1365 



trends that presaged diplomatic impacts; (3) to advise on the inter- 

 national control of technolog}^, and (4) to advise on departmental 

 management in international scientific and technological affairs. 



During its brief period of activity the Advisory Committee appears 

 to have served a useful purpose in providing an "outside" view of four 

 technological problem areas of concern to U.S. foreign polic}'. Four 

 subcommittees were formed dealing with (1) the control and manage- 

 ment of the export of technology, (2) international aspects of uranium 

 enrichment (as nuclear fuel), (3) the collection and distribution of 

 information produced b}* the Earth Resources SatelHte, and (4) 

 weather and climate modification. Principal emphasis was given to 

 items (1) and (3). Perhaps the most important contribution that this 

 committee could make, if revived, would be by serving as a two-way 

 communication link between the technical and policy groups in State 

 and the broad technical community at large, while at the same time 

 giving committee members a continuing education in diplomatic 

 science policy problems and issues. The Advisory Committee had 

 been selected with attention to the need for a very wide array of 

 disciplines and professional experience ^^ and could usefully bring 

 their varied experience to the Bureau on demand. 



Dr. Lewis Branscomb who had been a member of the Advisory 

 committee gave it as his opinion that the committee had served a 

 useful purpose during its short life. Its "mixed" composition — includ- 

 ing both scientists and non-scientists — had helped SCI to deal with 

 issues that began as technological but always went bejond technology 

 to social, economic, and political areas. It provided an independent 

 point of view on such subjects as bilateral science negotiations, inter- 

 national technology transfer, use of Public Law 480 funds, and prob- 

 lems of food. He offered two criticisms: that the Committee had 

 insufficient contact with principal policy officials in other agencies with 

 international science and technology missions, and that the Depart- 

 ment of State had no funds with which to assure that other agencies 

 fulfilled diplomatic commitments engaged in by State on their behalf."^ 



Growth of the State Science Office 



Programs goals of the State science office were described by Mr. 

 Pollack in a prepared statement to the Senate Committee on Foreign 

 Relations in April 1973."^ Said the statement: "SCI's basic mission is 

 to promote the effective utilization international!}' of U.S. capabilities 

 in science and technology to advance our national interests and to 

 strengthen our international economic, political, and cultural rela- 

 tionships." To carr}" out this mission there were four program goals: 



(1) Promote Constructive Utilization of the Peaceftil Benefits of Science and 

 Technology to Advance U.S. Interests and to Strengthen U.S. Policy Relation- 

 ships while Forestalling the Diversion of Such Technology to Military or Other 

 Programs Inimical to Those Interests. 



■' The Committee was chaired by Mr. Pollack. Its members were: 



Dean Rusk, former Secretary of State; Simon Ramo, vice chairman of TRW; John Hightower, former 

 Associated Press State Department correspondent and now professor of journalism, University of New 

 Mexico; Gordon J. F. MacDonald, professor of environmental studies, Dartmouth College, and chairman 

 of the National Academy of Sciences Environmental Studies Board; Kenneth Davis, Bechtel Corp.; John 

 Leddy, former Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs; Eugene SkolnikofiE, professor of political 

 science, and head of M.I.T.'s Center for International Studies; and Lewis Branscomb, vice president of 

 IBM and formerly Director of the National Bureau of Standards. 



'2 In a telephone conversation with the author March 17, 1975. 



'3 U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Department of State AppropriatioTis Authoriza- 

 tiom, Fiscal Year 1974, Hearings, 93d Cong., 1st sess., April 3, 4, 30, 1973, pp.'527-529. He asked for $1.7 miUion 

 for salaries for a staff of 50, plus operating expenses of $364,000 for the fiscal year 1974. 



