1801 



The study observed that the "community" of technology is less 

 coherent than that of science. Technologists tend to be mission- or 

 company-oriented rather than national or international in their 

 outlook. In particular, and unlike the case of the sciences, "inter- 

 national associations of engineers are neither very large nor very 

 active." *^* On both counts, the technological community — mostly 

 in private industry — is not easily accessible to the diplomatic commu- 

 nity either to receive diplomatic guidance from, or to give technological 

 guidance to, the diplomats. Yet it is very evident that many of 

 diplomacy's problems, goals, and solutions are shaped by technology. 

 Dr. Leo S. Packer, director of the OES Office of Technology Policy 

 and Space Affairs, spoke to this point as follows : 



For example, how do you balance short-term economic gains against long-term 

 competitive risks? How do you weigh the anger and possible retahation of a foreign 

 country? How do you account for intense competition for the business by foreign 

 industries? How do you consider the capacity of the overseas customer to assimilate 

 the technology transfer to our later disadvantage? How do you deal with foreign 

 customers who want an independent R&D capability rather than products? 

 How should government provide useful guidance and help to U.S. industry? 

 How do you measure the existing technology gap in a specific technology area? 

 What are the probable rates of progress in the U.S. and overseas and what will 

 the future trend be in the technology gap? What should our attitude be toward 

 exporting management and systems integration skills? How can we encourage 

 the import of certain commercially valuable technologies developed in Japan, 

 USSR, Europe and elsewhere? What are the risks of technology diversion to 

 undesired military use or to third parties? What are the comparative risks of 

 transferring various embodiments of technology by different modes of transfer? 

 To what extent does U.S. government action actually control the diffusion of 

 technology and what is the likely impact of possible actions? "" 



One possible bridge to the U.S. industrial, technological, and 

 business communities is the Department's Bureau of Economic and 

 Business Affairs.**^ The Bureau of Oceans and International Environ- 

 mental and Scientific [and technological] Affairs (OES) is another 

 bridging institution. On the private industry side, the multinational 

 corporation could be employed as an integrating or bridging element. 

 Others might be the National Academy of Engineering, technical 

 societies, and the technical universities. 



It may be unrealistic to expect the Department of State, with so 

 many different categories of expertise demanded of it (languages, 

 political systems and power structures, national and international law, 

 flows of persons and values, and negotiations between and among 

 systems) to add the further burden of required expertise in tech- 

 nology. Yet, as technology moves to the center of the diplomatic 

 scene, the planning and conduct of U.S. foreign policy require hard 

 and mature understanding of such matters as — 



— The changing structure of U.S. industry; 

 — Needs for U.S. technology in developing and developed 

 countries ; 



— ^Vulnerability of U.S. industry to uncertain supply of im- 

 ported raw materials ; 



— Effects of changes in technological levels of developed and 

 developing countries ; 



— Comparative receptivity of industry at home and abroad to 

 technological innovation ; 



«9 Ibid., p. 1331. 

 «o Ibid., p. 1436. 

 *« Ibid., see especially pp. 1430-1434. 



