overlooked — in Japanese academic culture.
Earlier this year, I had the opportunity to visit Capitol Hill shortly after the Trump administration took office, as a member of the U.S.–Japan Network for the Future, a policy fellowship organized by the Mansfield Foundation and the Japan Foundation. I am honored to be the first scientist ever selected for this program.
Our cohort of scholars and policy practitioners engaged directly with congressional staff and U.S. agencies, gaining insight into how science and policy intersect — and often collide. We recently traveled to Tokyo and Kyushu, where cities like Fukuoka and Kumamoto are transforming into "Japan's Silicon Valley,' driven by the semiconductor industry, government-backed startup accelerators and progressive immigration initiatives. These experiences underscored a critical truth: Science, diplomacy and innovation are inseparable — yet scientists remain largely absent from policymaking circles.
Now is the time for scientists to return to society — not just as experts, but as engaged members of the public we serve. We must listen, communicate and collaborate. In a divided information landscape, science alone will not speak for itself. We must.
Yuko Kakazu, an astrophysicist, is a cohort member of the Mansfield Foundation's U.S.-Japan Network for the Future.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump is trying to build a far-right international alliance
Trump is trying to build a far-right international alliance

Japan Times

time5 hours ago

  • Japan Times

Trump is trying to build a far-right international alliance

Until recently, the specter of an international far-right alliance of populist parties in democracies around the world has been just that: any appearance of cooperation was a form of self-promotion, rather than an expression of true solidarity. Few far-right figures have made any sacrifices for one another or seriously interfered in other countries' internal affairs to prop up allies. And efforts to unite the far right in the European Parliament have fallen dismally short. But that may be changing. U.S. President Donald Trump's threat to impose punitive tariffs on Brazil, with the explicit goal of protecting its far-right former president, Jair Bolsonaro, from a 'witch hunt,' marks a significant shift in tactics. What's more, Trump's meddling in other democracies in the name of 'free speech' serves powerful interests in the United States: tech companies that do not want to be regulated by foreign governments. The international far right is often said to be a contradiction in terms. After all, every far-right leader is a nationalist, which would seem to preclude, by definition, an international alliance. But this view shows little philosophical sophistication or, for that matter, historical awareness. In 19th-century Europe, liberals like Giuseppe Mazzini helped one another in their various struggles for freedom and independence from imperial powers. At the time, no one complained that there was a deep contradiction embedded in a liberal international alliance devoted to national self-determination. By the same token, today's far-right populists can claim that they form a united front against 'globalists' and supposedly illegitimate 'liberal elites.' This rhetoric — and the attendant conspiracy theories, often tinged with anti-Semitism — has easily crossed borders. Far-right politicians have also copied from one another what scholars have called 'worst practices' for undermining democracies. Just think of the proliferation of laws that force civil-society organizations to register as 'foreign agents,' or other thinly veiled repressive tactics. The far right also has a transnational ideological infrastructure. To be sure, there is no populist Comintern issuing binding interpretations of doctrine. But collaboration is real: for instance, Hungarian institutes lavishly endowed by Viktor Orban's government are now allied with the Heritage Foundation in the U.S. So far, though, there has been a lack of concrete solidarity among populist leaders. When Trump fraudulently claimed to have won the 2020 U.S. presidential election, his international allies, from Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, could have refused to recognize Joe Biden as president. Instead, they congratulated Biden on his victory, choosing pragmatism over ideological affinity. But Trump is changing that in his second term, embracing an ideologically driven approach to confronting other countries that obviously undermines long-standing international norms. In the case of Brazil, he is using the threat of a 50% tariff to pressure the government into ending the federal criminal trial against Bolsonaro for seeking to engineer a coup after losing the 2022 presidential election. Unlike Trump, who was never held accountable for his role in the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, Bolsonaro — often called the 'Trump of the Tropics' — has already been banned from running for office until 2030. In his letter to the Brazilian government announcing the levy, Trump also accused it of 'insidious attacks on ... the fundamental Free Speech Rights of Americans,' including the censorship of 'U.S. Social Media platforms.' This highlights another dimension of Trump's economic bullying: his administration's crusade against efforts to prohibit hate speech and regulate the digital sphere. In February, Vice President JD Vance berated Europeans for their supposed lack of respect for 'free speech.' Meanwhile, the State Department has reportedly targeted the prominent Brazilian judge Alexandre de Moraes, who at one point blocked Elon Musk's X in Brazil and is taking the lead in holding Bolsonaro criminally accountable for his conduct. Big Tech is clearly displeased with the extensive regulations that the European Union and Brazil have placed on its industry. As in other areas — notably its attacks on higher education — the Trumpists are weaponizing free speech to exert power over supposed political adversaries. The hypocrisy is apparent: while advocating for deregulation of platforms ostensibly to protect free speech, the U.S. government is snooping around in the social-media accounts of foreign nationals for speech it dislikes (and then refusing a visa or entry on this basis). Pious talk of defending democracy as a shared Western value sits uneasily with the abject disrespect for other countries' right to determine their own approach to platform regulation. Whereas far-right leaders of smaller countries are limited by realpolitik, Trump can use America's might to advance his punitive-cum-populist agenda at will. After all, a pliant Republican Party will not question his abuse of the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act. True, the courts may ultimately decide that his desire for political revenge hardly constitutes an 'emergency,' but the damage will have been done. As in other areas where his administration has taken plainly illegal actions, many of those being targeted will seek a deal rather than a fight. Solidarity is costly, but not for Trump. [/bio]Jan-Werner Mueller, professor of politics at Princeton University, is the author, most recently, of "Democracy Rules" (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2021). © Project Syndicate, 2025[/bio]

Japan expects only 1% to 2% of $550 billion U.S. fund to be investment
Japan expects only 1% to 2% of $550 billion U.S. fund to be investment

Japan Times

time9 hours ago

  • Japan Times

Japan expects only 1% to 2% of $550 billion U.S. fund to be investment

Japan expects only 1% to 2% of its recently agreed upon $550 billion U.S. fund to be in the form of actual investment, with the bulk of it being loans, according to the nation's chief tariff negotiator, Ryosei Akazawa. At the same time, Tokyo would save roughly ¥10 trillion ($68 billion) through lower tariff rates in its deal with America, he said. The $550 billion investment framework will be a combination of investments, loans and loan guarantees provided by financial institutions backed by the Japanese government, Akazawa said on public broadcaster NHK on Saturday night. Of the total, investment would be worth 1% or 2% and the United States and Japan would split the profits of that investment at a ratio of 90-to-10, he said. Japan had originally proposed a 50-50 ratio, he added. The fund is a centerpiece of the deal announced by the two sides that will impose 15% tariffs on Japanese cars and other goods. But the details given by Akazawa suggest the Japanese may end up giving up much less than at first glance. The comments come as officials from countries with deals with the U.S. sift through the terms to explain to the public what they entail. "It's not that $550 billion in cash will be sent to the U.S.,' Akazawa said. "By letting the U.S. have 90% of the profits rather than 50%, I think Japan's loss will be at most a couple of tens of billions of yen. People are saying various things, such as 'You sold out Japan,' but they're wrong.' For the loans provided through the program, Japan will simply be collecting the interest payments, and for the loan guarantees, if nothing happens Japan will also be just collecting fees, Akazawa said. "For that part, Japan's just making money,' he said. Akazawa also clarified that the investment program won't be only supporting Japanese and U.S. firms. As a potential example, he cited a Taiwanese semiconductor firm building a factory in the U.S. "We'd like to put the $550 billion in place during President (Donald) Trump's term,' Akazawa added. Further details of the implementation of the U.S.-Japan deal remain unclear including when the new tariff rates would take effect and when the new investment vehicle would kick off. There's been no joint document signed by both sides for the deal, although the White House has published a fact sheet. "If you say something like, 'Let's create a joint document,' they will say, 'We'll lower tariffs after the document is created,'' Akazawa said. In order to not lose time, "we will demand that they issue an executive order to lower tariffs as soon as possible, regardless of a document.' Last week, Akazawa said he expects universal tariffs on Japan's shipments to be lowered to 15% on Aug. 1, while he said he wanted the car tariffs to be cut to 15% as soon as possible without specifying a date. The Trump administration has touted the deal with Japan as a potential model for others. On Sunday, the U.S. and European Union agreed on a deal that will see the bloc face 15% tariffs on most of its exports with the EU pledging to invest $600 billion in the U.S.

More than 20% of NASA employees opt to leave agency: US media
More than 20% of NASA employees opt to leave agency: US media

NHK

time10 hours ago

  • NHK

More than 20% of NASA employees opt to leave agency: US media

US media outlets say nearly 4,000 employees have applied to leave the NASA space agency under a program by President Donald Trump's administration to cut federal spending. CBS News and other media have reported that 3,870 staff, or over 20 percent of NASA's workforce, have applied to leave. The agency employs about 18,000 people. The reports said the deadline for applications for the deferred resignation program was on Friday. The Trump administration says NASA will face a 24-percent year-on-year reduction in the budget for the fiscal year that begins in October. About 360 current and former employees of the agency published an open letter on Monday last week to voice their opposition to the spending cuts. The "Voyager Declaration" says, "The last six months have seen rapid and wasteful changes which have undermined our mission and caused catastrophic impacts on NASA's workforce."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store