A Scientific Warrior [Edward Teller, key developer of H-Bomb]

IEEE Spectrum Magazine ^ | October 2001 | Stephen Cass

[Incorrigible]

A Scientific Warrior Edward Teller has long been a controversial figure. Born in Hungary in 1908, he moved to Germany in 1926, where he joined the fraternity of those exploring the new science of quantum mechanics. Following the rise of anti-semitism in Germany, Teller came to the United States in 1935. He was one of the original members of the Manhattan Project, and remained in weapons work after World War II, playing a key role in the development of the hydrogen fusion bomb. He also helped to found the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, and to this day remains a strong advocate of nuclear power and the U.S. Strategic Defense Initiative. Teller will be publishing his life's memories in November (Memoirs, Perseus, Cambridge, Mass., $35, 592 pp., ISBN: 0-7382-0532-X). IEEE Spectrum associate editor Stephen Cass talked to him about his life and his work.   Edward Teller [top row, far left] was photographed in 1945 with key Manhattan Project scientists, including Harold Urey and Enrico Fermi [front row, second from left, second from right]. Below is Teller today. You describe a turbulent childhood in Hungary during World War I and a Communist takeover for several months in 1919 and its aftermath. How did this experience shape your later life? It made me interested in what was going on outside Hungary. My father had a map of the battlefronts in his office, and I remember seeing what was going on week after week. Even after I came to the United States, I was better informed and more interested in what was going on in this way than most. My childhood experiences also made me familiar with the dark side of Communism. And the dark side of fascism as well. I did not know that something reasonable like democracy even existed until I experienced it much later. What scientific accomplishment are you most proud of in your career? I participated in the great experience of developing quantum mechanics. In this development, I was a child. I came [to this field] rather late because I had studied chemistry. And so my contribution [for the most part was] in the application of the new ideas of quantum mechanics to polyatomic molecules--benzene, for example. It was a lot of detailed work, which was successful and most enjoyable. Do you have any regrets that your life moved away from pure science and into weapons research and policy issues? I wish I had lived in a better time--a time where dangers like that of Hitler and Stalin had been absent. But since it so happened I lived in this time, I was drawn into [the Manhattan Project]. I was given an opportunity. I did it, I did not enjoy it. But I was happy I did so. I would not be at all proud of having refused. Were you surprised by some of the hostile reactions other Manhattan Project scientists had toward continued weapons research after the war? Not at all. It was just those scientists who had imagination enough to understand their subject but not imagination enough to understand the world, and to understand the changes in the world, and they believed that by hoping for peace, there would be peace. The debate over whether or not to research the hydrogen bomb was a bitter one. You also gave testimony that many people interpreted as being damaging to Robert Oppenheimer during the hearing that led to his loss of security clearance for suspected Communist links; you were ostracized. How did you maintain your resolve to pursue your work? It was not an easy time. But I was helped by having friends, and we made [new] friends. Those friends were partly in the Livermore Laboratory and partly among other similar-minded Hungarians working in somewhat less controversial subjects, like my very good friend Johnny von Neumann. They helped me technically, they helped me psychologically. You say in your memoirs that the establishment of the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory in 1952 was your proudest accomplishment. Why? For a very simple reason. The Livermore Laboratory made a great contribution to the winning of the Cold War without any bloodshed. We had an important part in the end of the Soviet Union, of which I am very happy. What was the importance of creating a second laboratory after Los Alamos? Two secret laboratories, which can actually compete with each other, are better [than one]. One example I can mention is that when the question of nuclear-powered submarines came up, Los Alamos said, "It can't be done for a reasonable price." Livermore said, "It can be done," and we got the contract. The fact that we had submarines that could not be destroyed in a first strike made a great contribution to the Soviets being deterred from attacking. Controversially, you argued against the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. Why? Because it could not be checked. It would lead to the United States losing its advantage while other countries developed dangerous weapons. I am against treaties that cannot be checked and that will be violated. The result of that treaty is that dangerous knowledge is now available to [many] governments while the United States has made little progress. You have also advocated nuclear power plants, which has always generated heated opposition in some quarters. How do you think it could be made a more palatable choice for the public? With more assurance that complications [in power plant operation] will not become very serious. And by educating people that nuclear power is important because we are running out of other fuels. The raw materials we are now relying upon will begin to run short even in the next quarter of a century. A hundred years from now, we will have to look for other sources of power. I believe the best and easiest [source to use]--if properly handled--is nuclear power. I want nuclear reactors underground, and reactor products should be stored alongside the reactor, not transported. I think a safe approach to nuclear power is important and generally not practiced. In Hungary, nuclear power has been developed; 40 per cent of electricity in Hungary is nuclear. This is due to a very efficient group of people [at the location] where the Hungarian reactors are built. Hungary is one of the few countries where nuclear power is really accepted, and I think it will be to Hungary's ultimate benefit. Opponents of nuclear power point to accidents like Three Mile Island and Chernobyl and claim these events demonstrate that nuclear power is too dangerous to use. Those were accidents that the press has blown up out of all proportion. Three Mile Island resulted in a loss of a lot of money. Absolutely nobody was killed. Chernobyl, we do not know...in the accident itself, a few hundred people were killed, not many more than a big airplane accident. That other people were killed by radioactivity--this is unproven and probably wrong, too. A scientific conference in Vienna, 10 years after Chernobyl, showed that probably the biggest damage did not come from Chernobyl itself but from the fear caused by Chernobyl--in the months after Chernobyl, the number of women [having abortions] because of fear of what would happen to them soared. Tens of thousands of children were prevented from being born, because of the slight radioactivity that was measurable, but I believe not dangerous. What caused the damage was not radioactivity but the fear of radioactivity. Antiballistic missile defense has been very much in the news lately. Some have claimed that the system will never work, while others have declared it irrelevant in a post-Cold War world. Is an ABM defense worthwhile? We had made a good beginning under the Reagan and [first] Bush administrations in creating a defense against missiles. The [Clinton administration] was not interested and neglected the defense of the American people--a serious mistake that the new Bush administration is beginning to correct. We lost a number of valuable years. The missile shield is needed, but it should be carried out using a different system than is currently being tested. In the approach that we advocated under Reagan, the push was to stop the missiles very early. In the early acceleration phase of flight, the missiles are easiest to destroy. A system that would do that would not be a defense of the United States. It would be a defense of everybody, run by some sort of international regime. That is certainly not easy. Perhaps this kind of cooperation must first be developed in something more popular, like weather forecasting. Then it should be easier to sell the idea that we should defend both ourselves and everybody else. I am not for a unique defense of the United States. I am for planning for a peaceful world. Education and public understanding of science is important to you. In a culture where TV soundbites tend to be the main conduit of transmitting information, can anything be done to improve the level of general scientific understanding? I have a practically impossible solution--television should be improved! Actually for me, television can only be improved by not looking at it. Education is not just important, it's beautiful. Teachers should be better paid and better honored. The best people today do not become teachers. You must also get experienced people in the classroom who can teach children part-time. Any thoughts for the 21st century? Peace is very important. But to have peace, you must have power in the hands of those who want peace. That is the mistake of the pacifists, who believe that the knowledge of the big weapons is identical with the use of weapons. I am for the knowledge, but against the use. TOP: ARCHIVE PHOTO/BOTTOM: PAUL SAMUKA/AP PHOTO

Not for commercial use.  For educational and discussion purposes only.

[longshadow]

Wasn't "Dr. Strangelove" intended to be a caricature of Teller? Typical of Hollywood.

Actually, it was reputedly based loosely on Henry Kissinger, not Teller. After all, Teller was here in the US working on the Manhattan Project during the war, while Henry K. was wearing a grey or black uniform, if memory serves.

BTW, "Strangelove" was filmed in England by Kubrick, who lived most of his life there. Hollywood had very little control over any Kubrick film.

None of which matters an iota in comparison to the fact that Teller is one of the legendary heroes of the 20th century.

[Nogbad]

Actually, it was reputedly based loosely on Henry Kissinger, not Teller.

Not possible. Dr. Strangelove was created before the Nixon administration in 1964.

Kissinger did not have a role in government until the Nixon appointed him National Security advisor in 1969.

[PatrickHenry]

"My name is not Strangelove . I don't know about Strangelove," he flares. "I'm not interested in Strangelove. What else can I say?" A few moments later, as I pursue the question, he warns: "Look. Say it [Strangelove] three times more, and I throw you out of this office."

Scientific American's Very Leftwing Interview of Teller.

[Incorrigible]

If you and Incorrigible are so up to speed,

Hey!!!! Don't lump me in with criticism of Dr. Teller! I have no problem at all with him! I admire Dr. Teller and that's why I posted this.

After a long career of taking names and kicking atoms, I thought he was humble in this interview on how he and a few others played such key roles in both science and policy in preserving freedom for Americans. On top of that, in such a short interview he sliced and diced peaceniks, nay-sayers, bogus treaties and Beelzabubba!

What's not to like?? :-)

[longshadow]

Not possible. Dr. Strangelove was created before the Nixon administration in 1964.

Kissinger did not have a role in government until the Nixon appointed him National Security advisor in 1969.

He may not have had a role in government at the time the movie was made, but he certainly had a reputation as an international policy wonk among people in government for some time prior to his becoming NS advisor. It's not like Nixon found him working as a convenience store clerk and promoted him to National Security Advisor. Kissinger had a "behind-the-scenes" influence on American foreign policy for many years, and would have been known to the screen writers of "Strangelove" in the early sixties.

While it is possible that the character of Strangelove could well be someone else other than Kissinger, it is a stretch to claim that he is Teller, who isn't German, and who was here in the US working on the Atomic Bomb during WWII, not in Berlin giving der Führer fascist salutes.

[longshadow]

"Look. Say it [Strangelove] three times more, and I throw you out of this office."

And well he should have....

I suspect what we are witnessing is the post hoc hijacking of the Strangelove character by the left-wing apologetics who always dispised Teller's contribution to the Hydrogen bomb development and his role in Oppenheimer's loss of career and security clearance. Oppenheimer was, and still is the darling of the pinko-left in America, and they've never forgiven Teller for simply rendering his testimony that Oppenheimer tried to suppress development of the Hydrogen bomb, a testimony that was never refuted by any other witness, as far as I know.

When "Strangelove" came out in the early '60's, it provided the left-wing wackos a fresh insult with which to abuse Teller, and the further away from that moment we get, the easier it is for poorly educated goons to believe the fabrication that "Strangelove" was based on Teller.

I'll be happy to modify my take on this as soon as someone produces a contemporaneous quote from Kubrick or Terry Southern stating that "Strangelove" was inspired by Teller. Short of that, I must dismiss the linkage of Teller with Strangelove as so much vicious leftist retribution against those who failed to genuflect to either of their two great left-wing cause celebres of the Cold War: Alger Hiss and Robert Oppenheimer.

[PatrickHenry]

While it is possible that the character of Strangelove could well be someone else other than Kissinger, it is a stretch to claim that he is Teller, who isn't German, and who was here in the US working on the Atomic Bomb during WWII, not in Berlin giving der Führer fascist salutes.

A Commentary on Dr. Strangelove .

The case for Kissinger: he's German by birth, and the accent is very similar, which seems to be the main reason for linking Kissinger with Strangelove. Kissinger's subsequent career -- which journalist Christopher Hitchens compared to the pathology of a serial killer -- certainly matches Strangelove's ruthlessness. (Suggested reading: Seymour Hersh's The Price Of Power.) And given Kissinger's minor prominence and Kubrick's thorough research, one could argue it's likely that Kubrick thought of Kissinger.

The case against Kissinger: In my opinion he was far too obscure a figure to be "parodied." One would want to parody a widely-known personage, and at the time, Kissinger was one of many theorists of the unthinkable.

The second favorite is clearly Werner von Braun, the former Nazi rocket scientist who quickly turned his services (and those of his underlings) to the U.S. after the war. In the Cold War, von Braun's expertise in rocketry was more important to the U.S. than prosecuting him for administrating slave labor at Peenemunde and Nordhausen. His books were written with a view to the future (I Aim For The Stars), but it was a theme in humor at the time to note Von Braun's earlier work (cf. Tom Lehrer's song about him, Mort Sahl's subtitle to his book ". . . but Sometimes I Hit London.")

The case for Von Braun: He was famous. He was German. He had been a faithful Nazi. He promoted a self-image of coldly rational theorization of pragmatic scientific realities, untempered by such human issues as compassion, morals, or values.

The case against Von Braun: Very little, apart from the fact that he wasn't a nuclear scientist, nor a theorist of nuclear deterrence.

A third runner-up is Edward Teller, the Hungarian physicist who worked on the atomic bomb at Los Alamos, and whose theoretical work was instrumental in developing the H-bomb. Teller was also willing to denounce Robert Oppenheimer as a security risk, thus ensuring his reputation among liberals as a scoundrel. He was also the man who convinced Ronald Reagan that the Strategic Defense Initiative was a workable concept. Even historian William Manchester, in the Oppenheimer passages in The Glory And The Dream, said that, eventually, Teller would be savagely parodied as Dr. Strangelove.

The case for Teller; His role in the Oppenheimer affair. His promotion of the development of the H-bomb. His continued role in promoting nuclear weapons development (he was the head of Lawrence Livermore labs for many years). He had a foreign accent that, to an untrained ear, might sound German.

The case against Teller; Teller was Hungarian, and fled the Nazis they overran his country.

[longshadow]

Excellent synopsis.

The one point I suspect we may be overlooking is that "Strangelove" may not be a parody of any one particular person, but just a hypothetical character, inspired by an entire range of post-WWII Germans who became prominent Cold Warriors.

Having created the fictitious "Strangelove," it was axiomatic that an endless list would be compiled post hoc as "candidates" who inspired "Strangelove." It is equally axiomatic that the left-wing would promote, post hoc, it's most hated Cold Warriors of foreign origin to the head of the list of candidates, and thus it is of little wonder that Teller, von Braun, and Kissinger are often touted as the subject of the the probably non-existent "Strangelove" parody.

[yarddog]

I got to meet Dr. Teller although there were so many others there that I only got a chance to say hello.

If Dr. Teller is not an absolute genius then, he is a genius of an actor. The most imposing presence I have ever been around.

[longshadow]

Another site has yet another candidate, and then promotes my hypothesis that "Strangelove" was an amalgam of several different Cold Warriors, i.e., a purely hypothetical character, though based in part on several different real people.

"I think the best case can be made that Herman Kahn was the best source for Strangelove. Kahn was one of the earliest employees at the RAND corporation, which had been set by by Gen. "Hap" Arnold to study nuclear war. According to THE WIZARDS OF ARMAGEDDON by Fred Kaplan, Kahn was notable for developing the linguistic trick of referring to potential casualties with the "only" word, as in "only two million kiled." "Alluding almost casually to 'only' two million dead was part of the image Kahn was fashioning himself, the living portrait of the ultimate defense intellectual, cool and fearless, asking the questions everyone else ignored, thinking about the unthinkable." Indeed, his book ON THERMONUCLEAR WAR (1960), SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN reviewed it as "a moral tract on mass murder; how to plan it, how to commit it, how to get away with it, how to justify it."

The case FOR Kahn: Dr. Strangelove himself refers to a study he commissioned from the "Bland Corporation," a clear play on Kahn's old haunts. The similarity to Kahn's own ideas in Strangelove's pronouncements -- including the mine-shaft and ten-females-to-each-male stuff -- is uncannily similar to Kahn's brand of futurism. And since Kahn was the most famous nuclear war theorist at the time, Kubrick must have been thinking of his work.

The case AGAINST Kahn: Kahn, despite his name, was American-born, and was never a Nazi. Kahn was once asked about STRANGELOVE, and his reply was: "Dr. Strangelove would not have lasted three weeks at the Pentagon.. he was too creative."

My Best Guess is that Kubrick wanted to satirize the works of nuclear intellectuals such as Herman Kahn. Kahn was clearly the most famous, though it is not inconceivable that Kubrick was aware of Kissinger's work in the field. In order to give an extra spin on the ultrarational, "pragmatic" pose, Kubrick added allusions to Von Braun's Nazi past. The wheelchair and the physical infirmities were added to give Strangelove a bizarre, grotesque appearance. But personally, I believe that Herman Kahn was the single greatest influence on the creation of Dr. Strangelove."

Source Link

[Rushian]

I heard Teller give an essentially political speech at a DOD laboratory in 1992. He strongly endorsed George Bush, Sr. for his defense policies to an audience that was almost entirely government workers plus a few contractors like myself. LOL - no concern for the Hatch Act! He carried a long staff which reminded one of Moses. A great asset to this country!