years." This recommendation was reaffirmed by a special Department of State 

 International Science Steering Committee in its report, Science and Foreign 

 Policy, released in May 1950 at about the same time the National Science 

 Foundation legislation was being enacted. 



The Office of Science Adviser to the Secretary of State was established in 

 a preliminary way in the summer of 1950 and the post of Science Adviser was 

 formally filled as such in February 1951. During the first year, science 

 attaches were assigned to London, Stockholm and Bern. The following year 

 similar posts were added in Bonn and Paris. 



Following the resignation of the Science Adviser in July 1953, the program 

 was gradually permitted to lapse. Meanwhile, the scientific community, 

 which felt that the program had made a definite contribution to international 

 understanding and cooperation in science, pressed for a reactivation of the 

 program — principally through the medium of editorial comment as expressed 

 in various scientific journals. Under urging from the National Academy of 

 Sciences, the National Science Foundation, and the President's Science Ad- 

 visory Committee, the Department of State decided to renew and strengthen 

 the program in July 1957. 



The new Science Adviser took office in January 1958. In January 1959 

 the attache program was again active, with attaches assigned to London, Paris, 

 Stockholm, Bonn, Rome, Tokyo, New Delhi, Rio de Janeiro, and Buenos 

 Aires. At the present time no real obstacle appears to exist to the fulfillment 

 of the original Bush proposal that a scientific attache in Moscow would be 

 useful. In addition, the way appears to have been opened for better ex- 

 change between the U. S. and the U.S.S.R. of both scientific information and 

 scientists under the Bronk-Nesmeyanov Agreement of July 1959. 



As far as international scientific conferences are concerned, the situation is 

 probably more satisfactory than at any time since the Bush Report was pub- 

 lished. U. S. attendance at such meetings has been strengthened and placed 

 on a more orderly basis through the National Science Foundation's authority 

 to pay travel expenses of American scientists attending scientific meetings 

 abroad and through the continued backing of the scientific unions by the 

 National Academy of Sciences. In general, scientists are chosen to represent 

 the U. S. by their peers acting usually through the scientific societies. 



With respect to foreign scientists traveling to the U. S. for scientific meet- 

 ings, there have been some improvements in the situation. The visa problem 

 of recent years has been greatly alleviated. The current problem, which is a 

 very real one for science but which transcends scientific considerations, is the 

 problem of recognition and non-recognition of certain nations. The inter- 

 national scientific community operates without regard to political considera- 

 tions and establishes its meetings and selects its delegates solely on the basis 

 of their scientific qualifications. When these run head-on into political con- 

 siderations involving the entrance of foreign nationals, there are, of course, 

 knotty problems to be solved. At the present time, these problems appear to 

 admit of no easy solution. 



On the positive side, by far the largest and most impressive example of 

 eflfective international cooperation in science was the International Geo- 

 physical Year of 1957-58. The U. S. was one of 66 nations participating in the 



XIV 



