JAN MÅRTENSON

In 1967 Mrs Alva Myrdal offered me the position of Deputy Director of the recently established SIPRI. I was not very familiar with the Institute but found its concept interesting. I thus left my post in the UN Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and moved from the 18th century palace of Princess Sofia Albertina to the futuristic 'mini-skyscraper' of the Wenner-Gren Center. I was received by the Director, Robert Neild, a leading British economist from Cambridge, and the dynamic and charismatic professor and later Nobel Prize winner Gunnar Myrdal, Chairman of the SIPRI Governing Board.

My time at SIPRI, coinciding with its 'takeoff ', was initially dominated by efforts to establish an administrative infrastructure. I realized that I had entered an intellectually extremely well-equipped ship, but one that seemed to lack both sails and rudder from a bureaucratic point of view. SIPRI was, for obvious reasons, initially focusing on the outlines of its future programmes and activities, and administrative matters were thus not a priority. Was SIPRI, for instance, to be considered a Swedish institute, and thus subjected to Swedish rules and regulations (and there are lots!); or should it be treated, legally and administratively, as a purely international entity? This and many other unsolved problems forced me to spend a considerable time in the antechambers of various authorities-not all of whom shared the enthusiasm of Prime Minister Tage Erlander and Alva Myrdal for the project, to say the least!

Once the administrative sails were set, I also participated in the research activities. I was, among other responsibilities, rapporteur of an expert report on the use of the mineral resources of the ocean floor, the basic paper for which was written by Professor W. T. Burke of Ohio University. The very timely study was initiated by Alva Myrdal and coincided with a nascent interest in the UN for related matters. What, for instance, would be the consequences for the coastal states of the uncontrolled use of the oil, gas and mineral resources of the oceans? What would the consequences be for the raw-material producers, particularly in developing countries? Could a new colonization of the oceans be foreseen? These were some of the questions addressed by the study.

In the report Towards a Better Use of the Oceans, which seven leading international experts presented at a symposium in Stockholm, the main conclusions included the conviction that a future dividing of the seas must be avoided, and underscored the need for a redefinition of the continental shelf. A fair distribution of revenues must be secured, and the UN should establish an intergovernmental organization in order to regulate all aspects of the use of the oceans, including miltary use.

The focus of SIPRI's activities was designed from the outset to be on practical, concrete and pragmatic reports and studies or, in Gunnar Myrdal's words, 'hard-boiled research'. This was in contrast to traditional peace research, which had hitherto focused on intellectual theorizing, models for conflict resolution, and research on behaviour and aggression in a sociological context.

Jan Mårtenson helped establish SIPRI's administrative infrastructure: 'An initial problem was how to "reach out", to put SIPRI on the map. The answer was simple and tough: quality'. Jan Mårtenson is pictured here (second left) with other early SIPRI associates

SIPRI's approach was criticized by the 'traditionalists', but the road chosen turned out to be successful. One of the best examples was the creation of the SIPRI Yearbook. The philosophy behind this publication originated in Alva Myrdal's idea that 'non-military' society must have access to the same knowledge and information on modern weapons and technology as the military establishment, in order to achieve disarmament: 'The military monopoly of knowledge must be broken'. This was also reflected in the foreword by Robert Neild to the first edition, published on 30 September 1969: 'The Yearbook was designed to fill a gap. Until now there has been no authoritative international source which provided in one place an account of recent trends in world military expenditures, the state of the technological arms race, and the sucess or failure of recent reports of arms limitation or disarmament.'

Other important projects were also initiated during the 'pioneer years', including those on biological and chemical weapons, satellites, seismic monitoring, and other areas of relevance in the field of the arms race and disarmament.

An initial problem was how to 'reach out', to put SIPRI on the map and to disseminate the reports. The answer was simple and tough: quality. The Institute's products had to be factual, neutral and objective in order to receive respect. This was achieved not least through the hard and inspired work of an international scientific staff of leading experts under the guidance of the Governing Board, comprised of very distinguished and competent scientists and politicians from various parts of the world.

Another problem facing SIPRI during the first years was suspicion, particularly among the Warsaw Pact states. They apparently found it very difficult to comprehend that SIPRI was a truly international and ideologically, as well as scientifically, independent body. That we were oriented towards the West and negative to the communist world was a foregone conclusion for them: SIPRI was financed by the Swedish Government, the majority of researchers came from the West, and the basic reference material originated from mainly US sources.

We tried our best to explain that there were absolutely no affiliations with NATO or the USA, etc., but the necessary sources of information were to be found primarily in the West as military data were rarely published in the communist states. In actuality, the Swedish Government never interfered in our activities. Moreover, our critics from the East showed little interest in contributing experts in spite of our efforts. But gradually their suspicions lessened, and we were eventually 'blessed' with some Warsaw Pact experts, who came also in order to keep an eye on our endeavours.

But one day all our efforts could have been in vain. I had just returned from a visit to the United Nations to inform the member states of our activities, when SIPRI was visited by a high-level delegation from a leading Warsaw Pact country. I tried to speak very convincingly about our independence. The atmosphere softened gradually, and the chairman of the delegation wanted to light a cigarette but had no matches. I produced a matchbox from my pocket and offered it to him, but just before he took it I glanced at the cover. 'Nixon's the one!' was printed in big letters, a souvenir from my visit to New York where the election campaign was at its peak. My hand closed very rapidly!

I consider my years at SIPRI in its earliest stage a great privilege. And they were of great importance to me personally in my continued work in the field of disarmament and arms limitation. Not least the intellectual atmosphere contributed to my 'education': the daily meetings with bright and motivated scholars from all over the world, all convinced of the meaningfulness of our efforts.

In conclusion, it gives me great satisfaction to note that SIPRI has established itself as one of the leading authorities in its field. This was evidenced not least in my eight years as head of the UN Disarmament Department during the cold war, where constant references were made to the work of SIPRI during the deliberations in various forums.

SIPRI has indeed made, and still makes, a very big, constructive and important contribution towards a, hopefully, better world.

---

Jan Mårtenson is a Swedish Ambassador, former Director-General for Disarmament and Under-Secretary-General for Human Rights of the UN. He was Deputy Director of SIPRI from 1968 to 1969

---

Previous

Table of Content

Next