... observe the basic policy of non-discrimination and affirm the rights of scientists throughout the world to adhere to or to associate with international scientific activity without regard to race, religion, political philosophy, ethnic origin, citizenship, language, or sex.

... freedom of movement, association, expression and communication for scientists, as well as equitable access to data, information, and other resources for research.

At the GA meeting, the major decisions are taken, for instance the members of Committees and Commissions for the next four-year term are elected, the budget is decided, the location of the next ICM is determined, and applications regarding IMU membership are voted on. You will be able to listen to the reports of IMU Committees and Commissions and the reviews of IMU related organizations. You will have an opportunity to participate actively in decision making and to meet and discuss with your IMU colleagues.

Why, gentlemen, are you silent about how things were done, how you managed education, admission to universities, selection of cadres? It would be useful for the educational community to know how and why the sciences lost hundreds, and possibly thousands, of indubitably talented individuals, potential leaders, hard workers profoundly dedicated to learning, whose lives have been distorted, often irreparably so.

I was the chairman of one of the first-day sessions. On that evening, I received an envelope from the chairman of the meeting committee containing a hand-written paper by Margulis entitled "On Some Motions On Spaces Of Negative Curvature." I looked at the paper and recognized that it was a proof of the arithmeticity of Lattices of Rank >1 [Note. An achievement that had been unsuccessfully attempted by some of the world's top mathematicians]. I spent the night reading the paper. David Kazhdan, who was scheduled the next day, had not been able to attend, so I took the liberty of presenting Margulis' paper at a special seminar at the time of Kazhdan's scheduled talk. The front row included [members of the Royalty of mathematicians] Atiyah, Borel, and Deligne - and there were gasps of surprise and admiration.

When I lectured on Margulis's results at Harvard in 1974, David Mumford, a Fields medalist in that year, entitled the talk "Recent breath-taking results of G A Margulis." This unwonted adjective for a mathematical topic perhaps helps convey the electrifying excitement generated by Margulis' result among the mathematicians of the world.

The free and responsible practice of science is fundamental to scientific advancement and human and environmental well-being. Such practice, in all its aspects, requires freedom of movement, association, expression and communication for scientists, as well as equitable access to data, information, and other resources for research. It requires responsibility at all levels to carry out and communicate scientific work with integrity, respect, fairness, trustworthiness, and transparency, recognizing its benefits and possible harms.

In advocating the free and responsible practice of science, ICSU promotes equitable opportunities for access to science and its benefits, and opposes discrimination based on such factors as ethnic origin, religion, citizenship, language, political or other opinion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, or age.

During the joint luncheon of the Executive Committee, a veritable clash occurred. Pontryagin knew that one of the Fields medalists was G A Margulis from the USSR, and he was furious about this choice. He let it be understood that it was a shame for the Union and for the Fields Medal Committee to have selected as a winner a second-rate mathematician like Margulis.

If Pontryagin spoke with force, the answer he received came with equal vigour.

The essence of what Chandrasekharan [then President of the Executive Committee] said was that while it might not be absolutely certain that the Committee had found the four most deserving medalists, it was absolutely certain that the mathematics of all those selected was of the highest quality and deserved profound admiration. Pontryagin, realizing that Chandrasekharan had the full support of all the others present, did not continue the debate.

... the disagreement between the IMU and the Soviet National Committee for Mathematics about the preparation of the mathematical program of International Congresses began to disturb East-West mathematical relations. At the 1978 General Assembly the discussions about the North-South connections and the Soviet disagreement played a prominent part.

Thank you for your letter of May 10 and the abstract of your lecture. I had already heard from your remarkable result from Professor Borel. I am pleased to say that we can meet your wishes about time and space, so that we can include your lecture in the program. We have reserved 40 minutes for your lecture ...

Apparently, I shall be able to attend the international Congress of Mathematicians at Helsinki and I look forward to meeting you. If not, I should be very glad to meet you in Leningrad or in Moscow.

Margulis has completely or almost completely solved a number of important problems in the theory of discrete subgroups of Lie groups, problems whose roots lie deep in the past and whose relevance goes far beyond that theory itself. It is not exaggerated to say that, on several occasions, he has bewildered the experts by solving questions which appeared to be completely out of reach at the time. He managed that through his mastery of a great variety of techniques used with extraordinary resources of skill and ingenuity. The new and most powerful methods he has invented have already had other important applications besides those for which they were created and, considering their generality, I have no doubt that they will have many more in the future.

I had exchanged letters with Margulis before the Congress to arrange to meet him in Helsinki in case he was given permission to attend and to meet in Leningrad if he was not able to attend. After the Congress, my wife and I traveled to Leningrad and met him, as we had planned, in front of the Hermitage. Margulis graciously took my wife and me to many interesting sights in and around Leningrad during the several days that we stayed there, and, in the following week, in Moscow.

In order to visit us at our hotel, he had to call me from a public telephone booth near the hotel so that I could come down to the front door and escort him past the guard. Whenever he came to my room, I had to keep in mind that our conversation was being monitored.

Professionally, Margulis could not get a professorial position at Moscow University, even after winning the medal. In fact, even his efforts to defend his advanced doctoral dissertation at Moscow University were fruitless. He had a sinecure job at the Institute for the Transmission of Information, which did have the merit of giving him much free time for mathematics.

This Committee determines the membership of delegations to international conferences and has to approve all the addresses by Soviet mathematicians. No Soviet mathematician may join any international society or the editorial board of a foreign journal without the blessing of the Committee. This doubtless explains why scientists who happen to be Jewish rarely take trips abroad, even when the trip is recommended by the employing institution and by the local party organisation.

Before the end of the sixties, the fate of manuscripts depended mainly on their scientific level. After that the editorial board was reorganised. There has since been a radical change in the editorial policy. Manuscripts by Jews and other unwanted people are often rejected, even when they are prepared on the initiative of the publisher.

1. The categorical dissatisfaction of the Soviet Committee of Mathematicians with the procedure by which invited speakers were selected was noted. Further, Vinogradov and Pontryagin noted that "the Consultative Committees have systematically discriminated against Soviet candidates, rejecting strong candidates proposed by the Soviet Committee and including in the program candidates well known to be weak. In this behaviour of the Consultative Committees, an important role was played by the openly racist propaganda of the Zionists, widely advertised by the Western press."
   
   
2. Western mathematicians with Zionist ideology have taken advantage of the ICMs for anti-Soviet political activity, which has nothing to do with and is detrimental to the scientific work of the Congress.
   
   
3. The Soviet Committee will prepare a list of Soviet mathematicians proposed to be invited as speakers and will submit it to the Polish Organizing Committee.
   
   
4. The Soviet Committee is of the opinion that the procedure in force before the Stockholm ICM-1962 should be restored; i.e., invited speakers should be elected by the national Organizing Committee on the recommendation of the participating countries.
   
   
5. In compliance with the wish of the Polish Organizing Committee, the Soviet Committee is doing its best for the successful execution of the Warsaw Congress. Should the justified claims of the Soviets regarding the selection of invited speakers from the USSR not be met with, the Soviet Committee will consider, as an extreme measure, withdrawing from the Congress.
   
   
6. Following the wish of the Polish Organizing Committee, the Soviet Committee intends to consider once more the possibility of the participation of Academician Faddeev [whom the Soviets had ordered to quit the executive Committee] in the activities of the Consultative Committee.

The Poles came to Helsinki by a boat that they had rented for their exclusive use. During the Congress, it stayed anchored close to the University, and, being in harbour for non-commercial purposes, at a low cost. Thus it offered convenient accommodation. But more than that, the Poles had taken with them ample stores of food and liquor, and there was an orchestra on board. Invitations to Polish parties soon became a coveted privilege.

After the introduction of martial law, pro-democracy movements such as Solidarity and other smaller organisations were banned, and thousands of their leaders and activists, including Lech Walesa, were imprisoned without court sentence. In the morning, thousands of soldiers in military vehicles appeared on the streets of every major city. A curfew was imposed, the national borders sealed, airports closed, and road access to main cities restricted. Telephone lines were disconnected, mail was subject to postal censorship, all independent official organisations were criminalised, and classes in schools and universities suspended. Only newspapers controlled by the Communist Party or the military could be published.

The government imposed a six-day work week while the mass media, public services, healthcare services, power stations, coal mines, sea ports, railway stations, and most key factories were placed under military management, with employees having to follow military orders or face a court martial. As part of the crackdown, media and educational institutions underwent "verification", a process that tested each employee's attitude towards the regime and to the Solidarity movement; as a result, thousands of journalists, teachers and professors were banned from their professions. Military courts were established to bypass the normal court system, to imprison those spreading "false information". In an attempt to crush resistance, civilian phone lines were routinely tapped and monitored by government agents.

There were attempts to resist via strikes and demonstrations. After the violent strike-breaking of the "Wujek" Coal Mine in Katowice on December 23, 1981, the United States imposed economic sanctions against the People's Republic of Poland. In 1982 the United States suspended most favoured nation trade status until 1987 and vetoed Poland's application for membership in the International Monetary Fund.

In response to the inquiry of President Lennart Carleson about the expected attendance of U.S. mathematicians at the scheduled Warsaw conference, the members of the U.S. National Committee have undertaken to solicit the views of mathematicians in various parts of our country. Although many different views are expressed, there is a broad consensus on the following points.

1. A Congress taking place under martial law would be very poorly attended.

2. The outlook of a 1982 Congress in Warsaw is made even gloomier by the fact that the Polish government has not granted the President of the IMU, Lennart Carleson, the assurances that he has requested.

Our committee does not believe that a successful Congress can be held under martial law. Of course, the decision to attend or not is up to each individual. The opinion we offer is based on the information we have collected.

We understand fully the earnest desire of the Polish mathematicians to hold the Congress in Warsaw. We believe that they, as well as we, would like the Congress to be successful. Accordingly, we would welcome the postponement of the Congress for one year, in hopes that it might be held in Warsaw with complete success a year later.

We recognise the problems caused by postponement impose a heavy burden on the Executive Committee, especially if it turns out that an alternative location becomes necessary.

Our apprehension about convening the 1982 Congress in Warsaw does not apply to the General Assembly. Indeed, the U.S. delegation would be delighted at the prospect of contact with Polish mathematicians.

As members of the IMU, we welcome the opportunity to assemble in Congresses with mathematicians from all over the world, and we appreciate the mutual trust that our shared language of mathematics fosters. It is normal that the Congress meet in countries governed by diverse political systems.

However, when a country declares martial law, it announces that its authority is irregular, no longer resting on the consent of the governed. On its face, martial law is incompatible with the tranquillity that a host country is expected to provide an International Congress. After December 13, a Warsaw IMU Congress seemed unthinkable.

However, following the visits of Pres Carleson, Prof Lions, and Prof Lehto to Warsaw last February, they reported that our Polish Colleagues fervently desire the Congress to proceed and that moreover, under certain improved circumstances, a Congress was conceivable. We were urged to look beyond the term "martial law" which was aimed primarily at reversing economic decline.

Along with our colleagues in other countries, American mathematicians are caught in a conflict between dedication to principles on the one hand, and the desire to help our Polish colleagues on the other. In today's discussion in this General Assembly, we are asked to advise the Executive Committee on desiderata for its forthcoming November vote on whether to reconfirm the 1983 Warsaw Congress or to cancel it.

Based on information collected by the U.S. National Committee for Mathematics, the major obstacle before individual American mathematicians contemplating attending a Warsaw Congress is the moral repugnance at the imprisonment of many, merely for exercising their rights as responsible citizens.

The Human Rights Committee of the National Academy of Sciences, through its sources of information, has been collecting information about the abuse of scientists, wherever available. For example, it has sought the release of Jose L Massera from imprisonment in Uruguay. I have with me a list of 156 Polish scientists who have been reported imprisoned since December, 13. I hope that by October, the status of the scientists on the list will be made known by Polish authorities--whether freed, detained without charges, or convicted for specified crimes. The French delegation has independently taken a similar initiative. We urge the Executive Committee to study the data made available by these inquiries before making its decision in November. U.S.A. attendance at a Warsaw Congress will be dependent on how much improvement we perceive in the liberation of Polish colleagues.

General remarks about a help of scientists to the prosecuted Polish colleagues.

As a person deeply engaged in the events in Poland I do announce: The present events are not the end of the suffering, the worst is ahead. It clearly follows from what is happening in Poland: the growing polarisation of the society and economic gap between the party, militarian establishment and the rest of society, the economic collapse, increasing determination of workers and young people, getting used of the society to the violence etc. We think that the massive economic help is necessary rather not in the present time but it will be in the near future. E. g. actually 10 mathematicians are known to be removed of job for evidently political reasons. Now the Polish math. Society tries to help them, but the number may quickly increase. Information about teachers in the country propagate very slow.

What we actually need is:

1. Do organise an efficient information action about the repressions in Poland, distribute the information's at universities all over the world. The present action seems to be too local.

2. Let the scientists try to visit Poland, both officially and privately, in order to: observe trials, try to visit prisons and internees (do not bother with unsuccessful attempts), contact with their families, listen to relations of released persons.

Do maintain all contacts with your acquainted in Poland.

3. Make an interest of West-Germans mathematicians to the problem. The military authorities have a great respect to West-Germans. Furthermore you should protest when you listen to the following opinions:

i. "The day-after-day life in Poland looks normally." Such opinions were quoted during the session of the Int. Math. Union in Warsaw. Say that a good mathematician should not generalise the life in hotel "Forum" onto the case of all the country. Furthermore, remember that the situation in the country is much worse than in Warsaw (in particular in Silesia, which is the stronghold of Stalinism, Bialystok, Radom, Torun).

ii. "The situation in Poland is better than in Argentina, Lebanon and so on".

All terrible bloodsheds follow gradually. But in Poland the transition of December 13, 1982 was performed extraordinarily quickly and violently. During one night the liberal European country became a totalitarian dictatorship. Nobody knows the number of victims of the martial law and protesting demonstrations and brutality of police. The situation in Poland is a real threat to neighbouring colleagues.

iii. Imprisoned mathematicians are not famous. The prevailing age of imprisoned math. is below 30. But some are winners of internal or international Olympic games (Rusiecki, Dibikajitis, Garez, Kowakski).

Information for the Amnesty International headquarter. It is important to propagate it broadly.

Accident [should be "incident"] in Kwidzn prison.

On August 14, 1982 in Kwidzn at the visiting time police beat internees. The victims were beaten with gum sticks in cells, then dragged outside and pursued through the famous "health tracts." The families of the internees, getting out after the visits, heard terrible cries of their relatives. About 60 people have been beaten, including about 30 seriously. There are 5 hospitalisations: Vladislaw Kalusinki (backbone damage), Zdzisduza (heart attack), Golawaki and two unidentified persons. This accident was considered to be a consequence of a recent change of prison chief: Mr Nikolajczyk was considered as too "liberal" and replaced with a tougher man.

A month ago I requested the members of the U.S. National Committee on Mathematics to sample opinion in their regions of the country about attending an International Congress of Mathematicians in Warsaw, August 1983. The responses that I received from my committee members were remarkably uniform. Everywhere mathematicians strongly reject the idea of attending such a Congress. Over 80% of the responding mathematicians replied that they would not go even if granted travel funds.

The reasons offered for not going are:

1. Reluctance to run the risk of getting engulfed in demonstrations.

2. Attending the Congress sanctions the present Polish regime.

3. Attendance would be tantamount to rejection of their personal beliefs about civil liberties
...
The only mathematicians expressing strong desire to attend the Warsaw Congress were those who were planning to make public protests on behalf of imprisoned mathematicians.
A practical consideration was that since January 1982 there had been a block on the use of US federal funds for travel to Warsaw.

The matter-of-fact performance of Prohorov was to the taste of the Executive Committee. He certainly contributed to the final decision. After a long discussion, the Executive Committee decided to confirm the organisation of the ICM-82 in Warsaw in August 1983.

The decision defied widespread general opinion. How to make it public was therefore of importance, and the Executive Committee devoted due effort to the formulation of the announcement.

With particular reference to the ICSU resolutions on the free circulation of scientists, we are consulting with appropriate government officials and will be in communication with you again shortly.

Before the 1985 Executive Committee meeting convened, the Soviet National Committee suggested, in March 1985, that Ludwig Faddeev be elected President. Considerable time at the meeting of the Executive Committee on 9 May 1985 was devoted to a discussion of Faddeev's candidacy - one year before the Executive Committee's decision had to be finalised. The minutes of the Executive Committee meeting say not a word about the details of this discussion, but the pros and cons were presented in the letter the Executive Committee member Mostow sent to the members of the U.S. National Committee for Mathematics four days later.

An argument in favour of Faddeev was the fact that of the mathematical superpowers, the USA had had three IMU Presidents, the USSR none. Remarks concerning this imbalance had been made a few times by the Soviets. It was agreed at the meeting that Faddeev was a mathematician of high standing who had excellent personal qualities.

"He understood the West, and concerns regarding East-West cooperation could be directed to him openly."

"Not agreeing to the proposal of the USSR might prove detrimental to Soviet collaboration in the IMU, particularly since a negative decision could not be easily justified."

Arguments against Faddeev were functional and symbolic. Fears - said to derive from past experience - were expressed that in Leningrad, Faddeev could be badly incommunicado. Worse still, even as President, he might be subjected to constraints imposed on him by the official Soviet bureaucracy.

At the symbolic level, Mostow took up the matter of discrimination against Jewish mathematicians in the Soviet Union. His decision was to oppose a Soviet as President at this time, on the grounds that there were continuing and substantial violations of the norms of scientific merit in the Soviet mathematics faculties.

Thereafter I showed the draft to Faddeev; he replied that the proper person with whom to discuss the draft was the Chairman of the Soviet delegation to the General Assembly. When I did so, the Chairman listened attentively and asked if he might take the draft and meet me a few hours later at noon. When we met at noon, he returned my draft with a barely perceptible revision and pledged their support in the General Assembly.

Recalling your action in September when you cabled Academicians Fadeev and Marchuk, asking that they expedite Abram Kagan's emigration, we are writing to relay good news. On December 10, Kagan was granted permission to emigrate from the Soviet Union. He expects to leave no later than mid-February.

As we take pleasure in this happy development, we want to thank you for your efforts that helped to bring it about.

As you know, in late August, Kagan was refused an exit visa because of the objection of the Steklov Institute of Mathematics. This gives us grounds for hope that many others, such as Leonid Dikii, Alexander Lerner, Naum Meiman and former prisoners of conscience Vladimir Kislik, Alexander Paritsky and Leonid Volvovsky, who also have been handed refusals for reasons of state security, will also be allowed to leave.

We trust that, when called upon, you will lend them your support as readily as you did to Kagan.

It is traditional ... to reiterate our commitment to the principle of free circulation of scientists. The political issues in connection with this were sometimes a source of tension. Now due to changes in many countries this topic became self-evident, as it must be. This makes it possible for us to concentrate on our main professional duty-mathematics.

During the past several years we have been gradually expanding our program of scientific cooperation with the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. In December of 1988 the NAS officers and several other NAS members met at the NAS Beckman Center in Irvine, CA, with the leadership of the Soviet Academy to discuss future opportunities for scientific cooperation. The Presidents of the two Academies confirmed their support for the five-year agreement for cooperation signed. in January l988, and developed an ambitious program of joint activities for 1989 and 1990.

Through the program the NSF seeks to contribute to the advancement of scientific knowledge by combining the complementary efforts and capabilities of leading researchers of the United States and the Soviet Union in the area of basic scientific research on the basis of equality, reciprocity, and mutuality of benefit It promotes this objective through support of long-term cooperative research projects between scientists and scientific institutions of the two countries. The program complements other opportunities for cooperation between American and Soviet scientists.