1344 



delayed action on the part of the Department in naming an official United States 

 delegation. Lack of official United States recognition could have seriously affected 

 Peruvian Government support of this research. In addition, such failure could 

 impair international scientific relations and good will. 



Third, departmental non-scientific personnel are substantially insulated from 

 the scientific community. Much closer relations with this important element of 

 the community would appear productive on many scores. The Department will 

 become aware of the aid that the scientist can render on the one hand, and on the 

 other can make the scientist more keenly aware of the fundamental issues that 

 enter into the administration of policy .^^ 



The proposed solution was to establish a small science staff in the 

 Department of State "at the policy level." This staff, said the report, 

 should serve: 



— To appl}^ "highly competent scientific and technological 

 judgment and guidance ... in [the] formulation of foreign 

 policy"; 



— To serve as "advisory body in the day-to-day operations of 

 the Department to assure . . . due consideration fof] scientific 

 and technological aspects of these operations"; 



— To represent the Department "from the point of view of 

 science on interdepartmental committees"; and 



— To enlist the cooperation of "government and private science 

 in assisting the Department in carrying out its full responsibilities 

 in the field of international relations." ^® 

 The report also suggested periodic use of preeminent scientists as 

 "top level advisers" on major problems (and that they be periodically 

 briefed on the international situation). The report completed its 

 policy discussion with the suggestion that extraordinary effort was 

 needed to assure the availability of scientists with diplomatic ex- 

 perience, commanding the confidence of colleagues in both fields. 

 A separate chapter of the report, "State Department Organization 

 for Science," offered a plan for an operational office that overlapped 

 somewhat the policy office just described.^' In the discussion preceding 

 the prescriptive conclusion, two alternatives were offered: (1) a 

 "Science Office," or (2) "a scattering of men of scientific training 

 throughout the operating units of the Department." The report 

 opted for the first but not without some internal inconsistency: in 

 the discussion preceding the conclusion the staff function was stressed, 

 while the functions actually proposed were largely operational. 



BERKNER DESIGN FOR SCIENCE OFFICE 



Thus, the report recommended (paraphrase) : 



1. Creation of a science office at the policy level, charged with 

 staff functions. 



2. The office to be headed by a science adviser, appointed as 

 Special Assistant to the Under Secretary of State. Staff would in- 

 clude a deputy; three scientists (phj^sical, life, and engineering); a 

 scientific and technological information branch; and liaison oflBcers 

 from "political, economic, and public affairs of the Department, and 

 from other government agencies having international interests in 

 science and technology." 



25 Berkner Report, p. 89. 



2« Ibid., pp. 91-92. 



" In fact, it was not clear whether what was being proposed was two offices or one. 



