De Minimis
  • Home
  • ABOUT US
  • Podcast
  • Your Learned Friend
  • Anonymous Feedback
  • Art
  • Get published!
  • Constitution
  • Archive
    • 2018
    • 2017
    • 2017 >
      • Semester 2 (Volume 12) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8 (election issue)
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
    • 2016 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 9) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
      • Semester 2 (Volume 10) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8 (Election Issue)
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
        • Issue 13 (test)
    • 2015 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 7) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
      • Semester 2 (Volume 8) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
    • 2014 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 5) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
      • Semester 2 (Volume 6) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 12
    • 2013 >
      • Issue 1
      • Issue 2
      • Issue 3
      • Issue 4
      • Issue 5
      • Issue 6
    • 2012 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 1) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
      • Semester 2 (Volume 2) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12

LOCKHEED MARTIN: RESEARCH AND WARFARE

17/10/2017

 
Vol 12, Issue 12

LUKE THOMAS
​
Melbourne’s Militarised Research


The man shooting the finger guns while wearing a VR headset, above, is Christopher ‘The Fixer’ Pyne. This photo was posted on his Facebook page in August after he visited University of Melbourne’s STELaRLab, the first Lockheed Martin-funded research facility outside the US.

​
Picture
Pyne’s visit to STELaRLAB was a showcase for the first bit of tech to come out of this partnership, the unveiling of autonomous unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) that are able to efficiently and cheaply survey power lines while recharging their batteries through an induction loop, allowing them to survey autonomously for days. Powerline surveying formerly cost the government $1 billion a year to complete by helicopter, so even The Fixer was impressed by how well they fixed the energy industry.

STELaRLab fits nicely with the University’s ‘Growing Esteem’ 2015-2020 strategic plan, which explicitly contemplates public-private partnerships and industry connections as a way to ‘establish a small number of precincts as the locus platform for research commercialisation and impact creation.’

On the one hand, this is an understandable (and lucrative) partnership for the University. Lockheed Martin is an aerospace company as well as a weapons manufacturer, and not all of their products and services lead to civilian casualties. Their recent contracts include securing a bid to build communication satellites for the US government and to develop energy security infrastructure for US army bases in Texas.

However, what most of the Australian government and University conversation around jobs, growth, and ‘impact creation’ omits is that, at its simplest, Lockheed Martin is the leading manufacturer of weapons for the US military industrial complex. And it has fought hard to retain its market share, no matter the implications for human rights or global stability.

They currently operate a multimillion-dollar PAC with targeted donations for US House Armed Services Committee members—and hold one of the largest defence industry lobbying budgets in the US. A former Lockheed president even admitted to extensive bribery and political manipulation to secure contracts over their decades-long involvement with post-WWII US military expansion.

Their products are ubiquitous in global warfare. Their Hellfire missiles are dropped over Afghanistan. Their F-35A’s will patrol Korean skies. They maintain business ties with Saudi Arabia, despite brutal bombings in Yemen. And if the sale weren’t blocked by the Obama administration in 2015, the military forces suppressing human rights protesters in Bahrain would have been using Lockheed Martin aircraft.

While STELaRLAB improvements in UAV technology have wider, non-military application for infrastructure projects and energy security, it’s worth considering what impact their research will have on Lockheed’s arms manufacturing--and where they intend on using these innovations next.

Australia has had an increasing role in US warfare, and the recent Pine Gap revelations show just how connected the two countries are on intelligence and warfare. And while I’m not suggesting the recent advancements in UAV technology created by the brilliant engineers at STELaRLAB will be used for deadlier purposes, it’s clear from public statements that the STELaRLAB is being built to achieve Lockheed’s research goals.

Aviation Australia quoted Pyne at the recent event as saying the partnership “will make Australia a better ally to the US…more able to defend our nation and its people, more capable of projecting our power in the region and being a regional power that is standing up for the values that our countries . . . believe in.”

The Lockheed Martin—University of Melbourne relationship is both pragmatic and myopic. The reality of the competitive innovation and research industry is that the University is making a financially sound decision in seeking funding and facilities from a US weapons manufacturers. That’s the reality. The dream would be for the University to instead provide greater investment in researching how to reduce the use of these weapons to make a more peaceful world.

P.S.
For a more thoroughly researched analysis of the growing militarisation of university research, check out Alex Edney-Browne’s excellent article: https://medium.com/@alexedneybrowne/australian-universities-becoming-militarised-9b65f7c64076

​Luke Thomas is a third-year JD student

The rest of this issue (:O)
  • Riley Announces Presidential Run
  • Choose Your Story
  • So Long and Thanks for All the Fish
  • The Oxford Mythology and MLS Assessment
  • On Free Will
  • You Can Commit to Justice in Your Career
  • Chatting is Bullshit​

Decard.com link
21/2/2018 09:05:33 pm

I don't this is a good feature

satire topics for high school students link
22/2/2018 01:11:20 am

I’m always about progress, especially if we are talking about technologies that can make our life better. It’s great that this kind of researches have financial support. On other hand, I agree with that video that was posted in the end of 2017. That video was about how easily drones can turn to be a weapon, in the military hands. If I remember it right, it was advertisement about obligatoriness of law that must regulate all this drone issue. I think that government must have better care of regulating progress in some ways.


Comments are closed.
    Picture

    Archives

    October 2022
    September 2022
    December 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.
  • Home
  • ABOUT US
  • Podcast
  • Your Learned Friend
  • Anonymous Feedback
  • Art
  • Get published!
  • Constitution
  • Archive
    • 2018
    • 2017
    • 2017 >
      • Semester 2 (Volume 12) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8 (election issue)
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
    • 2016 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 9) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
      • Semester 2 (Volume 10) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8 (Election Issue)
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
        • Issue 13 (test)
    • 2015 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 7) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
      • Semester 2 (Volume 8) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
    • 2014 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 5) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
      • Semester 2 (Volume 6) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 12
    • 2013 >
      • Issue 1
      • Issue 2
      • Issue 3
      • Issue 4
      • Issue 5
      • Issue 6
    • 2012 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 1) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
      • Semester 2 (Volume 2) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12