1347 



Department of State. The durable effect of this report was beneficial 

 in a number of ways: 



(1) It emphasized the importance of science for diplomacy. 



(2) It identified important functions of a scientific apparatus as a 

 component of the U.S. diplomatic apparatus. 



(3) It prescribed the necessary mteraction of overseas scientific 

 attaches with a strong backstopping unit at home. 



(4) It addressed the need for coordination of the State scientific 

 office with other agencies with scientific functions. 



(5) It called attention to the importance of the U.S. nongovern- 

 mental scientific community for the Department of State — and 

 vice versa. 



On the other hand, the report had a number of adverse conse- 

 quences : 



(1) The array of proposed functions for science attaches was 

 unrealistically wade in scope, without establishing priorities of 

 emphasis. 



(2) The important distinction between science as somewhat interr 

 national, and technology as more closely related to national policy 

 and objectives, was neglected; similarly the heavy emphasis on science 

 and the interchange of scientific information obscured the larger 

 importance of technology for diplomacy and on the role of techno- 

 logical analj'^sis as an input to foreign policy formulation. 



(3) No assessment was presented of potential scientific and techno- 

 logical interests of the Department of State in the geographic and 

 economic bureaus, in State Intelligence and Research, in the in-house 

 educational activities of the Department, and especially in the PoHcy 

 Planning Staff. 



(4) The relationship of the proposed new scientific organization to 

 the White House and the National Security Council was not discussed. 



