Due to the pandemic, scientists gathered all over the planet. In order to confront the common enemy, COVID-19, specialized magazines decided to remove subscriptions.In the numerous studies carried out by researchers around the world, anyone can explore, but still explore.However, due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the “microclimate” of pandemic harmony was suppressed. What is the position of these publications when faced with war conflicts?
The truth is that in addition to denouncing Russian actions in the international scientific community, more than 7,000 Russian scientists, mathematicians and scholars faced fines or direct imprisonment for rejecting Vladimir Putin's decision.
“We, scientists and scientific journalists from Russia, declare: Our decisive protest against the military actions initiated by the Armed Forces of our country on the territory of Ukraine,” he said in a letter published on March 4. In that sense, they were convinced that “there is no reasonable justification for this war.” “It is clear that Ukraine does not pose a threat to the security of our country, the war against this is unjust and frankly useless.” I emphasized that. “Many of us have relatives in Ukraine, friends and colleagues in scientific research. Our parents, grandparents and great-grandparents fought against Nazism. Waging war for the geopolitical ambitions of the Russian leadership, fueled by dubious pseudo-historical illusions, is a cynical betrayal of their memory,” he stressed.
Similarly, as if it were a sign, they affirmed that with this decision “Russia condemned international isolation.” “Our scientists will not be able to work normally right now. After all, it is unthinkable to conduct scientific research without fully cooperating with colleagues from other countries”, in the same context mathematicians expressed: “We are convinced that geopolitical interests cannot justify sacrifices and bloodshed; war will only result in the loss of the state of the future in which we work.”
Despite this position, many organizations that promote scientific research have defined funding cuts and cooperation with Russian researchers. That is why the debate began about whether it is necessary to continue publishing in specialized journals. “Russian scientists do not have the moral right to deliver a message to the world scientific community,” said Olesia Vashchuk, director of the Council of Young Scientists of Ukraine, in two letters collected by Nature on March 1, according to the magazine.
Meanwhile, Richard Sever, co-founder of the prepress server BioRxiv and MedRxiv, showed himself to the other side and questioned the goal of punishing scientists who already opposed Putin's decision. “We have to wonder what this is going to achieve, is it sending a signal? If so, there is a better way.” He claimed.
Blame against the international scientific community, but without the isolation of Russian scientists
ba href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00647-w" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"bNature and scientific progress, two of the most authoritative journals in terms of academic and scientific dissemination, condemned the decision of the Russian government. This statement was consistent with what was stated by various organizations, societies and scientific organizations However, these publications warned that they would not isolate Russian scientists.
“Nature, together with the world scientific community, condemns this terrible aggression in the strongest terms, and urges Russia to immediately end the attack. We support and solidify the Ukrainian people, including the research community.” He also shared what he had already seen about civilians on Ukrainian land, saying, “Ukrainian researchers are among those who endure excessive violence and suffering. Many people are bravely holding weapons to defend their country. Others stay in cities that are being bombed to take care of their families.”
Despite the pressure, the magazine took a position as follows: “Some scientists are calling for a complete and global boycott of all Russian research, and scientific journals do not consider articles from Russian researchers. Given the fear of what is happening in Ukraine, such a call is understandable. However, Nature, like many other journals, will continue to consider the manuscripts of researchers from anywhere in the world, because we currently think that such a boycott will do more harm than good. Because “it will divide the global research community and limit the sharing of academic knowledge that has the potential to harm the health and well-being of humanity and the planet.”
Meanwhile, science mark class="hl_yellow"signed by Masha McNut and Juan Hildebrand (President and International Secretary of the National Academy of Sciences in Washington - USA) explained its position/mark. “This war reverses progress in creating a peaceful and sustainable world and addressing important issues facing all mankind, including climate change, environmental degradation, public health and inequality. The international scientific community collaborates extensively to solve the problems of our time, and wars that destroy stable and healthy countries and cause refugee crises are no exception.” They said.
“Many Ukrainian scientists are women who have left with their families during their husband's stay to fight for their country. Many families of male scientists need a cozy home on the outskirts of Ukraine, at least for now.” They said, and they warned: “Although the world tries to support Ukrainian scientists, we must be careful not to criticize Russian scientists indiscriminately by assuming that they all support this conflict; many have been against aggression at their own personal risk.”
Who has already defined turning his back on Russian science
Far from the position of nature and science, the ibmolecular structure journal belonging to Elsevier claimed that it would not consider scientific research carried out by Russian researchers or institutions.Rui Fausto, journal editor and chemist at the University of Coimbra, in Portugal, said: “Without a doubt, it is aimed at Russian institutions, and not aimed at Russian scientists who deserve all our appreciation and respect.” On the other hand, the editorial itself said that this position is not aimed at Russian scientists who deserve all our appreciation and respect. It said that it was not expanded. “If individual editors have a very strong opinion on this issue, they will not apply their preferred approach.” Elsevier said.
“bBy rejecting manuscripts written by Russian authors and excluding Russian journals from Scopus and Web of Science, Elsevier and Clarivate (NDER: a company that provides information and data analysis to scientists) can contribute to the end of this war,” says Myroslava Hladchenko. A student with a political career in higher education at the National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine in Kyiv. He noted that isolating Russian writers and journals will allow these scholars to “re-evaluate their activities and contribute to the development of civil society in their country.”
The Kremlin's response to this international position came on March 7. At that time, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Chernyshenko announced that in order to advance the scientific career pursued by researchers, the requirement to publish in international journals with references such as those previously published will be removed.He even urged the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Russia to promote a self-assessment system.
The letters are drawn and the position of scientific journals is still attracting international attention.
Keep reading: