On November 26, 1944 Dutch-American particle physicist Samual Goudsmit and his fellow members of the secret Operation Alsos carefully scoured the private papers of Nazi scientists, uncovering startling information on the extent of Nazi biological weapons experiments. Operation Alsos would give rise to Operation Paperclip – the U.S. government’s effort to bring over 1,600 German and Nazi scientists, doctors, engineers, and technologists to the United States. Also recruited were Nazi war criminals whose scientific prowess seemed to override the U.S. government’s moral qualms. The period from November, 1944 – May, 1945 changed the world as the U.S. government began to gather a group of individuals to secretly make Cold War weapons of mass destruction

Haleas, Diane

Miller, Matthew

English

Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy: DigitalCommons@IMSA

Diane Haleas & Matthew Miller ICHE Conference, IMSA, March 4, 2016 November 26, 1944 Strasbourg, France Dr. Samuel Goudsmit and U.S. Army soldiers find a stash of communications in the apartment of Nazi chemist Dr. Eugen Haagen, the first evidence of Nazi medical experiments. SOURCE: Annie Jacobsen ,  Operation Paperclip: The Secret Intelligence Program That Brought Nazi Scientists to America, (New York: Back Bay Books: 2014)   Late March, 1945 Nordhausen, Germany Wernher von Braun, head of Reich V-2 weapons production at the Mittelwerk slave-labor facility, orders his assistants to hide two crates of V-2 documents that he intends to use as a bargaining chip with the arriving Americans. SOURCE: Annie Jacobsen ,  Operation Paperclip: The Secret Intelligence Program That Brought Nazi Scientists to America, (New York: Back Bay Books: 2014)    June 22, 1945 Heidelberg, Germany Dr. Leopold Alexander, Boston psychiatrist, uncovers records Nazi Dr. Rascher’s experimental records in captured documents. Alexander characterizes them as a record of “medical murder.” R.A.F. and U.S.A.F. investigators do not view the records. SOURCE: Annie Jacobsen ,  Operation Paperclip: The Secret Intelligence Program That Brought Nazi Scientists to America, (New York: Back Bay Books: 2014)  By the end of June, 1945, the hunt for Nazi scientists had reached a crossroads.  In the civilian U.S. government, the State Department and Labor Department were resisting pressure from the Commerce Department to open the doors to bring Nazi scientists to America.  Different investigative groups from the U.S. Army, U.S. Army Air Force, U.S. Navy, and Chemical Weapons Divisions, each had their own agendas.  Meanwhile, teams searching for evidence of war crimes would find themselves at odds with these competing interests. SOURCE: Annie Jacobsen ,  Operation Paperclip: The Secret Intelligence Program That Brought Nazi Scientists to America, (New York: Back Bay Books: 2014)  On September 6, 1946, under pressure from the military and Commerce Department, President Truman signed a directive officially transforming previous scattered efforts into OPERATION PAPERCLIP.  On the surface, this directive was focused on advancing the nation’s scientific and military potential. Truman explicitly forbade the inclusion into PAPERCLIP of influential Nazi Party members and other Reich supporters, a policy that was soon circumvented by the War Department and the Joint Intelligence Objectives Agency (JIOA). SOURCE:  Cold War: A Student Encyclopedia, Ed. Spencer C. Tucker. Vol. 3. Santa Barbara, CA:  ABC-CLIO, 2008, Inc. Thomas D. Veve When the State Department rejected desired scientists because of war crimes investigations, the JIOA began to purge dossiers of Nazi Party connections and connections to war crimes.  Thus OPERATION PAPERCLIP grew to involve over 1,600 former Nazis with desired skills. SOURCE:  Cold War: A Student Encyclopedia, Ed. Spencer C. Tucker. Vol. 3. Santa Barbara, CA:  ABC-CLIO, 2008, Inc. Thomas D. Veve   ¨  When it comes to the weapons of WWII, 97% of freshmen surveyed at SICP have studied, and 52% have debated, the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan prior to reaching high school. ¨  Of those same freshmen,  ~ 0.5% recognize the name of Wernher von Braun; ~ 0.2% accurately describe Operation Paperclip; ~ 20% have an ability to accurately describe the Nuremburg Trials. ¨  Introducing Operation Paperclip into the classroom provides new opportunities for learning, and shifts debate and discussion from a single historical event over 70 years old into a debate about how national policy is formed – a debate highly relevant today. ¨  The complexities of the rush to capture Nazi scientists at the end of WWII is readily adapted into a role-playing activity. ¨  A number of opportunities to analyze and compare primary sources is readily available. ¨  OPERATION PAPERCLIP can be tied into research based on a number of GVRL History in Dispute topics. ¨  Broader moral and ethical questions can be debated in the classroom. ¨  The issues involved in Operation Paperclip can be extended into several other topics. ¨  Recreating the opportunities of the summer of 1945 – a time when policy was emerging in an ad hoc manner, and competing priorities still battled for dominance. ¨  Students are divided into categories based on history: War Department, Labor Department, State Department, War Crimes Investigators, etc. ¨  Students are given cards of Nazi scientists and a deck of “options” cards. Considering their role, students formulate a policy using the cards and compare with the other groups. ¨  Comparing primary sources to discern viewpoints. ¨  Connecting events and issues of OPERATION PAPERCLIP to GVRL History in Dispute topics:  “Victors’ Justice: Were Nazis Tried for War Crimes Subjected to Victors’ Justice?”  “Medical Experiments: Should     Data Derived from Nazi  Medical Experiments be Used  by Contemporary Scientsts?  “The Allies: Was the Postwar Collapse of the Allies’ Coalition Inevitable?”   ¨  Did the United States really need the Nazi scientists to combat the postwar Soviet threat? ¨  Did the hiring of the Nazi scientists exacerbate the conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union? ¨  Should the public have been given more information about OPERATION PAPERCLIP? ¨  Should NASA correct the official biographies of Wernher von Braun, Kurt Debus, and Arthur Rudolph to include their controversial wartime activities? ¨  How should the nation’s policies involving weapons, science, and technology, be determined? In secret committees or through public debate in Congress or by the Executive Branch? SOURCE: Annie Jacobsen ,  Operation Paperclip: The Secret Intelligence Program That Brought Nazi Scientists to America, (New York: Back Bay Books: 2014)  ¨  There are 16,400 nuclear weapons  ¨  Five states are declared as nuclear weapon zones under the Non-Proliferation Treaty: US, UK, France, Russia and China. These countries are committed to disarmament under international law. It is illegal for any other country that has signed the NPT to develop these weapons. ¨  Other countries with nuclear weapons include India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea. ¨  China: 240 warheads ¨  France: 300 warheads ¨  Russia: 10,000-12,600 warheads ¨  United Kingdom: 180 warheads ¨  United States: 9,613 warheads ¨  India: 100 nuclear warheads ¨  Israel: 75-200 nuclear warheads ¨  Pakistan: 70-90 nuclear warheads ¨  North Korea: Unknown ¨  Source: Arms Control Association This treaty aimed to stop the spread or proliferation of nuclear weapons. Countries that had tested nuclear weapons at the time had to sign as a Nuclear Weapon State (NWS) and agree not to pass nuclear weapons technology on to Non-Nuclear Weapon States (NNWS), and to disarm. The NNWS had to promise not to make any attempt to produce nuclear weapons.  The NPT has three main pillars: non-proliferation, disarmament and peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Number of countries signed: 188 Not signed: India, Pakistan, and Israel. North Korea (DPRK) announced in January 2003 that it was withdrawing from the NPT.   2004 The Security Council decided that all States shall refrain from providing any form of support to non-State actors that attempt to develop, acquire, manufacture, possess, transport, transfer or use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons and their means of delivery, in particular for terrorist purposes.  The resolution requires all States to adopt and enforce appropriate laws to this effect as well as other effective measures to prevent the proliferation of these weapons and their means of delivery to non-State actors, in particular for terrorist purposes.  See Video Clip of UN Secretary general Ban Ki Moon http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/1540/   Unanimously adopting resolution 1887 (2009) in its first comprehensive action on nuclear issues since the mid-1990s, Council members emphasized that the body had a primary responsibility to address nuclear threats, and that all situations of non-compliance with nuclear treaties should be brought to its attention.  The text underlined the right to pursue peaceful nuclear energy under IAEA supervision, but also urged States to curb the export of nuclear-related material to countries that had terminated their compliance with Agency safeguards agreements.   Link to Atoms for Peace Speech by President Eisenhower 1956 https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/multimedia/videos/atoms-peace-speech ¨  Reasons for Allowing Nuclear Weapons Ø  Required for deterrence  Ø  They restrain aggressors through fear of mutual escalation and certain destruction. ¨  Reasons Against Ø  Morally repugnant Ø  They can kills thousands and cause catastrophic environmental effects http://debatewise.org/debates/3382-abolish-nuclear-weapons/ Ø  Abolishing Nuclear weapons is unrealistic ¨  There already have been great strides made in reducing and dismantling nuclear arsenals and in preventing other states from adopting nuclear weapons  ¨  programs ¨  Nuclear deterrence is a key strategy in maintaining international security ¨  Nuclear weapons have been recognized for their restraining effect on war ¨  Could result in more warfare and more deaths ¨  Nuclear deterrence encourages proliferation ¨  The use and/or threat of nuclear weapons is illegal (ICJ ruling 1996) ¨  Risk of weapons falling into the wrong hands ¨  Throughout the nuclear era, the conventional wisdom has been that one state’s nuclear acquisition has driven its adversaries to follow suit. As former Secretary of State George Shultz so eloquently put it, “proliferation begets proliferation.” ¨  Although some of the earliest nuclear proliferation cases followed this pattern, it has been increasingly rare as the taboo against the first use of nuclear weapons has become more entrenched. Instead, the primary security factor driving nuclear weapons proliferation today is the disparity in conventional military power. This is likely to continue in the future, with profound consequences for which states do and don’t seek nuclear weapons. 100 Reasons To Disarm As part of the WMD - We Must Disarm campaign, a reason to disarm has been put out on Twitter for each of the 100 days leading up to the International Day of Peace. The first 10 of these 'tweets' were put out in the name of Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon We Must Disarm.... 1. because nuclear weapons threaten humankind. Let's get rid of them for good - UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon 2. because as UN Secretary-General, I believe we now have a real opportunity to make a change - we should seize it 3. because as UN Secretary-General, I believe there would be no winners in a nuclear war 4. because as UN Secretary-General, I know a nuclear war would be the ultimate catastrophe 5. because nuclear weapons do not discriminate - UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon 6. because we have to prevent terrorists getting nuclear weapons - UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon The Iran Nuclear Deal Signed by P5 + Germany and Iran  ¨  1. Sanctions relief upon implementation (January 2016):  $100 billion in overseas Iranian assets unfrozen ¨  2. Uranium enrichment lowered to 3.67% (need 90% to produce atomic weapon) ¨  3. Centrifuges reduced to 5,060 from 20,000 ¨  4. Heavy water reactor at Arak reconfigured to produce only small amounts.  No new reactors for 15 years ¨  5.  Inspections and verifications by IAEA Raising Moral Questions in the Nuclear Debate Focus on critical thinking and analysis based on evidence and presentation of arguments…   ¨  Did nuclear proliferation after WW II have a more positive or negative impact on international relations during the Cold War? ¨  What if nuclear weapons had never been invented? What events might have occurred? What might the world look like today? ¨  Is there any justification for countries today to pursue a nuclear weapons program? More Questions… Allow students to present their ideas in writing and in small and large group discussions and activities.       ¨  If you were a research scientist asked to find even more powerful and cost effective ways to create weapons of mass destruction, would you do it?  Why or why not?  ¨  Under what specific conditions would you justify using nuclear weapons if you were the leader of a country that possessed them? LESSON IDEAS (See additional materials for specific lesson guidelines)  11. Setting a Framework for Discussion Objective:  Students will consider the pros and cons of nuclear proliferation by  asking questions and finding answers  2. Nuclear Proliferation Today Objective:  Students will understand the differing viewpoints regarding the topic of nuclear proliferation today by role-playing different people from various positions such as government officials, advisors, activists, nuclear industry leaders, and heads of state of various countries.    3. Dealing with Nuclear Proliferation Crises Objective:  Students will understand the perspectives of many countries today regarding nuclear weapons and how each country might respond to potential crises such as  Ø  North Korea develops long-range missile technology and threatens to strike the United States. Ø  U.S. intelligence reports that ISIS secretly has been working with North Korea to develop nuclear weapons. Ø  The United States has threatened to cut off economic relations and introduce sanctions against India and Pakistan if they refuse to dismantle their respective nuclear weapons programs.    4.  Straight Debate:  Pro-Con Nuclear Weapons Objective:  Students discern the opposing viewpoints by  presenting  arguments in a variety of debate formats .  5.  Nuclear Proliferation and Real Policymaking:  YOU DECIDE! Objective:  Students consider real life implications of nuclear proliferation policies  tackling issues such as  Iran Nuclear Deal Debate:  Should the U.S. keep the deal or repeal it? India-Pakistan:  Nuclear Weapons good or bad for peace and security? North Korea:  Is North Korea a real threat to international security?  U.S.:  Should the U.S. reduce its nuclear stockpile?   Russia:  Should Russia feel threatened by U.S. missiles in Europe? Israel:  Should Israel be allowed to have nuclear weapons? 

Session B-3: Operation Paperclip and the Rise of Weapons of Mass Destruction

https://digitalcommons.imsa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1252&amp;context=proflearningday

Session B-3: Operation Paperclip and the Rise of Weapons of Mass Destruction

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy: DigitalCommons@IMSA