1387 



Foreign Service Officers at such posts who are assigned continuing responsibiUty 

 for scientific and technological matters. Provides them with technical advice and 

 guidance as necessarj'.""" 



Briej Survey of the Contemporary Role of the Science Attache 



Iq an ejffort to establish how the attache system works in practice, 

 the author provided a questionnaire to the attaches on the occasion 

 of their return for their annual meeting in Washington. The arrange- 

 ment was that responses by individual attaches would be consolidated 

 by SCI into a single reply which would be provided to the Congres- 

 sional Research Service on an informal basis. It is believed that the 

 responses, provided to the author on November 19, 1974, are suffi- 

 ciently instructive to warrant inclusion in this study, along with the 

 questions that prompted them. Accordingly they are presented here, 

 as follows: 



QUESTIONNAIRE FOR U.S. SCIENTIFIC ATTACHES 



/. What is the "critical mass" of a science staff in an embassy f 



Varies with the size of the Embassy and the scope of the programs which the 

 Counselor or Attach^ is involved in. At the smaller posts an'Attache and a secre- 

 tary suffices. At the larger posts where the involvement of the Attach^ in the 

 policy issues concerning the Embassy is quite broad then the ideal size and make- 

 up of the staff would be an Attache, an assistant, an American secretary and a 

 local assistant. i°' 



S. What are the program priorities? 



Program priorities are determined by current government to government 

 foreign policy relationships having significant S&T content. Consequently these 

 are more technology oriented and differ from country to country. There is little 

 involvement with the basic sciences or basic scientific research unless problems 

 occur which may be resolved through Embassy intervention. Higher priority is 

 given to policy contacts which usually involve ministry officials rather than 

 academic representatives. Lower priority is given to "scientific" visits. 



3. What contacts does the science attache have with the U.S. science community, 



apart from the occasional facilitating of contacts and travel in the country? 



Again depending upon the country of assignment, contact with the U.S. 

 scientific community is through visitors. In the more developed countries i.e. 

 Europe, there is a continuous stream of U.S. scientific visitors both government 

 and academic. In the developing world or in less traveled areas the contact is 

 usually through U.S. government science officials visiting the country. Direct 

 contact with the U.S. community is usually left to visits to the U.S. for home 

 leave or during the annual conference for the Scientific Attaches. 



4. How much opportunity is there for laboratory visits or professional contacts in 



the host community? 

 This is sporadic depending on workload and opportunities provided by visitors. 

 When workload slackens, laboratory or university visits are scheduled. 



'»» U.S. Department of State, Funcfioiis of Scientific Attaches, prepared by the Bureau of International 

 Scientific and Technological Affairs, January 1967, pp. 2-3. 

 "" On this point Herman Pollack observes: 



In every function, there is inevitably bread and butter work to be performed. Every attachfi and 

 counsellor needs an American or local assistant or two for this purpose alone. Otherwise, a senior, 

 highly trained man is wasting part of his time. 



The size and configuration of a science office is a function of time and place. On the whole, every 

 attache or counsellor needs a junior assistant for the bread and butter work that must be done. Then 

 the situation will vary with the size and importance of the science and technology activity in the 

 country. Thus Paris, Bonn and Tokyo would naturally require and do have larger staff than Tel 

 Aviv, Buenos Aires or Tehran. Speaking generally, the entire attache program could make good use 

 of an additional 10 positions, but I do not believe that any single post is hurting critically for man- 

 power. 



<PoUack to Huddle, March 25, 1975.) 



