Right Web

Please note: IPS Right Web neither represents nor endorses any of the individuals or groups profiled on this site.

John Foster Jr. is a distinguished scientist whose career working in the U.S. weapons complex dates back to the early years of the atomic era. Closely affiliated with a long line of hardline policy initiatives, Foster was a member of two hawkish advocacy outfits—the 1970s incarnation of the Committee on the Present Danger (CPD) and the American Security Council. He collaborated on the controversial Team B exercise and led a congressionally appointed panel (the so-called Foster Panel), which played a role in pushing for new nuclear weapons production.

In May 2006, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) commissioned a study to assess the U.S. Stockpile Stewardship Program and the potential of the Reliable Replacement Warhead, and empanelled the Nuclear Weapons Complex Assessment Committee, of which Foster was a member.

The AAAS study, released in April 2007 and entitled The United States Nuclear Weapons Program: The Role of the Reliable Replacement Warhead, was notable for its critical stance regarding the Bush administration's argument for building a new generation of nuclear warheads. Summarizing its findings in a speech at the MacArthur Foundation, which helped fund the study, Jonathan Fanton said: "The AAAS report The United States Nuclear Weapons Program, could not have been better timed. Made public in April, it provided a coherent argument that urged caution as the United States proceeds toward a Reliable Replacement Warhead, outlined its probable impact on the nuclear Stockpile Stewardship Program (SSP), and drew attention to how an RRW program could undercut international efforts to stem the spread of nuclear weapons. Soon after, the House of Representatives passed the 2008 Defense Authorization Bill. This version of the Bill reduced funding for the RRW and called for the development of a comprehensive new nuclear weapons strategy before steps were taken to produce new warheads."

In a separate comment attached to the AAAS report, Foster dissented with many of the report's conclusions. He wrote: "Although I am in agreement with many of the specific recommendations in the report, I am disappointed that in my judgment it does not provide adequate focus on its terms of reference: to assess the degree to which RRW would alleviate risks in the SSP. Rather, it is long on risks and short on reducing risks (the value of RRW); long on raising uncertainties and short on recognition of answers to many of them already provided by Congress and DOD/NNSA officials. The report fails to recognize the urgency of initiating the RRW program to reduce risks in the stockpile by: failing to recognize the DOD requirement for diversity; failing to recognize the need to proceed with RRW-1 to provide a back-up to the Trident warhead; and providing an opportunity for retiring experts to train the next generation. Instead it conveys the impression that, despite such urgency, RRW be held hostage to the resolution of domestic and international political nuclear weapons issues, which are real, while all other nuclear powers have already initiated programs similar to RRW."

Foster has served as an executive at several government contractors. A biography provided in the AAAS report summarizes the various posts Foster has held during the past 50 years: "John S. Foster is chairman of the board of GKN Aerospace Transparency Systems, chairman-emeritus of Technology Strategies & Alliances, and a member of the board of Wackenhut Services Inc. He currently is co-chair of the Nuclear Strategy Forum. He was director of defense research and engineering (DDR&E) for the Department of Defense for eight years (1965-73); served on the president's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (1973-90); was chairman of the Defense Science Board (1990-93); and currently serves as a Senior Fellow of the DSB. Before his appointment as DDR&E, he was director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and associate director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Mr. Foster retired from TRW Inc. as vice president of science and technology in 1988. He continues as a consultant to Northrop Grumman Space Technology."

Earlier in the Bush administration, Foster was instrumental in pushing for new nuclear weapons research as head of the congressionally mandated Panel to Assess the Reliability, Safety, and Security of the U.S. Nuclear Stockpile (or "Foster Panel"). As Stephen Schwartz wrote in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists ("The New-Nuke Chorus Tunes Up," July/August 2001): "Congressional advocates of nuclear testing and new weapons production have not been particularly subtle. Consider the 'Panel to Assess the Reliability, Safety, and Security of the United States Nuclear Stockpile,' created in 1998 by Republican Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, a longtime foe of the comprehensive test ban. Known as the 'Foster Panel' after chairman John Foster, a former director of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, the group was established to 'assess whether [the Energy Department's stockpile stewardship program] would prove adequate should the suspension of testing be extended indefinitely under the proposed Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. ... In its second and most recent report, released in February, the panel recommends, among other things, spending $4 billion to $6 billion over the next decade to 'restore needed production capabilities ... to meet both current and future workloads'; to construct a small-scale plutonium pit production facility at Los Alamos; to continue design work on new warheads; and to shorten the time needed to prepare for tests at the Nevada Test Site from 24 to 36 months to just three to four months. The Energy Department is reported to be working now on increased preparedness for testing."

Foster's affiliation with hardline policy initiatives dates back at least to the mid-1970s, when he was a member of the CPD, an advocacy outfit partially inspired by neoconservatives associated with Sen. Henry "Scoop" Jackson that helped revive aggressive anti-Soviet policies and roll back détente, and his work on the Team B initiative, which was headed by noted anti-Soviet crusader Richard Pipes and staffed with the likes of Paul Wolfowitz. (For more on CPD, see GroupWatch Profile: Committee on the Present Danger. See also Right Web's profile of the latest incarnation of the CPD , which was created shortly after the 9/11 terrorist attack to support the Bush administration's "war on terror.")

In her book Killing Détente: The Right Attacks the CIA, which details the history of the Team B affair, Anne Cahn writes that at the same time that Foster was a member of the Ford administration's President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB), he was "chief instigator of the PFIAB-mandated competitive threat assessment [Team B]," which was charged with reinterpreting intelligence gathered by the CIA on Soviet strategic capabilities and intentions. Foster recommended the anti-Soviet hardliner Pipes to chair Team B's Strategic Objectives Panel, the most well-known and controversial team. As alternates, he suggested William Van Cleave or Albert Wohlstetter, both anti-Soviet activists and experts in strategic weapons programs.

Foster is the recipient of numerous awards. In 1960 he received the Ernest Orlando Lawrence award "for unique contributions, demanding unusual imagination and technical skill, to the development of atomic weapons." He has also received the Defense Department Eugene Fubini Award, the Founders Award from the National Academy of Engineering, the 1992 Enrico Fermi Award, the Defense Department's Distinguished Public Service Medals, the James Forrestal Memorial Award, the H.H. Arnold Trophy, the Crowell Medal (1972), the WEMA Award (1973), and the Knight Commander's Cross (Badge and Star) of the Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany (1974). Foster is also a commander in the Legion of Honor, Republic of France.

In a 2000 article for Physics Today entitled "The Evolving Battlefield," Foster argued: "National defense with maximum precision and minimum unintended damage should be an attractive challenge for scientists seeking to improve the human condition."

Please note: IPS Right Web neither represents nor endorses any of the individuals or groups profiled on this site.