“Your hand can stop atomic war! Sign for peace!” This petition known popularly as the Stockholm Appeal was produced and disseminated in 1950 by W.E.B. Du Bois and the Peace Information Center (PIC). On the eve of the Korean War, both Albert Einstein and Henry Wallace signed a single petition card with the intent of making a public statement of solidarity and joining the popular international protest movement against nuclear proliferation. The card was submitted to the PIC and collected by Shirley Graham. Yet their prominent names were never officially counted among the millions of signatures to the Stockholm Appeal. This particular petition card signed only by Einstein and Wallace was strategically and covertly retracted. It ended up in the hands of Einstein’s close friend Otto Nathan, and eventually made its way into the Morris and Adele Bergreen Albert Einstein Collection at Vassar College where it sits today. In February 1951 Du Bois was indicted and arrested for his work with the PIC on behalf of the Stockholm Appeal. Later that year, Einstein offered to testify as a character witness at Du Bois’ trial, and although he never testified, the added layer of his involvement in the Stockholm Appeal initiative raises questions about what causes Einstein chose to support during these politically turbulent times and how selective he was in deploying his social capital at the height of the Second Red Scare.

The European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN) was founded in 1954 with the aim of collaboratively building a large particle accelerator facility. By providing a unique machine to the physicists of its member states, CERN would benefit the development of European physics as a whole, help rebuild the scientific landscape destroyed by the war and act as a vehicle for European integration – at least these were the hope of its founders.

In my contribution I trace the development of CERN’s scientific cooperation with its member states through the 1960s. This decade was a crucial time in the history of the organisation as it not only had to face up to the reality of wide scientific and financial inequalities within its own membership but also had consider the future of its own organisation and its place within the broader physics landscape in Europe. The path eventually chosen by CERN and its member countries was one of Europeanisation, i.e. of standardising research practices across its membership base, and, even more importantly, of coordinating science policies. This CERNtralisation of the high energy physics field across Europe therefore constitutes an interesting case study of both the role of Big Science infrastructures on the development of scientific fields at the regional level, as well as the integrative effect of international organisations on their member states.

The end of World War II marks a period in which new perceptions about science are emerging. One of the areas of greatest interest is Nuclear Physics, both for its military potential and for its potential applications in the area of Energy. Mastering this knowledge becomes not only of scientific interest, but also a central element in State policies. During this period, Nuclear Physics conducted using Particle Accelerators, especially Electrostatic ones, also becomes central, and they begin to spread throughout the world.
In Brazil, the first electrostatic accelerator, Van de Graaff, was built at USP in the 1950s. Its operation was maintained with funds from the Rockefeller Foundation, a rare case of support for Nuclear Physics in the post-war period. The person responsible for the project was Oscar Sala. However, a new phase occurred in the 1970s, when a new accelerator, the Pelletron, was installed in the newly created Department of Nuclear Physics. The first accelerator of its kind in the world, its acquisition involved agreements with the government of the time, which used funds from the BNDE (National Development Bank). It was also necessary to develop a new kind of scientific instrumentation, which involved young researchers and new forms of technical training that were still not widely available in Brazil. The objective of this research is to analyze this historical episode, seeking both to identify the different agents who acted in it and to verify which political agreements were necessary to enable a large-scale scientific enterprise in Brazil.

Scholars and policymakers consider techno-scientific cooperation central to the process of European integration. However, its historical role, particularly in fusion energy research, remains underexplored despite preliminary studies indicating its significance during key moments of integration. This study addresses these gaps by applying network analysis to examine the evolution of techno-scientific collaboration in fusion research across Europe, contextualized within global developments. Drawing on reports, published literature, and archival materials, it employs temporal social network analysis to map the growth of collaboration, identify influential scientists, subcommunities, and topics, and elucidate how fusion research became progressively international within the European context

The results show that international collaboration in fusion research evolved significantly over time. Initially, the United States held a clear hegemonic position in the international cooperation network, as seen in publication data. However, over the decades, countries within the EEC—and later the EU—strengthened their collaboration and gradually emerged as central players in global fusion research. This transition became particularly pronounced in the 1990s, driven by the formal establishment of the EU. The findings suggest that while Western European cooperation during the Cold War was primarily shaped by institutional frameworks, the subsequent maturity of scientific networks reflected deeper cross-border integration, underscoring the dynamic interplay between political agreements and the development of techno-scientific collaboration.