379 



(d) This project Is reportedly being carried out in the office of the 

 Deputy Assistant Secretary for Private Sector Initiatives. Will the views and 

 contributions of the private sector (e.g., the U.S. National Commission fot 

 UNESCO) be sought? 



<e) In a report coiranissioned by the Department last year (1), the National 

 Research Council suggested that "the time may have come to begin discussions 

 of new models for facilitating international cooperation both for the 

 advancement of scientific knowledge and for strengthening infrastructure in 

 developing countries" (p. 19). The report also cited an unfortunate lack of 

 overall coordination of U.S. involvement in multilateral science cooperation 

 and suggested the development of "a complementary working relationship between 

 a governmental entity, such as the NSF, and a nongovernmental one, such as the 

 National Research Council" (p. 19). We urge that a decision be made to fund a 

 more in-depth study of the U.S. role in multilateral scientific cooperation, 

 as the NRC has recommended (p. 17). 



3. The fate of the U.S. National Commission for UNESCO 



The U.S. National Commission for UNESCO was not asked to participate as a 

 body in the 1984 Monitoring Panel on UNESCO (although some members of the 

 Commission, including Chairman James Holderman, served on it). Similarly, the 

 USNC was not assigned the role of monitoring the UNESCO reform process. This 

 task has been turned over to a newly appointed Reform Observation Panel that 

 includes one eminent scientist (Dr. Fred Seitz), several members of the 1984 

 panel, and several new members (including Ursula Meese). The Commission 

 appears to have been bypassed, even though it was founded by Congress in 19A6 

 precisely to advise the U.S. government on matters relating to UNESCO. It is 

 composed of 100 members representing organizations predominantly in the 

 private sector. In 1982, the Commission produced a "Critical Assessment of 

 U.S. Participation in UNESCO" (4) that was unanimous in recommending "that the 

 United States not only continue to remain a member of UNESCO, but that the 

 effectiveness of U.S. participation in the work of the Organization be 

 increased" (1). In December 1983, the Commission again expressed this view, 

 voting AI-8 in favor of the United States remaining a member of UNESCO. 



It appears that these positions have made the administration reluctant to 

 call upon the Commission to fulfill its statutory function with regard to 

 monitoring reform within UNESCO. We do not believe that this failure can be 

 justified, particularly in view of the fact that in recent years the 

 Commission's critical analyses of UNESCO's shortcomings, and of the 

 shortcomings of the Commission itself, have been honest and forthright. On 

 every occasion the Commission has shown itself to be willing to cooperate with 

 the Department of State. It is difficult to guess at what role the 

 administration might see for the Commission in the years 1985, 1986, and 

 beyond. 



4. The administration's overall goals in multilateral affairs 



Mr. Newell has frequently expressed a set of five goals that guide the 

 administration's relations with all multilateral organizations (5). The first 

 of these goals is to "reassert American leadership in multilateral affairs." 

 We believe that it will be difficult to pursue this goal successfully without 



52-283 0-86-13 



