1397 



Education, and Welfare. The science office of the Department of 

 State exercises a general monitoring function of all three programs and 

 the U.S. Scientific Attache in Tok^'o is required to maintain a watching 

 brief at the other end. 



The scope of the second program with Japan includes exchange of 

 research information at periodic meetings of panels of United States 

 and Japanese scientists on : 



1. Desalting 



2. Air Pollution 



3. Water Pollution 



4. Energy 



5. Forage Seeds 



6. Toxic Micro-(3rganisms 



7. Mycoplasmosis 



8. National Park Management 



9. Wind and Seismic Effects 



10. Diving Physiology and Technology 



11. Protein Resources 



12. Marine Resources and Engineering Coordination Committee 



13. Marine Mining 



14. Marine Facilities 



15. Marine Communication and Electronics 



16. Marine Environmental Observation and Forecasting 



17. Marine Geology 



18. Seabottom Survey 



19. Aquaculture 



20. Forest Resources Inventory ^^ 



A three-man team was appointed by John Ingersoll, Acting Under 

 Secretary of State, July 26, 1974, to undertake a comprehensive 

 review of the entire U.S.-Japanese science bilateral. Persons ser^^ng 

 on this team are: Dr. Keith Glennan, earlier Administrator of NASA, 

 Dr. Edward David, former science adviser to President Nixon, and 

 Robert Hiatt, president of the University of Alaska. The findings of 

 this surve}^ are expected to be returned to the Department of State 

 around the end of 1975. 



An assessment of this bilateral by the National Science Founda- 

 tion in 1973 described it as being "highly successful in bringing 

 scientists of the two countries together to work on mutual problems." 

 It had maintained an annual level of about 50 "active cooperative 

 research projects," 25 seminars to exchange scientific information on 

 specific topics, 6 long-term U.S. scientist visits to Japan and 6 to 8 

 exchanges of "eminent" lecturers on scientific subjects."" 



The undoubted diplomatic and scientific success of this first bi- 

 lateral led to a long succession of others until by 1975 there were 

 some 28 different programs on the books. In the discussion that fol- 

 lows, two of the principal programs — with France and the U.S.S.R. — 

 are discussed. 



If* Ibid., p. 3. r, ■ ^ . ,■ 



""US Congress, House, Comrnttee on Science and Astronautics, 1974 N'ational Science Foundation 



Authorization, 93rd Cong., 1st sess., Februaiy 27, 28, March 1, 6-8, 1973, p. 315. In comment on NSF's role in 



International science bilaterals. Pollack says: 



NSF is par excellence this government's science agency. It is logical and natural that it should be 

 exDected to carry the princioal respoiisibility for intergovernmental relations in Science. Indeed, 

 tlie Department of State has looked to the NSF to become the "executive agent", i.e. the respon- 

 sible action center, for nunieious intergovenmiental agreements. In my view the NSF has re- 

 spoi'ded niagnificentlv. The principal problems that have arisen have related to the lack of partic- 

 ipation of other agencies in intergovernmental programs for which the NSF is the executive agent. 



(Pollack to Huddle, March 25, 1975.) 



