206 



Historically, countries have always felt that to discover some- 

 thing is of great national pride, and that still carries through with 

 our science awards and so forth, the Nobel Prize, you know, where 

 countries take a great deal of pride in having Nobel Prize winners 

 in their own country. We certainly do in our country. And I don't 

 know that we can break that down enough to really accomplish an 

 international effort in terms of science. 



Then, of course, you have all of the military and the application 

 of the scientific research that is done that becomes very competi- 

 tive, and I see this as a real dilemma. 



Dr. Stever. Yes. 



Mr. Packard. Let me take the devil's advocate for a moment. 

 Would it not be wise for us to recognize those significant problems 

 dealing with internationalism and recognize that perhaps the 

 reason that the United States is interested in internationalism is to 

 get some financial help in developing good science and other coun- 

 tries. Third World powers and so forth, might find that it's a bene- 

 fit to them because they can share in the technology that comes 

 from a big brother with a lot of money involved. Are we actually 

 looking up an avenue that is a blind alley and that, in fact, inter- 

 nationalism is just a hope and a dream but not possible in today's 

 society, and therefore should we not consider maybe putting our ef- 

 forts and our energies instead of into international efforts into 

 moving forward on a national level? 



Dr. Stever. Well, I think you have certainly hit the dilemma, 

 and that dilemma, which has been around for a very long time, is 

 very acute. It has been highlighted recently. 



I think there are some fields, however, where an international 

 approach may still go. One of them certainly is in the basic, truly 

 basic research, and SSC fits in that group. SSC and a number of 

 basic research facilities are not going to impinge too much on the 

 nationalism with respect to industrial competitiveness and military 

 strength. But lots of applied science certainly gets into that catego- 

 ry. But that now is also being interchanged internationally a lot 

 more than you think, a lot more than the Federal Government con- 

 trols, through truly the multinational companies. It is very difficult 

 to keep secrets very long and to hold things tight, it's true. 



In other areas where clearly there is an international base, data 

 base — weather, climate, oceanography — in those certainly we ought 

 to be international. There are others. I think certainly we should 

 be international in helping the lower emerging countries in their 

 science. There is no reason why we can't do that, because I don't 

 think we're giving away the competitive or military store there. 



I think that you can't go to one extreme or the other. You have 

 still got to live with the dilemma that we are living with, which is 

 more acute at the present time. 



Mr. Packard. Do you not believe that the driving force behind 

 that international approach is cost-sharing, that that really is what 

 is making it difficult for countries like ourselves, who have given a 

 significant contribution to science development and are finding 

 now that, as a good illustration, the SSC, a $10 billion item, that 

 we are finding difficult to justify that kind of a cost under the pres- 

 sures that we have now and so we are looking outside of ourselves 

 for assistance in financing? 



