[TYPES] R: ETAPS bars Russian researchers from attending

[Ross Horne]

There are too many different views on parallel conflicts, so I'm
sticking to Russia-Ukraine and conferences such as ETAPS. Although the
policy has been updated, there are still things to do:

1. On Russians academics: Russian academics are also scared. At least
99% of them are in the well-informed category, are therefore appalled
by the war, and suffering restrictions, e.g., they are eligible for
conscription in a conflict they do not support, and may be cut off
from relatives. I support high level sanctions of people in the public
eye, but CS researchers (unlike rectors) are not in the public eye, so
sanctioning researchers would serve no good. We should be supporting
these researchers. If there is a submitted paper "of political
concern", from Russia (or any other country), we can have confidence
that it will be filtered out by the review process without needing to
update the code of conduct for conferences.

2. On Ukrainian academics: universities will have ceased functioning
and have even been bombed. What ETAPS can consider is forming a
committee to discuss how we can *support* the intellectual
reconstruction of Ukraine going forwards. Today, we cannot possibly
know the best way to proceed. However, round tables can be arranged
and committees can be formed to address this question. For example, if
genuine stability returns even to part of Ukraine, we, as a community,
can help as visiting researchers to rebuild departments. We can also
include universities in funding applications. To achieve this,
stakeholders such as funding agencies and Ukrainian scientists, would
need to be engaged soon for strategic readiness, rather than waiting
until the solution is clearer. Why funding agencies? If they are not
engaged they will not be prepared to assist, and are likely to
consider adding a partner institution in Ukraine to a project as an
untenable risk, rather than a major humanitarian contribution and
hence points for funding a project (although not as the sole criterion
of course).

It seems that a conference should host this debate. Since ETAPS have
gone political, perhaps they are best positioned for initiating such a
proactive debate.

Kind regards,

Ross