1797 



ship, learning by experience, with the U.S. Departments of State, 

 Agriculture, Treasur}-, and Commerce standing by as anxious 

 midwives. 



In the background will remain the question of the effect of this 

 interaction on Soviet militarj- potency and Soviet military intentions. 

 While the main actors in this drama, insofar as the United States is 

 concerned, are the American industrialists and businessmen, "polit- 

 ical benefits are the main measure of net gain to the United States 

 from any pattern of increased United States-Soviet trade. . , .*^'' 



Thus, the study documents a clear-cut need for U.S. private enter- 

 prise to act in U.S. diplomatic and national security interests, in 

 particular the facilitating of a reorientation of Soviet production away 

 from armaments to consumption goods with a consequent slowing of 

 the arms race. It would seem to be a further responsibility of the U.S. 

 participants in dealings with the Soviets to keep U.S. officialdom 

 fully informed of all transactions. The Soviet counterparts, them- 

 selves a part of the bureaucracy of the Soviet Union, presumably 

 coordinate better. Accordingly, U.S. diplomats may be placed at a 

 serious disadvantage if they are less well informed than Soviet diplo- 

 mats. But it is also a responsibility of the Department of State to 

 provide a central institutional arrangement for the receipt, aggrega- 

 tion, synthesis, and analysis of this information. 



ISSUE one: the evolution of international technology 



The theme of this study is that technology has grown from a national 

 concern to a global force, even as it continues to be the principal source 

 and measure of national power. On both counts it is of foremost 

 concern to the field of diplomacy. But the development, use, manage- 

 ment, and transfer of technology are largely left in private hands. 

 So the question is posed squarely: what useful functional relation- 

 ships need to be developed between the U.S. diplomatic community 

 and the private sector for the purpose of developing, using, managing, 

 and transfering technology for diplomatic purposes? If the diplomatic 

 impact of technology depends on private decisions, to what extent and 

 in what ways can and should these decisions be influenced by diplo- 

 matic considerations? 



Kinds of impacts cited in the study include: 



— Whether to support the transfer of simple industrial tech- 

 nology to developing countries that put U.S. industry using the 

 same technology at, a comparative disadvantage; 



— Whether to export production equipment used by U.S. 

 industries ; 



— Whether to encourage in the United States a high-con- 

 sumption domestic economy (with a high throughput of materials) 

 that increases U.S. dependence on overseas sources of materials ; 



— Whether the export of U.S. technology unsuited to the re- 

 cipient, or otherwise flawed, works to the disadvantage of the 

 U.S. image abroad; 



— Whether the trend toward economies of scale invites serious 

 consequences for the global environment; 



«37 Ibid., p. 606. 



