1835 



objectives of U.S. foreign and international scientific and techno- 

 logical programs: 



a. To advance the world's store of knowledge by free exchange of ideas and data 

 (e.g., International Decade of Ocean Exploration) ; 



b. To create a "critical mass" of intellect andjor instrumentation in attacking 

 common problems (e.g., Global Atmospheric Research Program) ; 



c. To speed the solution of critical problems by task appointment or complementary 

 research (e.g., .safety vehicle development, U.S., Italy, Germany (CCMS)); 



d. To meet the need in many studies of simultaneous or coordinated observatio?is for 

 many sites (e.g.. World Weather Watch) ; 



6. To compare the effects of geographic, climatic, cultural, etc. variables on a target 

 system under study (e.g., International Biological Program) ; 



f. To avoid unnecessary duplicatory research by information and personnel ex- 

 change (e.g., Medlars Information Exchange) ; 



g. To make available to scientists everywhere unique resources or experimental 

 conditions otherwise available to only a few (e.g., SEATO Cholera Research Labora- 

 tory, Pakistan) ; 



h. To develop international "banks" of scarce materials (germ plasma, micro- 

 organisms, geological samples, etc.) for the use of all scientists (e.g., Lunar rock 

 study program) ; and 



i. To concentrate the talents of many nations on a transitory phenomenon (eclipse, 

 volcanic eruptions, etc.) to provide maximum scientific benefit (e.g., International 

 Task Force at Mexico solar eclipse.) ^is 



Besides these scientific and technological objectives, Pollack sep- 

 arately enumerated political, national securit}^, economic, and humani- 

 tarian objectives. Virtually all of these have imjilications for inter- 

 dependence, many of them quite directly — such as "To reduce tensions 

 and rivalries between countries by utilizing science and technology 

 for common goals and mutual benefit (e.g., U.S.-Mexico Desalination 

 Cooperation)"; "To provide for mutual security by devising reliable 

 methods for ensuring compliance with treaty obligations (e.g., inter- 

 national nuclear safeguards)"; and "To provide networks for early 

 warning systems (hurricanes, tidal waves, etc.) (e.g., Tsunami warning 

 system)." ^^* 



The study brings out an interesting point about the relationship 

 between government and science. Although (as noted in the IGY 

 study) scientists tend to be international and nonpolitical in their 

 orientation, there are in fact varying degrees of interdependence — to 

 use the word in a more limited sense — between them and their govern- 

 ments : 



U.S. scientists, like their counterparts in other fields and in other countries, 

 play pivotal roles in determining both the content and mechanics of foreign and 

 international scientific programs. In a similar manner, the objectives of these 

 activities — the scientific goal of systematically accumulating knowledge about 

 man and his world, and the political goal of forging closer relationships among 

 states — necessarily vary with the way the diplomat uses science and the way the 

 scientist views his diplomatic role.^s 



Ejiezo further suggests that scientists participating in ostensibly 

 nonpolitical international scientific activities may often, in effect, be 

 given political missions. She cites an observation by Jean-Jacques 

 Salomon with regard to the scientists who attend the privately spon- 

 sored Pug wash Conferences that "the compliance of governments 

 toward them is in no way absent from the calculation. In fact a reading 

 of the lists of participants in the Pugwash Conferences is enough to 

 pick out the names of the scientists or political observers who are 



513 Ibid., p. 886. 



51* Ibid., pp. 884-886. 



iis Ibid., p. 886. 



