Clash of words

Unequivocally acclaimed in the world of science, Nobel Laureate Ahmed Zewail has raised controversies inside Egypt. He spoke to Aziza Sami
Three things were on my mind as I prepared to meet Ahmed Zewail. The first: how far the Nobel laureate in chemistry, an expatriate Egyptian and a US citizen, had progressed toward his self-professed goal of initiating a "scientific renaissance" in Egypt since he received the award in 1999. His continual declaration of this objective to the media ultimately induced criticism of the distinguished scientist himself. Detractors said that Zewail had allowed himself to become yet another media phenomenon, a cog in an endless cycle of promises that the state has failed to back up through policy moves on the ground.
The second: the political controversies in Egypt when he obtained the Nobel. Zewail received the award for what the Nobel Academy described as "his pioneering investigation of fundamental chemical reactions, using ultra-short laser flashes -- [contributions] which have brought about a revolution in chemistry and adjacent sciences." This new field of science is now called femtochemistry. Some articles in the Egyptian press, however, supported by off-the-record conversations with a few scientists, alleged that Zewail -- even if he deserved the prize on scientific merit -- had received it nevertheless because he had gained the approval of the "Zionist lobby." Other Arab scientists who had made important contributions but taken anti-Israeli stances had not received similar recognition, said those critics. Zewail visited the Knesset in May 1993 to receive a scientific prize there, as he published in his autobiography. But it was rumoured as well, although this writer could not verify the allegation, that he had undertaken research with Israeli scientists. The outcome, according to these critics, was that political expediency helped Zewail receive the Nobel. The argument that a "pro-Israeli" position is a requisite to gaining the world's most coveted award remains significant, since similar allegations were directed to Zewail's two Egyptian predecessors: the late President Anwar El-Sadat, and novelist Naguib Mahfouz.
The third point it would no doubt prove interesting to discuss was a growing perception that he was excessively eager for media attention, in a manner unwarranted by his scientific status.
A bodyguard led me down the hall to Zewail's suite in a Cairo hotel. The laureate opened the door. Neat in trousers and a light brown shirt, he looked like his pictures, with his moustache and shock of very black hair. A copy of his autobiography Voyage Through Time. Walks of Life to the Nobel Prize (AUC Press) lay, alongside a string of prayer beads, on the cream-coloured sofa. He asked where Sherif, the photographer, was. I said he would be joining us soon.
Why the bodyguard? I asked. "It is one of those requirements demanded by the Egyptian government ever since I received the Nobel prize. I don't like it, but they believe it is necessary, because as a public figure I can be targeted by anyone who wants to make trouble for the country here."
He comes to Cairo every year, sometimes three times a year. This time, he was in town to attend the annual meeting of the Board of Trustees of the American University in Cairo. He said that AUC, rather than his own alma mater, the University of Alexandria, was the first to honour his achievement when he received the Benjamin Franklin Medal in Chemistry in 1998. He had just given the commencement speech at AUC's fall graduation ceremony, and had been moved, he said, by the standing ovation the students gave him. He was proud of the endowment he had created to help support the Zewail Prize in Sciences and Humanities -- awarded for three consecutive years now -- for seniors displaying excellence in research, and preferably in a topic that bridges the gap between the two fields.
'There are people who say this about Israel, that America helps and subsidises it. But this alone will not qualify one for scientific progress. There are some Gulf states which are super-rich. Why did they achieve nothing in science and technology?'
What, then, of his aspirations to help initiate a scientific renaissance in Egypt? Why, specifically, did the University of Science and Technology, whose establishment he proposed three years ago, never make the transition from the headlines to implementation?
"Initiating a scientific 'renaissance'" has been my preoccupation for the past 12 years. [After I obtained the Nobel] I met with President Mubarak, who was very supportive of the principle of a university for science and technology. We wanted this to be a non- governmental, non-profit organisation, which is a new concept in Egypt. The idea was to adopt the same principle by which an institution like the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), which is non-profit, operates. Caltech has an endowment fund of close to $2 billion. At the same time, because it is non-profit and not run by the government, it has flexibility in obtaining the top people, who can do scientific research at the highest level without having to report to a specific bureaucracy."
According to Zewail, President Mubarak himself "was very enthusiastic about the idea" and agreed to extend his patronage to the university. "Six Nobel laureates have agreed to sit on its board of trustees. Even its academic and administrative structures are in place." Yet the university still awaits "the law for the establishment of science and technology in Egypt." The law has been drafted and awaits approval by the president and parliament. But until it is issued, the university cannot operate as an independent financial entity, or raise the funds needed for its operation.
"Quite frankly, I cannot be serious about building a scientific base, or start a fund-raising campaign for such a university, unless certain things are made very clear first, such as taxes and customs. For instance, if we have a piece of equipment in customs, will we have to wait a year in order to get it into the country?"
There are other problems.
"The government gave us 300 acres to build the campus on, but we still needed a building. We needed initial support, and there were problems with this. The implementation process in Egypt is rather slow, and when bureaucracy exceeds the limits, it becomes a barrier to any progress. So of course, people get tired of hearing about this with nothing being delivered in the end."
As one who knows the constraints all too well, does he condone the image the media often propagates, that he will single-handedly bring about a scientific rebirth? "I think the impression is reasonable. This happens all over the world. Every country, in the advanced West as well, when it has a Nobel laureate in science or medicine, immediately tries to utilise the opportunity to advance its science and technology. All of a sudden, within the span of 24 hours, this man becomes different -- connected to the world. Germany did this when it established the Max Planck Institute, after Planck became a Nobel laureate. The same happened in France, and in the US. I think people's reactions were legitimate. But what was not realised was that in the West, the person is supported by all the institutions present. There is no way I can do this alone. I do not have a post in Egypt, nor do I wish to have one. But I would like to be able to help rebuild the scientific base in my birth country, which has given me so much."
Could Egypt's business community, NGOs or civil society, not fund the "scientific base"? He approached several business community leaders, but felt they were "more inclined to think in terms of charitable institutions and activities." It is also important to realise that "it is the government which must first support initiatives to create such a science base, before asking businesses to come and invest in it."
In the US, he elaborated, "you see integrated support for science. It is not as if they were relying on Bill Gates to come and establish this base. Had the US government not supported the science and technology base, it would not have existed. The whole system is totally convinced of the need to have a strong science foundation." He referred to cooperation between state-supported research and leading non-profit academic institutions, which derive their funding from endowments induced by tax benefits. "There is also the National Science Foundation, the army, and the defence initiative that supports basic research to promote the development of technology."
He evokes, too, the experience of Japan in the 1860s and of India today -- the latter, proof that even massive poverty will not stand in the way of determinaton to achieve scientific progress. He speaks, on the other hand, of "the affluent Gulf states, whose resources come to trillions of dollars, yet can boast of no scientific base to speak of. Look at these [rich] countries with all their beautiful buildings [and material achievements]. With all their wealth and resources, there is not a single institution in the Arab world to match the top science and technology institutions in Israel, like the Weismann Institute or the Technion. Israel produces 70 per cent of its GDP in hi-tech, because the science base is very strong. I look at the Arab world and I do not see this."
He rejects "conspiracy theories" that accuse the West of undermining the Arab world's scientific potential, or globalisation of perpetuating developing countries' backwardness. "Granted, the West looks to its interests, but we cannot lie down and say we are backward because the West does not want us to advance."
Just as categorically, he absolves the Arab world's predominantly authoritarian political systems of any responsibility for scientific backwardness. "I do not claim to have all the answers, but Western democracy is not necessarily the only way to govern societies." Proof, he says, is in "politically 'closed' systems such as those of China and Singapore, where the rules are clear and flexible, and which have therefore succeeded in luring investment and technology transfer." Still, have the subsidies America pours into Israel's economy, and the privileged relationship between the two countries, played no role in perpetuating Israel's economic and scientific edge over other countries in the region? "There are people who say this about Israel, that America helps and subsidises it. But this alone will not qualify one for scientific progress. There are some Gulf states which are super-rich. Why did they not achieve anything in science and technology? I am not trying to support Israel, but their mind-set, if you will, is oriented to the principle that without science and technology, they will not gain superiority -- in the region, or in the world."
I asked him if he had particular links with Israeli research institutions, or had participated in research with scientists there. "I have undertaken no research with Israelis," he said emphatically. "I visited Israel only once. When I went there, it was not for politics, but as a scientist who had received an international award, the Wolf Prize, given inside Israel by the Wolf Foundation, based on the request of the founder, Professor Ricardo Wolf, who was Jewish. You must realise, too, that when I went, it was not to an 'enemy' country, but to one with which Egypt has concluded a peace treaty. When I went, I was received by the Egyptian ambassador as the first Muslim and Arab to obtain this award."
What did he think of the controversies surrounding this matter? "I must tell you, I think this [linking scientific awards with political positions] is a 'Third World-type' issue. The controversies raised here were born of ignorance: a lack of accurate information about the nature of the Nobel prize for science. I admit that the Nobel prize for peace might have some politics involved, since it will depend very much on what they want to do in Norway. But as regards science and medicine, every year there are 3,000 nominations. The Swedish academy sends out these nominations to individual scientists, not to organisations, countries or political bodies. These scientists are the top in their field, including all of the previous Nobel winners, and are all over the world: the US, China, Egypt, Japan, Spain... The nominations are sent back to the Swedish academy, which works on them before determining who is deserving, based on these scientists' recommendations. If you can come up with statistics indicating that 70 per cent of Nobel awards in science were given on the basis of political affiliations, then I will salute you for it."
Another of his critics has demanded what benefit Zewail's discovery has brought Egypt in practical terms. "This is a good question," he responded; "but again, a typical 'developing country-type' question. The critical difference between homo sapiens and animals is the mind. When the Nobel prize is awarded, it is for discoveries or inventions that change the way we think about the world we live in. Every time we open up a whole new universe of knowledge, it is very important because, based on this, you can develop new technologies. In this case, femto science dealt with molecules and how they move, which means the life within us." He went on: "I am very surprised that someone should put the question this way, implying perhaps that a new invention should have come out of it right away, or a new industry; something that we can hold in our hands. But this is not about a new laser show, or supplying us with better theatres, or improving the streets. This is about creating new technologies, and opening new frontiers." Zewail said femto science is now impacting medicine, telecommunications and information technology. "I'm surprised at the question, because it is a sign of not looking ahead, at what the mind needs to know." Beneath the smiling face, the easy equilibrium, he was rather upset.
"When societies start picking holes in somebody's success, they must realise that there are limits to people's tolerance. I know lots of scientists who are very good and would really like to help Egypt. But when they see trivialities like this, they end up withdrawing and going back to where they came from. Would it hurt if there were five, six, or seven Nobel prize winners in Egypt, and hundreds of scientists ready to communicate their knowledge to the media? Why should this bother anyone? I am a strong man, and still ready to help my country. But it is not me that I am worried about; it is the people here, who may be young and talented, and then find such attitudes -- which will break them. This is the atmosphere that is killing the country."
He notes a great discrepancy between some of the reactions to his success inside Egypt, and those at Caltech, one of the world's foremost scientific institutions. "At Caltech, even the scientists who might have felt that they, too, deserved the prize, celebrated, and felt that they, too, were part of the success of one of their colleagues."
He spoke of the predicament of Egyptian scientists in the West, some of whom, like him, have reached the uppermost echelons of scientific research. When they try to come to Egypt to work for their country's improvement, he remarked, they find themselves repelled by what he describes as "anti- gravity forces," which prevent them from working with the established scientific institutions. He argues that the strength of Egyptian academic institutions, which once produced "top-notch" people, has declined under the burden of increasing numbers "Some of these universities have more than 100,000 students, and support for basic research is not easy to come by [for many reasons]."
The challenge, then, is not to let the old centres of education undermine financial and human resource potential, "but rather, to initiate 'centres of excellence' that will radiate, interact and contribute to the reform of the older institutions. This was done by India, now the world's rising superpower in IT and nuclear science. It must also be done in Egypt, so that young researchers and professors, here and the world over, can identify these centres. In this way, Egyptian centres of excellence can begin to participate in the world map."
What bothers Zewail, not only in Egypt, but in many developing countries, is that "the people who are in charge think that everything is OK, that the only thing needed is to change a rule here or increase a budget there by 20 per cent. I assure you, though, that if you increase the science budget in Egypt, if you double, even triple it, you will still be unable to produce science and technology of the required standard."
Despite its problems, however, he acknowledges Egypt's great strides in infrastructure, telecommunications and the organisation of water resources. Most importantly, "it has no major enemy, and the support of the West," which it can capitalise on.
Thus, if existing resources are focused, and there is belief in the importance of science and technology, the "centres of excellence" of which Zewail dreams can be created. "This is important, because it will have a tremendous impact on the young generations, who don't see hope for the future, as far as where they're going."
Rather than going to the old academic institutions, he prefers to interact directly with the public, lecturing to young people on university campuses, in clubs and at public venues. He seems taken aback by the charge that he has often appeared to enjoy the media limelight, if not solicit it.
"I'd like you to mention the last time I appeared on television. And what Nobel laureate will not be sought out by the media? What will I gain from being interviewed by you for two hours? In the West, people are paid for such interviews, which does not happen here in Egypt." He was "intrigued" that frequent media appearances in his own country should be taken against him.
"That is exactly the opposite of what happens in the US. How many scientists do you know who can communicate to the media in simple terms? Don't you think you need this for your children's education, for their inspiration?
As one who seems well placed to view two cultures from a bridge spanning them, as a US citizen and an Arab American who found opportunity in the West, but also as a man of science, what does he make of the apparently deepening dichotomy between Muslim and Christian, East and West?
"I will say again that the only way out for the Arab world in 2002, is to create a scientific culture. Such a culture will appreciate the importance of religion while thinking scientifically. This has been the principal dynamic of Islamic culture and civilisation. It will not help the Arabs, or the Muslims, if they remain in the current spiral of ideological thinking, or what has become a 'hearsay culture'." In Egypt, he noted, too much has been made of Samuel Huntington's "clash of civilisations" theory, which, while inspiring only a passing comment or two in the US, has become a recurring theme of public debate here. "I do not believe that civilisations, by definition, can clash. What we have between East and West is not a 'clash' of civilisations, or of religions, but a situation bred by politics because of perceptions in the Middle East of the US favouring Israel, [combined with] the continuing lack of a resolution to the Palestinian problem. The problems have also arisen because of economic conditions, and mutual ignorance."
Will he cling to his dream of participating in his country's scientific renaissance? He did not answer at once. "It will be an incremental process," he finally mused. "How long it will take, I do not know." He concluded: "I will focus on helping Egypt, but if I get tired and see no growth, I will stop."
He perceives the greatest impediment to scientific progress in Egypt and the Arab world, more important than poverty or illiteracy, to be "bureaucracy and legal rigidity, which are the enemies of a creative mind. Decentralisation of power is necessary, as is a system in which institutions can challenge one another, and people can speak their minds. We might learn from others that it is very important to maintain 'freedom of human thought'. There must be the belief within academic institutions that, if someone tells me they think I am wrong, and that they have a different outlook on things, this does not mean they disrespect me. We can still work as a team..."
Recommend this page
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved