With the Cold War over, Sergey Piontkovsky thought nothing of picking up the phone or sending e-mails to Western colleagues from his office in Sevastopol, Ukraine. Just a routine job for a marine biologist working on projects with scientists overseas. But Ukraine鈥檚 security service had other ideas. This latter-day KGB decided Piontkovsky鈥檚 chats amounted to the leaking of state secrets. Raids were ordered on his home and offices at the Institute of Biology of the Southern Seas. He was interrogated and banned from leaving the country. Thanks to a massive campaign involving scientists around the world, charges were never brought. But the action took its toll: Piontkovsky fled to the US, from where he spoke to Jon Copley.
How did you manage to get out of Ukraine?
The last days before departure were a nightmare. We purchased tickets and checked in. Then, just 15 minutes before departure, we were stopped from boarding. There was no explanation. My passport and travel documents were confiscated and we were told to wait. All the flight staff were running around, looking for our luggage among the other suitcases. I felt that I would be arrested again, so I told my wife to go back to the city with our son and wait there.
Advertisement
I think this was a parting shot from the SBU. We had paid a lot of money for the tickets. Perhaps they thought that if they removed us from the plane at the last minute, we wouldn鈥檛 be able to purchase tickets again. I was expecting this, which is why I bought tickets which would allow me to change the date of the flight. We caught a flight several days later.
What do you think prompted the SBU鈥檚 interest in your work? Was it the fact that you had been working in labs in Europe and the US since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989?
My gut feeling is that it鈥檚 because two people working at my institute wrote to the SBU. One was probably jealous of me. The other letter was from someone who alleged that we were illegally transferring classified, Soviet-era data on the oceans to the West.
I take it that you weren鈥檛 passing classified data to the West?
Of course not. None of the information was classified. We were working on several joint projects to create databases on the oceans, with colleagues from Europe and the US.
How long do you think the SBU had been monitoring you?
At least a year, maybe longer, and even before I returned to Ukraine after working in the US and Britain. They have copies of all e-mails I had been sending to Ukraine from abroad.
What happened next?
Both letters showed up on the desk of a SBU officer in Sevastopol, who is sitting around without much to do in a small city. Suddenly he realises that this is a real opportunity to further his career, and immediately starts all this action. About 40 people were interrogated, which the SBU likes to call being 鈥渋nvited to talks鈥�. The SBU searched my home, they confiscated my computer, our money, our credit cards, even the personal belongings of my son, who is 11 years old.
Was interrogation physically tough?
Yes. It was both physically and mentally tough. My first session was eight hours of continuous questioning by two guys.
How did newspapers in Ukraine report the story? Did they follow the government line or were any of them sympathetic to your plight?
The story was headline news. But the SBU controls the media and the first thing it did was to brief newspapers that I was selling billions of dollars鈥� worth of national treasures to the West. Everyone knew this was nonsense, but no one was willing to challenge them for fear of the consequences.
Was it difficult for your colleagues to speak out in your defence?
Colleagues of mine organised an alternative article: about 40 signed up and we fought to publish it. Eventually it was published in a small, local newspaper that no one reads.
The SBU never charged you with illegally passing data to the West, accusing you instead of breaking Ukraine鈥檚 foreign currency laws. Why did they do this?
It鈥檚 because all the data in our research projects has never been classified. The security services had no idea of what they were doing. We were dealing with completely incompetent people. They have no understanding of how science works. They do not believe that scientists exchange data for free. They believe that all such data should be classified, even if it isn鈥檛.
This is partly why the allegations regarding data exchange to the West were dropped. But in order to save face, they accused me of breaking Ukraine鈥檚 foreign currency laws. They were desperate to find something-anything that could show that I was giving information to the West and was being paid for it.
What was your main priority? Was it to try and escape, or to stay and fight?
I had to avoid a trial. Had the trial taken place, things would have gone downhill from then on. The SBU is the most powerful force in the country. It can reach agreements with everyone. These guys never lose. Once they鈥檝e started, they plan the end. We can鈥檛 prove it, but we knew that they had preliminary talks with the courts. We knew what would happen in a trial. We even knew what sort of punishment I could expect: I wouldn鈥檛 be jailed, but I鈥檇 never be allowed to leave the country.
The world鈥檚 leading scientific bodies- including the American Association for the Advancement of Science-rallied to your defence and the currency charges were eventually dropped. How did that happen?
I was rescued by the Internet. That was the most powerful tool in our fight. Things like my Web page: the SBU monitored it every day because it was an indicator of international media activity. I was very proud of that-that people respected me and that they respected the principle of freedom. I think the final straw was a visit to the state prosecutor by a delegation representing an organisation that promotes cooperation between scientists from the West and those from Eastern Europe. It鈥檚 called INTAS. The arrival of the INTAS delegation, which included an international lawyer, meant a lot.
The Western community rescued me. They helped me more than my own colleagues in my own country. But I can understand that. People are very frightened in Ukraine. They have to consider the consequences for them personally and for their families.
Why did you return to Ukraine in 1999, after seven years abroad?
I had been at the State University of New York at Stony Brook since 1997, working as a research scientist on a project funded by the US National Science Foundation. Before that, I was a research fellow at the Plymouth Marine Laboratory in Britain. I鈥檓 also a member of the international steering committee of a research programme called GLOBEC. One of our goals is to create a world databank of information on the oceans. One of my jobs was to get different research institutes to include their data in such a databank. This is why I went back to Ukraine. A lot of Russian data has been transferred. Ukraine also participates in this project, which is what makes such a mockery of the actions of the SBU.
Another project was on marine ecosystems in the Indian Ocean. Our institute has done many expeditions there: the former Soviet Union sent 10 or 15 expeditions. Our goal was to collate all the data and combine them with those collected by scientists from Europe and the US. We were then planning to release a CD-ROM of our data, which was inaccessible in previous years.
What did you think such a database could be used for in the end?
It can serve scientists in many ways: you can model the behaviour of an ocean, or forecast its productivity. You can include the data in models that study the consequences of climate change. Or you can use it for fundamental problems such as the biological structure of the oceans and how it changes over years.
The SBU clearly thinks your research had military uses. Does it?
We never had any military outputs. But some things can be used by a navy, such as records of temperature in different parts of oceans, and density characteristics of water. At the same time, all this information is already freely available. It isn鈥檛 classified.
Weren鈥檛 you also funded by the US Office of Naval Research?
Yes, that was a grant to study bioluminescence in the ocean. Plankton can produce tiny amounts of light when they escape. If they are disturbed, they flash as they jump to hide from a predator. This is called bioluminescence. One laboratory in our institute has studied bioluminescence for decades, and they now collaborate with colleagues in Britain and the US involved in the same kind of research.
This project was to create a database on bioluminescence, because the former Soviet Union had unique data. Our lab was involved in expeditions in the Indian Ocean, in the Atlantic and the Pacific. No one had been studying bioluminescence of open ocean waters, so the US Office of Naval Research funded this project to create a database that would be available to anyone interested in that.
Bioluminescence can be used to track the movement of submarines. It strikes me that the US Navy could find this useful. Isn鈥檛 that a military application of your work?
We have never worked with military uses. Our data never had any military outputs. As I said, neither I nor my colleagues have had access to classified materials.
So what you鈥檙e saying is that oceanographic data collected during the Soviet era is now in the public domain and can be accessed by anyone?
Sure. We are talking about data obtained 20 years ago. We published a series of joint papers with British and American scientists. This data has been published: my laboratory has tens of publications, and it has been involved in international symposia and conferences.
Science thrives on the free exchange of information. But even Western governments restrict the transfer of information they think might harm national security, don鈥檛 they?
We need to promote and enlarge free data exchange. It鈥檚 the only way to do things like large-scale modelling and forecasts of climate change. To understand climate change, scientists need historical datasets covering tens and hundreds of years. Unfortunately, we don鈥檛 have that. The longest data series we have for plankton communities covers about 50 years-which is nothing in terms of climate change. That鈥檚 why it is so important to rescue data from as many regions as possible and include it in worldwide databases.
After what happened to you, do you think other scientists in Ukraine with links to the West are at risk?
I know several people who are so frightened that they have withdrawn from international projects and refuse to cooperate with their foreign colleagues. They are waiting to see how the situation will develop in the next two or three months.
What should the international community do now? Should it withdraw scientific cooperation with Ukraine? Or should it maintain a collaborative relationship in the face of these developments?
The best thing is to enhance cooperation. Should Europe or the US start to diminish their investment, science would simply die. In the past five years, the numbers of scientists in Ukraine has decreased by a factor of 2 or 3. In Russia, 800 000 scientists have emigrated. Just think about it: 800 000 scientists leaving the country.
What are your plans for the future? Would you consider going back?
I won鈥檛 rule out going back if the situation improves. My plan right now is to find a job. At the moment, all we have is four suitcases.
Do you have any idea what the SBU鈥檚 next move could be?
I think the SBU is planning an action against a project funded by NATO, which involves the countries around the Black Sea-the Science for Peace Programme. 快猫短视频s from my institute and the Marine Hydrophysical Institute in Sevastopol frequently visit Turkey and are building a joint database there on everything related to the ecosystem of the Black Sea-chemistry, biology and physics. The SBU are trying to get letters of confirmation from their military experts that this sort of data exchange has harmed Ukraine. For instance, that data on physics and chemistry of the Black Sea, including coastal areas, might contain classified information.