"Chef, everything is gone!"

We publish the comments of leading Russian scientists on the letter of A.A. Fursenko to the President V.V. Putin.

Dmitry Vibe,
doct. physical. sciences, head. Department of Physics and Evolution of Stars of the Institute of Astronomy of the Russian Academy of Sciences:

It’s somehow boring to comment on it. “Chef, everything is gone! Gypsum is removed, the client is leaving! " Nothing new.

Andrey Rostovtsev ,
doct. physical. Sciences, co -organizer of the Dissernet project:

The concern of A. Fursenko undoubtedly has a real basis. The situation in science today is much more dramatic than it is described in the letter. However, the conclusions and recommendations on the exit from the crisis are made, in my opinion, fundamentally erroneous.

The main problem of the scientific world in Russia is the pyramid of the arrangement of scientific life upside down. The most lower layers (scientific groups) are deprived of any authority, academic freedom and financial independence. Instead, they are burdened with exorbitant reporting in front of higher bureaucrats. In this position, real science cannot develop under any conditions. No development of development priorities will help, since the development mechanism itself is killed. This mechanism is based on specific scientists, and not on the status representatives of the Council for Science under the President of the Russian Federation.

If the flight of capital from the country can be easily measured, then the flight of scientific capital is still difficult to evaluate. It is obviously proportional to the withdrawal of market assets abroad. In the same way as to attract investments, it is necessary to create a favorable climate for ordinary entrepreneurs, and for the development of science in the country, it is necessary to create greenhouse conditions for working scientists.

The main argument against the creation of greenhouse conditions for scientists in Russia is the low efficiency of scientific research. You have to put up with this. Moreover, this will have to endure this for many years until the situation is straightened. The society should consider such an encumbrance as a fine for a long -term neglect of the world of living science.

Andrey Tsaturyan ,
doct. physical. Sciences, leading researcher at the Laboratory of Biomechanics of the Research Institute of Mechanics of the Moscow State University, co -chair of the ONR Council:

Of the three fundamental steps named by A.A. Fursenko, to improve the state of science (“Reorganization of the academic sector of science, the allocation and support of a group of leading universities focused on scientific research, the creation of a full -fledged institution of grant financing - the Russian Scientific Fund”) The first was frankly destructive and knocked out thousands from the normal operating mode of operation

scientists, the second was bureaucratic and “companion” in nature and equipped some universities with expensive equipment, with a “cut and rollback” of a significant part of the funds spent on its purchase. Now, many of these devices and installations simply have no one to work, and certainly there is definitely nothing to buy supplies, not to mention the device to repair. Finally, the third “step” may work, but so far none of the leaders of RNF grants even received a penny even a penny, and the winners of the rest of the competitions are announced, so it’s too early to talk about the return.

Of the proposed “projects” I can only evaluate one thing: creating new drugs to combat infections. In a situation where in the Russian Federation the entire size of a competitive science of life is less than in one leading US University, the setting of such a task seems to be a pure “maneulin” and another “cut”.

Instead of creating conditions for work and keeping the few competitive scientists and their young students in the country (for example, having removed customs and bureaucratic obstacles and requisitions when acquiring instruments and consumables), which have already shown their complete failure of the sawing and organizational measures: to open up the “technological valley” in the dying of old age and the dying of old age and the dying of old age and the old age and Negiability to the Titanic of Moscow State University, to conduct a priority, i.e. Non -exchange financing of the listed projects through the RNF and the state program for the development of science and technology in the Russian Federation.

And finally, to concentrate all financial and administrative levers in the hands of the Council on Science and Education under the President of the Russian Federation and the corresponding administration of the President of the Russian Federation, whose operational leadership is carried out by a happily coincidence by A.A. Fursenko.

Mikhail Feigelman ,
doct. physical. sciences, deputy. Director of the Institute of Theoretical Physics. Landau RAS:

The key ideological motive of the Fursenko program (if, in fact, it is enclosed in the above text), it is similar to what the monkey from Krylov’s fable would write if she knew how to write. The “integration of Russian science into world space” was carried out in about the same way as that monkey turned into her paws with glasses. Now, offended by the result of her own stupidity, she decides that the glasses are not suitable for anything and they need to be thrown away. Everything else in the “Program” is another version of the cutting technology and rollback, which differs from the previous only the convenience of its application specifically for the author of the program.

Konstantin Severinov,
doct. Biol. sciences, head. Laboratory at the Institute of Molecular Genetics and the Institute of Biology of the Gene of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Professor Skoltha:

Almost every phrase in the letter of A.A. Fursenko raises questions. There is a lot of distortions and logical inconsistencies who do not honor the analysts who prepared the letter. The objections are quite obvious, they do not want to waste time on them. As for the projects indicated in the letter, the proposal to engage in antibiotics is, of course, a big step forward. Just like the voiced by A.A. In the program article in the journal "Expert" "Scientific needs of the country" [1] a proposal to engage in the modern level with therapeutic bacteriophages.

And this is not even because my laboratories are actively engaged in both. It’s just that Russian biomedicine in the near future will not be able to make any real competition developed foreign countries in “fashionable” areas of the type of genetic medicine, combating cancer, developing stem cells, etc. Search niches in which we can achieve significant results, it is necessary based on the understanding of our strengths, and not that the relevant programs are opening abroad (and this is how it was with nano and clutches).

The indicated A.A. The directions are certainly socially significant and strongly related to bioinformatics, the only area in which our positions are relatively strong. Work in these areas will require a study of a huge number of natural samples (soils, water, air, etc.), and here our country occupies a very advantageous position.

On the other hand, both directions are already actively developed in Europe, the USA and Japan, and both areas are rapidly technologized (so soon studies will become no less expensive than “fashionable” biomedical topics) and now require a very developed scientific infrastructure. Therefore, plans to start work in the Moscow State University Valley that will open no earlier than 2018 [2], must be reviewed.

Pavel Chebotarev ,
doct. physical. Sciences, G.N.S. Institute of Management Problems named after V.A. Trapeznikova RAS:

The basis of modern science is a free circulation of ideas and people leading to cooperation. The Russian segment, which makes up 2-3% of world science, can develop normally only as part of its body. It is clear that the installation on the isolation of this segment will lead to its complete decay. As a result of the replacement of world scientific criteria for “sovereign” and weakening and so scarce international ties, “scientists” like Petrik, all kinds of demagogues and imitators will take the dominant position in Russian science.

But today the shadow of politics is on science. The aggravation of disagreements between Russia and the most developed countries enhances its isolation; In the air, like an ax, there is already the idea of ​​supporting on its own strength (chuchhe). And the hole in the budget enhances the spirit of utilitarianism.

Officials immediately try to saddle any slogan of the day. A. Fursenko in a letter to V. Putin insists on the need for “immediate changes in the organization of Russian science” and declares: “The integration of Russian science into the world scientific space, contrary to expectations, did not make it more effective.” This passage leads to the conclusion: the course on integration was mistaken and should be canceled.

What in return? “The principle of independence” (from abroad) when building scientific and technical policy. The Soviet model of the Cold War is given as a positive example: “... if in Soviet times, despite the active actions of our competitors to contain the development of science in the USSR, we remained competitive in a number of directions, then at present Russia has almost completely abandoned its own new ambitious projects.”

In contrast to this “struggle for independence” today, almost all major advanced scientific projects are carried out in international cooperation. “Own ambitious projects” are mainly military projects of the rogue countries, which are not distinguished by any novelty.

In addition, after two decades of actual non -financing, the power of Russian science and its ability to develop autonomously are very inferior to Soviet indicators. Therefore, the success of future “own ambitious projects” is not in doubt only in terms of the development of megabytes.

The second subject of the letter is the “main directions” of the development of the scientific and technical sphere. One of the points of the proposed Fursenko measures provides for work on their choice. But at another point, he is ready to name them (as you might guess, these directions are purely utilitarian). Moreover, he considers it necessary to “structure the institutions subordinate to the fan, highlighting the groups that ensure the implementation” of these areas. Having laid the beginning of the caste segregation of scientists, Fursenko goes further and lists specific projects, which will ensure that he will ensure, how he has “assuming every reason”, Russian groups “place among world leaders”. And at one point in its measures, it offers "to ensure priority financing of these projects."

Almost everyone who has something to do with Russian science will easily describe the main consequences of the implementation of this concept, the approval of which the president of the country has already been received.

Yuri Kovalev ,
doct. physical. sciences, head. Laboratory of the Astrosmic Center Fian, head of the scientific program of the Radio Astron project, member of the Council for Science of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation:

I believe that the state has the right to formulate priorities. In this approach, as such, there is no crime in principle. However, the devil, as always, in details.

Part 1: In fact, these priorities (referring to the experience of recent years) only receive significant funding. That is, the rest of the areas suffer to a much greater extent than necessary for the country's comprehensive scientific and technical development.

Part 2: All priorities are applied to a greater or lesser extent. However, it has already been said repeatedly (I am not going to repeat a bunch of articles in the TRV on this topic) that it is the development of fundamental science that creates the base. Moreover, I immediately note that the development of fundamental science will give an impetus to both the economy and high technologies. After all, it is the new infrastructure projects of a fundamental nature that set the most difficult tasks before technologies. Examples close to me from astronomy: Elt, Alma, SKA. Naturally, a super -collar.

Detail 3: And who are the judges? There is a serious concern that the structure proposed for making final decisions (the Council for Science under the President and its Presidium) has many members with a serious conflict of interest.

At the last Council for Science, we discussed the issue of just making decisions on infrastructure projects. We discussed that the state was almost completely focused on applied Central Committee forces (centers of collective use), and there are a huge number of fundamental tasks requiring new large infrastructure projects. And their construction will undoubtedly push the technology forward. A proposal was expressed on how to select priority fundamental tasks and the corresponding infrastructure projects. (See press release [3].)

Sergey Nechaev ,
doct. physical. Sciences, leading researcher at the Mathematical Physics sector Fian, Directeur de Recherche au Cnrs Universite Paris-Sud, Orsa, France:

Emotionally, this letter caused a sickening sensation of the standard game of Russian officials: one pretends to say something smart and significant, and the other pretends to make decisions.

In fact, to science and those who do it, what has been said has nothing to do, but quite demonstrates the administrative delight necessary for career advancements.

It seems to me that global tasks such as the stated do not even need to be tried to set due to the obvious impossibility of their implementation. In the same way, you can set the task of starting the development of minerals on the moon ...

The sad position of science in Russia and the position of Russia in the world community allows us to hope only for the strategy of "small steps", such as:

• participation in joint scientific projects with foreign countries,
• development of the Russian Institute of Postdroks (including the invitation of postdrods from abroad),
• The development of a normal system of grants of the TFRSFA type with a foreign expert assessment, the admission of specialists (in non -officials) to the distribution of money, and a decrease in the bureaucratic load on grant recipients.

In general, the main thing, of course, is in the general atmosphere of Kafkian delirium and intellectual depression: scientists in captivity do not multiply ...

Alexey Kondrashov ,
cand. Biol. Sciences, professor of the Institute of Biological Sciences and Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology of the University of Michigan University, Creator and Head. Laboratory of evolutionary genomics of the Faculty of Bioinformatics and Bioenginery of Moscow State University:

This letter raises a number of questions.

The first paragraph. It is impossible to wait for no benefit from the “fundamentally important steps taken over the past two years”. The harm from the reform can occur immediately, but the benefit is always with a delay. I believe that the creation of the RNF, which has just distributed the first grants, can be useful.

The second paragraph. And what, the “integration of Russian science into the world scientific space” has already occurred? When at Moscow State University (we don’t have about other universities) the professor’s vacancy opens, is it publishing an ad on Nature ? As for the “priorities formulated abroad” and the general second -rate of Russian science (a few exceptions only confirm this rule), then, unfortunately, it is true.

Third paragraph. The described situation arose primarily due to the fact that the professor of Moscow State University will never be able to buy an apartment in Moscow for his salary.

The fourth and fifth paragraphs. “The risks of the influence of external factors” are not the main trouble from second -rate science, although we can say about them. But I did not understand about buying and sales at all. And if there was a first -class science in Russia - would this guarantee oil salesiness?

Sixth paragraph. Everything is true about the international situation - the aggression against Ukraine caused, among other things, great harm to Russian science. It consists, first of all, not in any sanctions and boycotts, but in the difficult to measure Western scientific elites, which ceased to perceive Russia as part of the civilized world. The only correct (in every sense) way to fight this is to return the Crimea with an apology and stop supporting the separatists. But since there is no talk of this, you have to come up with palliative measures.

Seventh, eighth and ninth paragraphs. Independence and competitiveness are, of course, good, but these principles are formulated too widely. “The normal functioning of the state and society, the high defense capacity of the country, ensuring minimal life standards” ... (And in the next paragraph - so even high!) Is this all - the tasks of science? If so, then the president of Russia should be forts ...
Then A.A. Fursenko offers 4 “projects”, which will strengthen independence and competitiveness. The projects are quite meaningful, but you can offer many others, equally meaningful. Offhand:

• New antibiotics-there is no dispute, it is very important, but the fight against cardiovascular diseases is even more important-more than half of deaths in Russia come from them,
• Two out of four projects - about energy, and where, for example, nanotechnology?

Unfortunately, I do not share A.A. Optimism Fursenko, who believes that “in the case of creating an effective system for organizing and managing the listed projects”, “Russian scientific groups will take a place among world leaders”, is this in the field of “information and communication technologies”? But what, the American state somehow organized the projects of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and then managed them?

The measures proposed to solve the tasks contradict each other:

• The technological valley of Moscow State University is good, but not enough in the USA for every serious university there is some technopark or business incubator.
• The item about priority directions directly contradicts the previously formulated 4 projects, since all biology and medicine (and not just antibiotics) fell into these areas. And biology with medicine, this, in costs - is more than half of modern natural science - so what are the priorities here.
• Then it is said about “coordination of work on choosing the main areas of development of the scientific and technical sphere”-although the direction seems to have already been selected?

It is easy to criticize, but what would I offer the authorities (without going beyond the scope of the organization of science)?

• Способствовать действительной интеграции Российской науки в мировую.
• Осуществить децентрализацию науки. Когда Путин является председателем совета попечителей ведущего вуза страны — это путь в никуда. Обама никак не причастен к управлению Гарвардом.
• Обуздывать свое желание всем управлять. Если когда-нибудь Российские ученые смогут сформулировать собственные (осмысленные!) приоритеты, произойдет это не попечением властей, а потому что Васе Иванову пришла в голову хорошая идея.
• Финансировать науку за счет честно раздаваемых грантов (хочется верить, что РНФ — шаг в правильном направлении).
• Выгнать министров и прочих госслужащих с ворованными диссертациями.