1745 



convergence, namely, the correct result."^" Unlike politicians, they are not engaged 

 in conflict resolution as a profession and are not charged with responsibility for 

 the protection of national interests in a competitive arena. Rather, the existence 

 of a common, agreed-upon technical objective creates a tendency toward social 

 cooperation despite all obstacles, a tendency which has become a characteristic 

 of the international scientific community .^'^ Scientists tend inherently to recogniz*^? 

 the interdependence of their efforts and accept that interdependence as one of 

 the basic conditions of the environment in which they work. It is then relatively 

 easy for them to accept the extension of this principle to the environment in 

 which they live.^" 



And finally, there is the strongly suggestive evidence that the multi- 

 lateralism evident in the IGY may have helped to further the multi- 

 lateralism of the Antarctic Treaty, the Test Ban Treaty, and the 

 Space Treaty'^" and to establish other patterns of multilateral 

 cooperation, both governmental and professional. (On this general 

 point see also Case Three, under Outcome.) 



CASE four: the MEKONG PROJECT 



The thought behind the selection of this subject was that the same 

 internationalism manifested by the scientists in the IGY program 

 might also be found among technologists engaged in a mutual project 

 of regional development. As with the IGY, the forms of agreement 

 in the Mekong Project were almost entirely multilateral. They were 

 also conscientiously technical. Of regionalism, one quoted study of- 

 fered the opinion that regional cooperation measures "... have the 

 best chance of success when they achieve a net maximum of two goals: 

 the maximum of intraregional political neutrality and colorlessness." 



Resistance to multilateral development and a preference for bi- 

 lateralism was expressed by officials of the U.S. program of foreign 

 assistance. Said the Mekong study (Vol. I, p. 428) : 



Bilateral aid problems were thought hard enough to deal with, without the 

 necessity of becoming involved in multinational plans and programs. However, 

 the "spirit of the Mekong" has been showr, to have exerted a durable cooperative 

 influence on the Riparian States for r early two decades. Given a forum for 

 consultation, and a shared opportunity for economic growth and development 

 with many donor nations contributing, the nations of a region can demonstrably 

 work together, despite a long history of conflict and instabilities. 



In practice, regionalism appears to open the door to a veritable 

 catscradle of multilateral associations, institutions and arrangements. 

 Said the study (Vol. I, 428) : 



When a regional development project involves both a plurality of recipient 

 nations and a plurality of donor nations (and perhaps also an array of United 

 Nations instrumentalities) the administrative complications may grow but the 

 political complications seem actually to be reduced. One reason for this is the 

 doubly "lowered profile" of the individual donors, even though their contribu- 

 tions may be of commanding importance on an individual program unit in some 

 one country. The various arrangements for task management by the World 

 Bank or some other institution, plus the coordinating organization for the total 

 regional program, tend to insulate the donor from the recipient. In terms of 

 imposing conditions on the recipient, this insulation may limit the benefits of the 

 arrangement to the donor, but in terms of its general acceptability to all recipients 

 and amity among aU participants it is highly beneficial. At the same time, as 

 President Nixon has said: "I am confident that our role can be kept in consonance 

 both with our interests and with those of the increasingly self-reliant and inde- 

 pendent Asian states." ^*' 



3" i^enate Document No. 56, Tnfernalional Cooperation and Organization, p. 208. 



ara Astin. "The Scientific Conununity," p. 32. 



3" Bullis, Political Legacy of the International Geophysical Year, vol. I, p. 349. 



3S» Ibid., pp. 351-357. 



*> U.S. Foreign Policy for the 1970's: Building for Peace, House Document 92-53, p. 76. 



