It is important to stress that Kremlin authorities 

 have not abandoned their basically centralized ap- 

 proach and holistic perspective toward science policy, 

 even in face of the growing size and complexity of 

 their R&D effort. On the contrary, a perceived need 

 to accelerate science and technology has led them to 

 press all the more strongly in the 1970s for new tech- 

 niques of systems planning and management . Their com- 

 mitment to central planning remains firm. "The scale 

 and complexity of these problems," says Gvishiani, 

 "are such that in present-day conditions they can be 

 tackled only on the level of state policy. "^5 



Today, modern systems technology and terminology 

 have become the fashion of the times in Soviet dis- 

 cussions of science policy. The new systems movement 

 and management mentality are very much in keeping 

 with the conventional centralized approach to sci- 

 ence policy. At the same time, however, the new sys- 

 tems rhetoric continues to suggest an image of unity, 

 coherence, and wholeness that are still lacking in 

 reality. 



THE SEPARATION OF SCIENCE AND INDUSTRY 



Science and industry in the USSR have always been 

 largely separate worlds, more coexisting apart than 

 mutually cooperating and pulling in the same direc- 

 tion. They are, to use Pravda' s recent imagery, like 

 "two flagships proceeding on different courses, in 

 different seas. "16 Or, to phrase the analogy slightly 

 differently, they often appear like two ships "pass- 

 ing in the night," unaware of the other's presence 

 and activity. This basic and persistent feature of 

 the system forms an essential background to an under- 

 standing of the Soviet situation, especially the ser- 

 ious interface problems involved in technological de- 

 velopment and delivery. 



On the one hand, a bias in favor of theoretical 

 work pervades the world of scientific research and 



9 



