Research can be used against peace without the scientists’ knowledge. It is the responsibility of scholars to know where their research can lead to.

It is not bad to take an ethical stance, but it is a bit hard to know where any research might lead. Anything in physics could lead to some new weapon or a way of improving one or creating a better defence. Those investigating the atomic nucleus could not have known how it might lead to atomic weapons. And peace is not just the absence of war. It could be argued that any technology that results in some being able to take more than their fair share of resources on a finite planet will lead inexorably to war over limited resources or gradual immiseration for many.

On the other side of the argument, much of the technology we possess today has been derived from projects for national security. From radar, to jet travel, to emergency medical techniques, to the digital computer, to the internet itself. Research for defense often has a great benefit in improving the peace.

Research for defense often has a great benefit in improving the peace.

Bit of a euphemism there isn't it. 'Research for war' is more accurate.