1416 



To comluct the slratoo;ic j)lannino^ to design the future diplomatic 

 [)Osture of the United States in the face of the numerous challenges 

 of global technology *^- would seem to require a staff capability in 

 either the White House, or the Office of the Secretary of State, or 

 both, with the following characteristics: 



1. Ivnowledge about technological trends to obtain early 

 knowledge of what is likely to be technically feasible and also 

 diplomatically imi)ortant. 



2. Enough technical sophistication to identify aspects of an 

 ongoing development (i.e., the diplomatic counterpart of 

 "technology assessment") to determine what might be done to 

 enhance beneficial diplomatio consequences or minimize adverse 

 di])lomatic consequences. 



3. An early understanding of specific items of new teclmology 

 (wherever developed) that has a probability of perturbing the 

 international balance of power, destabilizing local societies, or 

 introducing significant economic developments. 



4. An ai)preciation of the possibilities of beneficially reacting 

 to foreseen technological developments by diplomatic means. 



Clearly, ])olicy planning requires a wide variet}' of information 

 flows, and the skills of a well-informed generalist, and the inmiediate 

 availabiUty of a technically competent interpreter of the scientific 

 or technological content of the information. 



Ever since World War II technology has been of increasing impor- 

 tance for U.S. diplomacy. How important is it today for the future 

 dil)lomatic posture of the United States? 



Importance oi Science and Technology for Foreign Policy Planning 



What proportion of the really important diplomatic issues that 

 have arisen since 1945 have a significant technological content? 

 Actually, it is not easy to find very many that are not somehow 

 involved with technology — issues that come to mind might include: 



Nuclear weapons control, tests and nuclear power development; 



Military hardware and its deployment; 



S[)ace, tracking, communications, observation, and sharing; 



Foreign aid and technical assistance; 



Technologv transfer; 



Food; 



Pollution and environmental issues; 



Antarctic exploration; 



World heallh and disease control; and 



International air transport. 

 A panel of the I'nited Nations Association of the United States of 

 America, '^^ in 1973, identified "10 basic issues of a global character 



'■-' The liistorical diplomatic importance of toclniology was explored in an earlier study in the series. See; 

 U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Foreign Affairs, The Evolution of International Technology, in the 

 scries, Science, Technology, and American Diplomacy, prepared for the Subcommittee on National Se- 

 curity Pohcy and Scientific Developments by Dr. Franklin 1'. Huddle, Senior Specialist in Science and 

 TechnoloRV, Science Policy Division, Congressional Kesearch Service, Library of Congress, 

 1970. See vol. JT, pp. 607-680. 



'MThe Panel was chaired by Howard C. Petersen, Chairman of the Board, The Fidelity Bank, Phila- 

 delphia, and its 21 members included: David E. Bell, Executive Vice Presideiit, The Ford Foundation; 

 Kichard Newell Cooper, Provost, Yale University, and Frank Altschul, Professor of International Eco- 

 nomics, Formerly. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Monetary Affairs; Thomas L. 

 Hughes, President, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Formerly, Assistant Secretary of State; 

 Oeorge B. Kistiakowsky, Professor Emeritus, Harvard University, Formerly, Special Assistant to the 

 President for Science and Technology, and Member, President's Science Advisory Committee; Francis O. 

 Wilcox, Dean, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University, Formerly, Assistant 

 Secretary of State for International Organization AfTairs; Adam Yarmolinsky, Ralph Waldo Emerson 

 University Professor, University of Massachusetts, Formerly Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for 

 International Security Affairs. The report of llie panel was titled Foreian Policy Decision Making: The Xeiv 

 Dimensions (New York: U.N. Association of the U.S.A., May 1973), 108 pp. 



