1034 



lateral cooperative scientific relationships with Europe imperils 

 transatlantic security: 



If Washington does not soon develop a concerted science and technology policy,, 

 it is foreclosing options for the late 1970's and early 1980's in a way that almost 

 guarantees insecurity in Europe. The enormous complexity of the task is no 

 excuse for not addressing it. Small-scale, bilateral cooperation may postpone 

 the peril, but it cannot in the end avert it.^^^ 



The Honorable Emilio Q. Daddario, former chairman of the Sub- 

 committee on Science, Research and Development, House Committee 

 on Science and Astronautics, has addressed the same theme, but on a 

 broader basis: 



... It has become evident that the concept of sovereignty and the traditional 

 means of conducting relations between nations are no longer sufficient. The reason 

 for this is that technology has largely changed the world, and in doing so it has 

 rendered the old framework very vulnerable. Today, we are witjnessing an in- 

 creasingly rapid compression of both time and space. . . . This has led to the con- 

 temporary paradox whereby the human race is simultaneously becoming more 

 unified and more fragmented. We now seem to have a dichotomy on our hands — 

 either lasting cooperation or complete political dissolution — the potential for 

 either being greater than in any previous period in human history .^^s 



Mr. Daddario suggested that the development of individual na- 

 tional science policies is no longer sufficient to meet today's foreign 

 policy needs. A consensus must be reached on developing policies 

 to meet the needs of a technologically interdependent world: 



. . . Before there will be any real global cooperation, there must be far greater 

 consensus on its purposes. What are these? Is it to enhance material well-being 

 and intellectual development? Is it economic growth or a massive educational 

 effort? Is it limited arms control or an international peace-keeping mechanisms? 

 Is it expanded medical health care or more adequate housing? And what are the 

 priorities? . . . How do we reach some balance between near-term localized prob- 

 lems and long-term global problems? *29 



He then went on to suggest that formulation of a consensus on 

 international science policies might be achieved by developing a co- 

 operative international science policy committee to provide for ex- 

 change of information and views between developing and developed 

 nations and to assist in formulating and broadening collaborative 

 scientific activities. A similar proposal, which has received considera- 

 tion by the National Academ^^ of Sciences and funding from the Na- 

 tional Science Foundation, is to establish an International Foundation 

 for Science to award funds for cooperative international scientific 

 research on a multilateral ba>is. 



In both his second and third foreign policy addresses, President 

 Richard M. Nixon identified international cooperation to solve global 

 problems posed by science and technology as a major new dimension in 

 American diplomacy. In his second address, the President stated in 

 part : 



Along with its vast contribution to our well-being, technology has given us the 

 common capability to pollute the earth's ocean and air. It has increased the in- 

 centives for nations to assert, and attempt to enforce, territorial claims to the 

 oceans so immoderate as to endanger the ancient right to freedom of the seas. 

 It has brought the ability to tap — or to ravage — the resources of the seas and the 

 ocean floor, to the vast benefit — or to the huge harm — of mankind. 



6-'' Ibid., p. 68. 



528 Emilio Q. Daddario, "National Science Policy — Preclude to Global Cooperation," Bulletin of the Atomic 

 Scientists (June 1971), pp. 21-24. This statement was presented to the House Committee on Science and 

 Astronautics at its 12th meeting with the Panel on Science and Technology, January 1971. 



M» Ibid., p. 22. 



