1844 



What reforms might be appropriate in the Congress? For example, 

 should the Murphy Commission proposal for establishment of a Joint 

 Committee on National Security be adopted? What are the pros and 

 cons of such an arrangement? Should the scope of a joint committee, 

 if estabhshed, be broadened to reflect considerations of interdepend- 

 ence beyond those normally encompassed by the term "national 

 security" — e.g., international cooperation in science and technology, 

 and in the maintenance of global economic security and stability? 



It is widely conceded that (a) interdependence is an increasingly 

 universal and compelling fact of lite today, closely tied to the proc- 

 esses of technological innovation, change, and growth, but also (b) 

 that the sovereign nation-state is firmly entrenched, at least for the 

 predictable future, as the principal instrument of growth and develop- 

 ment. What are the main implications of this seeming contradiction? 



To what extent and in what ways can the United Nations be real- 

 istically expected to moderate and direct the forces of nationalism in 

 the interests of constructive interdependence? 



Are temperate forms of nationalism to be encouraged as a means of 

 preserving cultural variet};^ and creativity in a world in which growing 

 interdependence might tend to produce a sterile uniformity? How 

 can the line be drawn between harmful excesses and differences worth 

 preserving? How can a Hegelian "higher s3Tithesis" be achieved in 

 which a blend of independence and interdependence embodies the 

 best values of both? 



Is multinational regionalism a practical approach to striking a 

 balance between constructive interdependence and the protection of 

 valid national interests? Is the European Community or the Mekong 

 Project a useful model of the rogional approach? 



Are economic alliances like OPEC potentially constructive from the 

 standpoint of world economic security? How can the excesses of such 

 alliances be reconciled with the interests of global interdependence 

 and development? 



How can nationalist political leaders who seek the benefits of inter- 

 dependence be persuaded to assume commensurate burdens? - 



At a time when a grooving acceptance of the reality of interdepend- 

 ence is accompanied by a paradoxical sense of drift and tendencies 

 toward world fragmentation and anarchy, leaders like those of the 

 early post-World War II period (who foresaw interdependence) are 

 conspicuously lacking. What can be done to encourage articulate 

 leaders with world visions to come forward — from small, as well as 

 large, nations? 



This study has shown how the technology of transport, communica- 

 tions, space, the seabed, global health, and atomic control has been 

 eroding national sovereignty and bringing about the rise of inter- 

 dependence. But what other forces are at work to this end? Is the 

 multinational corporation one of them? Might the multinational 

 corporation itself be shaped into a constructive instrument of beneficial 

 interdependence? 



What can be done, for example, to establish a code of conduct for 

 multinational corporations that would achieve a constructive balance 

 between the interests of private enterprise and those of interdepen- 

 dence? 



Can a system be devised for sharing vital resources with have-not 

 nations in accommodation with the practices of both the free market 



