Michael Nacht Interview: Conversations with History; Institute of International Studies, UC Berkeley

Changing Paradigms in National Security Policy: Conversation with Michael Nacht, Aaron Wildavsky Dean and Professor of Public Policy, Goldman School, University of California, Berkeley: 1/9/03 by Harry Kreisler

Photo by Jane Scherr

Page 1 of 7

Background

Michael, thank you for being here today.

Good to see you, Harry.

Where were you born and raised?

I was born in New York City, grew up there, went to public schools there. Went to NYU in New York, studied aeronautical engineering. It was then called aeronautics and astronautics. And then began a career. I graduated relatively young, at age twenty. I left New York, and went to work at a NASA lab in Ohio. That's how I started my professional career.

Looking back, how do you think your parents shaped your thinking about the world?

My parents were both born in New York, and their parents were all born in Europe, in Lithuania and Romania. I think that they had what scholars would call a realist view of international politics. They were not particularly political, but they did keep up with current events. My father, in particular, was a small businessman, and was very practical. I think that practical sense was transferred to me.

When did you start getting interested in world affairs and so on? You started off on the engineering track.

That's right. I was very technically oriented, and I really had very limited knowledge. I had not traveled abroad at all. I traveled throughout the U.S., and into neighboring Canada. That was my extent, one trip to Montreal, when I went off to NASA. I guess I just was reading in the newspapers about it, and it sort of was attractive to me. And then, of course, I was there as the Vietnam build-up began.

You were where, now?

I was at NASA. I had a deferment, a so-called "critical skills" deferment, which was available. I became very interested in the whole business of the build-up, and then the use of force, and then the antiwar movement, none of which I was a part of. I think that was the first stimulus to my international interests.

So at some point you put that aside and went to Columbia to do a Ph.D. in political science.

That's right. I had done some graduate work at Case Western Reserve, again, in technical areas, and then went to work at a consulting firm back on the East Coast. The consulting firm had a project on conflict forecast studies. That really was my first professional experience of any kind related to international affairs. I was thrilled and taken by it, and I said, "Whatever this is, this is what I'd like to do." That led me ultimately to going to Columbia to get a Ph.D.

What in your background prior to that graduate education had prepared you with skills that later proved useful in the kind of work you were doing? Was there anything in your previous education or life experiences?

I think there was. I think an engineering education is very valuable. In engineering, you're forced to brush aside a lot of the complexity and isolate a core problem area, and then try and develop a set of tools and techniques to solve a problem. It lends to a clear, logical way of thinking about things, which I think is valuable. Also, later on, I got into national securities studies, which deal in part with military weapons systems. I have some familiarity with their feasibility because I have technical knowledge in some of these areas. So that was valuable as well. I would say those were the two elements from the technical side that helped.

Next page: Public Policy