1479 



2. They do not have large numbers of overseas assignments to 

 offer, which lessens their attractiveness as Washington basea 

 for Foreign Service officers thinking ahead to the next post. 



3. Their substantive concerns have not ordinarily been top 

 priority for the Secretary and his supporting team. 



4. Though they have a number of specific "line" responsi- 

 bilities, in their larger policy areas, some other department or 

 agency generally has "prime" responsibility, such as Treasury 

 for monetary matters and the Atomic Energy Commission for- 

 nuclear questions, (p. 87) 



Although much of the work of the functional bureaus was "bilateral 

 and sometimes well-removed from the emerging areas of international 

 interdependence," nevertheless, the report suggested, "we see the 

 areas to which these functional bureaus are devoting their attention 

 as being of increasing importance to the U.S. ability for efTective 

 leadership in multilateral affairs." (p. 87) 



FOREIGN SERVICE OFFICER TRAINING 



The Panel called for a balance in FSO expertise between political 

 and technical subject matter: 



Any personnel development program designed to prepare personnel for the issjies with 

 which the U.S. will be faced in the next two decades will require training and experience 

 in both political and technical fields. Foreign Service Officers will need to knoic more 

 about domestic and substantive issues, and program agency personnel will need more 

 knowledge of international political and economic affairs, (p. 96) (Italics in original.) 



However, its prescription for remedy was limited to a proposal that 

 would increase the range of expertise by introducing a discontinuity 

 in the service of personnel. It was noted that a number of FSOs were 

 serving in other agencies of the Government while som.e domestic 

 agency personnel had been seconded to work in the Department of 

 State. It was recommended that this practice be expanded: 



Domestic agency personnel, particularly those from departments which are 

 heavily involved in multilateral affairs, should be encouraged to serve in various 

 V)ureaus of the Department of State, especially the functional bureaus. Service 

 Ijy FSOs and domestic agency personnel at the U.S. Mission to the United N^itions 

 in New York and at U.S. missions to international organizations overseas should 

 be developed as an integral part of a training program for international diplomacy. 

 In addition, a greater number of FSOs should be rotated periodically to serve in 

 domestic agencies, (p. 97) 



One difficulty in maintaining a continuity of foreign policy is the 

 "short institutional memorA^" of State Department organizations 

 whose personnel are moved about after short duty tours. A tradeoff 

 between acquiring expertise and maintaining continuity would always 

 be necessary, but this proposal of the panel would add a further 

 complication to it. 



Technology Transfer and the Multinational Corporation 



In the words of an unpublished study by the Department of State, 

 "Technology has become thoroughl}^ internationalized." The primary 

 inedium that has brought about this internationalization is the multi- 

 national corporation. In vivid passages the A^evj Yorker magazine has 

 characterized this phenomenon of world\vide significance thus: 



The rise of the global enterprise is producing an organizational revolution 83 

 profound in its implications for modern man as the Industrial Revolution and the 



