1470 



SOME INFORMAL DEPARTMENTAL VIEWS 



— Technological advance has become the basis for national 

 security, for the international economy, and for national prestige. 



— Technology has become thoroughly internationalized — and 

 is likely to aggravate the difficulty of international political and 

 economic relations and to disrupt long-standing international 

 arrangements. 



— The very future of mankind will depend on the management 

 of such fundamental issues as population, food, the depletion 

 of nonrenewable resources, and the ecological threat of waste 

 and pollution. 



— There is a serious bureaucratic lag in the ability to deal with 

 these problems, not only in the Department of State but in the 

 U.S. Government as a whole. 



— The spread of nuclear weapons and the concurrent acceptance 

 of international nuclear safeguards involve a significant degree 

 of strain on the historic concept of national sovereignty. Other 

 strains on national sovereignty are implicit in the spread of the 

 multinational corporations with their largely uninhibited ability 

 to shift technologies, capital, and employment from country to 

 country, in the overflights of reconnaissance satellites, in the 

 apparently advancing ability to influence the weather and 

 redirect storms, and in the foreseen linkage of the world banking 

 and commerce systems through satellite communications, com- 

 puters, and data banks. • . 



■ — On the other hand, technology also goes hand in hand 

 with increasing nationalism. National technology programs and 

 strategies are evolving in Japan, France, and England. Inter- 

 national cooperative ventures in technology are being subordi- 

 nated to narrower considerations of national interest. Control 

 of the flow of industrial materials is being subjected to policy 

 considerations of national technological advantage. 



— The multilateral programs of the United Nations in science 

 and technology, extensive and diverse, are supported in a major 

 way by the United States, but do not yield benefits to this 

 country commensurate with the level of their U.S. support. 

 Similarly, there is no coherent doctrine governing bilateral 

 science agreements of the United States with other nations, and 

 U.S. benefits from these agreements are not maximized. 



—-In the special field of world health research, U.S. competence 

 offers an opportunity' of contributing in wa^s that greatly 

 benefit U.S. foreign policy objectives. But these efforts are 

 uncoordinated, diffused, and insufficiently rewarding to this 

 country. 



— Decisions on technical matters, taken early in their develop- 

 ment, may determine their ultimate impact on foreign affairs, 

 but an early input b}^ the Department of State is seldom pro- 

 vided for. 



— A tabulation of "science and technolog}^ based foreign 

 policy issues" prepared several 3'ears ago in the Department 

 shows the breadth of the technical activities that impinge on 

 diplomacy. (See the accompanying list, Table 11.) 



