824 



imsimnis 



SCIENCE AND THE 

 STATE DEPARTMENT: 

 An Uncertain Alliance 



Eugene B. Skolnikoff 



In a speech before the National 

 Academy of Sciences on March 6, 

 1985, entitled "Science and Ameri- 

 can Foreign Policy: The Spint of 

 Progress," Secretary of State George 

 P Shultz discussed the growing role 

 of technology in international af- 

 fairs. While cnticizing the public pol- 

 icy pronouncements of some 

 scientists and observing that they 

 have "no special claim to infallibil- 

 ity" in political debates, Shultz ap- 

 pealed for greater cooperation 

 between scientists and government 

 leaders. "The great intellectual ad- 

 venture of the scientific revolution 

 beckons all of us," he said. 



Shultz spoke of the need for new 

 ways of thinking about such matters 

 as the revolution in information 

 technology and strategic defense, 

 and he called on scientists to help 

 structure effective controls on the 

 transfer of mililanly sensitive tech- 

 nologies and to find ways to inhibit 

 the spread of chemical weapons. 



While Shultz was examining se- 

 lected technical issues and their ef- 

 fect on foreign policy deliberations, 

 others at a one-day National Acad- 

 emy of Sciences workshop entitled 

 "Teaching About the Role of Science 

 and Technology m U.S. Foreign Af- 

 fairs" were discussing ways to en- 

 hance the integration of science and 

 technology into the U.S. foreign pol- 

 icy process and to improve the train- 



ing of science attaches. In particular, 

 James L. Malone, assistant secretary 

 of state for oceans and international 

 environmental and scientific affairs, 

 descnbed the Department of State's 

 renewed efforts to restructure the sci- 

 ence officer corps and to strengthen 

 the role of science and technology in 

 the department and throughout the 

 U.S. Foreign Service. 



From this flurry of activity it 

 seems that we are being treated once 

 again to the periodic recognition by 

 the Department of State that science 

 and technology are not only prime 

 movers in shaping worid affairs, but 

 that the department's ability to deal 

 with those subjects as they interact 

 with foreign policy is marginal at 

 best. Perhaps it is ungenerous to be 

 skeptical of well-intentioned and 

 even potentially valuable proposals 

 for improvement, but Department 

 of State officials need some greater 

 sense of the problem, of past at- 

 tempts to deal with it, and of the 

 genuine constraints faced by the de- 

 partment if they are to achieve any 

 real progress. 



In fact, since World War II the 

 Department of State has been at- 

 tempting with only sporadic senous- 

 ness to come to grips with the 

 evident importance of major devel- 

 opments in science and technology. 

 A vanety of steps have been taken 

 over the years to create new offices 



and upgrade science advisory func- 

 tions. In 1979 Congress, frustrated 

 by the apparent lack of progress, 

 added Title V to the Foreign Rela- 

 tions Authonzation Act. Title V 

 called on the executive branch to 

 recognize the interdependence of sci- 

 ence, technology, and foreign policy 

 and to implement policies and pro- 

 grams that would "maximize the 

 benefits and minimize the adverse 

 consequences of science and technol- 

 ogy in the conduct of foreign affairs." 

 It also called for an annual report to 

 Congress on science, technology, and 

 U.S. diplomacy. (This reporting re- 

 quirement is about the only part of 

 Title V that has been earned out.) 



In addition to creating a science 

 attache corps in the 1950s, the De- 

 partment of State has penodically 

 attempted to make regular foreign 

 service officers more knowledgeable 

 about science and technology. Van- 

 ous courses or segments of courses 

 have been offered in the Foreign Ser- 

 vice Institute (FSI). Charactensti- 

 cally, rapid staff turnover at FSI 

 destroys the institutional memory; a 

 1983 cumculum review initiative at 

 the institute, for example, duplicated 

 one of 1963 — in complete ignorance 

 of the earlier one. 



The incredible aspect of these past 

 eflxirts and of the flurry of recent 

 interest is that the significance of 

 science and technology in foreign 



SUMMER 1 



