874 



196 ANNALS NEW YORK ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 



States maintain a measure of genuine technological leadership. Although 

 even more substantial moves of theis sort are needed, recall that this is 

 what Brzezinski had in mind. In passing, we also must note that U.S. uni- 

 versities train tens of thousands of foreign students and interact in re- 

 search with hundreds of academic institutions round the world. Such 

 training, while it runs the risk of increasing "brain drain," must be sharp- 

 ened and sustained. 



Finally, connecting all of the major sectors in the United States, the 

 media are important. There are broad deficiencies in the public's literacy 

 about science and technology as well as about international issues. 

 Newspaper and magazine coverage of science has been weak, but it is im- 

 proving. The general public probably does not understand the future 

 global stakes in maintaining our scientific and technological capabilities. 

 And, of course, foreign technical aid is so extremely unpopular that our 

 relations with the "third world" are fragile and contentious. 



International Patterns: Centripetal or Centrifugal Forces? 



We will touch briefly on international institutions. Here, of course, are 

 many kinds of bilateral connections, as well as multilateral alliances and 

 other coalitions, together with the United Nations. 



Bilateral government agreements on science and technology involving 

 the U.S. number many more than even well-informed observers are 

 aware. It took 15 single-spaced pages to list the important ones in a 

 January 1979 survey by the State Department. Beyond these are 

 thousands of relationships involving industrial and academic groups. 

 Comparable statistics apply to most of the other industrial countries and 

 their private institutions. These bilateral partnerships are often the most 

 effective — some would say the only effective — ways to get things done. 



Yet it is the multi-lateral political-economic coalitions, as well as for- 

 mal treaties and the military-oriented alliances, that usually receive at- 

 tention internationally— e.g., NATO, OECD, the Group-of-77, and 

 OPEC. To be sure, there also are many internationally effective non- 

 governmental associations (such as ICSU), particularly in the sciences, 

 medicine, and engineering. And there are topic-centered groups — say, in 

 health and agriculture— that cross the public/private sectors in rather 

 productive ways, transferring technical skills with high leverage and 

 overcoming tall political barriers with deft pragmatism; e.g., CGIAR. 



The United Nations system today is a frustrating blend of idealism, 

 technical commitment, bureaucratic waste motion, and weary rhetoric. 

 Ironically, the reputation of the U.N. seems to be falling as rapidly as the 



