1456 



The theme of technological impacts was never far from center stage 

 in these hearings, which ranged widely i ver the military, economic, 

 foreign aid, and even sociological considerations. Among the ques- 

 tions posed in the outline of the hearings '^^ were the following: 



[How can national strategy be designed so as to avoid] overwhelming tech- 

 nological influences in an increasingly complex world? 



How to control and direct technology and who controls the controllers? 

 Will [the United States] be able to continue to export technology . . . ? 



Issues raised by participants included the "growing worldwide 

 concern with the allocation of the planet's resources" (p. 7), the rise 

 of the multinational corporation (p. 18), the general movement 

 toward a global economy of interdependence with respect to both 

 resource depletion and environmental protection (pp. 31, 34), and 

 the "single community" of Western science and technology (p. 45). 

 In this hearing again, Secretary Johnson was the concluding witness. 

 He spoke of the "economic side of diplomacy" as presenting "the 

 most intractable problems for the future" : 



I expect [said the Secretary] that economic considerations may dominate foreign 

 policy over the next two decades, as security concerns have dominated the last 

 two. Technology is hurrying us into the future at a rate that neither our under- 

 standing nor our institutions, including our diplomatic ones, seem able to compre- 

 hend or cope with.'»» 



The impressive scope of this hearing was reflected in a subcommittee 

 report containing an "agenda for congressional consideration and 

 action" which appeared October 25, 1972. After reviewing the findings 

 of the Hearing-SjTnposium, it proposed 



. . . that the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Senate Foreign Relations 

 Committee, and other appropriate committees of the Congress should : 



(1) Hold annual hearings on the foreign poUcy reports to the Congress of the 

 President and the Secretary of State as well as on the foreign policy implications 

 of the economic report to the President and the President's message on the state 

 of the world. 



(2) Establish machinery and procedures for systematically and periodically 

 assessing the long-term foreign policy goals and programs of the United States; 

 for example, by the creation of a high-level advisory panel composed of public 

 officials and private persons, and/or by systematic and lieriodic review through 

 congressional hearings. 



(3) Hold hearings and/or establish advisory panels which would: 



(a) develop criteria to determine more clearly what constitute the vital 

 security interests of the United States; 



(b) establish guidelines to determine what commitments must be based 

 on treaties and what role executive agreements can and should play; 



(c) set criteria to guide the conduct of foreign policy in such traditional 

 fields as the protection of American citizens, property, and investment 

 abroad; freedom of the seas, and access to markets and sources of raw 

 materials ; 



(d) examine the decision-making process in foreign affairs, particularly 

 the roles of the Secretary of State and the National Security Council as 

 well as the potential roles of the Cabinet and other executive agencies con- 

 cerned with domestic affairs; 



(e) examine the extent to which social science research can be more effec- 

 tively utilized in guiding the formulation and execution of U.S. poUcy toward 

 the other nations and cultures of the world; 



'w U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Foreign Affairs, National Security Policy and Scientific Develop- 

 ments Subcommittee, National Security Policy and the Changing World Power Alignment, Hearing-Sympos- 

 ium, 92d Cong.. 2d sess., Mav 24, 1972, p. 1. 



«a /6W., August 8, 1972, p. 368. 



