247 



But it definitely is important, in all of these cases, that we have 

 discussions with potential partners, or those even just interested in 

 particular areas, at the earliest stages in the formulation of 

 projects. 



Mr. FuQUA. Yesterday, one of the witnesses suggested that, par- 

 ticularly in the fusion program, the United States needed to, in 

 effect, get its act together, to come forth with a proposal. 



Now, in the Space Station, just the opposite was suggested by our 

 international friends: "Don't have a program and come tell us what 

 part do we want; we would like to be on the planning for it." 



How do we accommodate these conflicting procedures, possibly? 

 And maybe there is a reason to do that. Maybe the Space Station is 

 different — well, it is different than fusion, of course — but it still is 

 big science. How do we accommodate those differences and yet still 

 be reliable partners in international cooperation? 



Dr. McTague. I think the two examples that you have men- 

 tioned, Mr. Chairman, indeed are probably at the extremes of ap- 

 proaches. In the fusion area, in particular, we are reexamining, 

 from a fundamental level, what our fusion program should be. And 

 fusion, of course, has in it mixtures of research and development. 



We have been reaching the conclusion that our efforts, from a 

 national point of view, should be focused more on long-term re- 

 search and on determining the underlying physics, so that eventu- 

 ally, when the need comes about, some several decades down- 

 stream, to actually develop fusion as an economical renewable 

 source of energy, we have the underlying physics. 



Whereas, in the past, we have been expending perhaps much 

 more effort on short term, rapid development and demonstration 

 projects, that, in particular, does create difficulties in international 

 cooperation, as any one nation — especially as you get toward the 

 development end — changes its goals either for economic reasons or 

 for other strategic reasons. 



That is not so much the case in basic science, however. It is 

 fairly easy to lay out — well, I should not say easy, but it is a more 

 regularized process — to lay out a program of interest in basic sci- 

 ence. The fundamentals don't change. The frontiers move forward, 

 but the fundamentals don't change so much. 



So I think, in the area of basic research in fusion, for example, as 

 we are developing our own goals, then discussing them with other 

 nations to see if their goals match, we will be in good shape. 



Mr. FuQUA. Would you include such projects as the SSC? 



Dr. McTague. Absolutely, and SSC is an example of a pure sci- 

 ence project, where in fact, right from the beginning, we have been 

 very actively soliciting cooperation in the design phases and in the 

 goal phases from other countries. In particular, we have been 

 having some very fruitful discussions along these lines with Japan. 



Mr. FuQUA. Mr. Packard. 



Mr. Packard. With the constraints on budget that we are now 

 experiencing, it requires that we divide up the dollars. We just 

 don't have sufficient funds for all the research that we would like 

 to accomplish. It means that we have to pick and choose a little bit 

 more carefully. As we move more and more into the cooperative ef- 

 forts internationally, will that curtail or reduce the commitment to 



