1025 



12 SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL COOPERATION 



1982 annual report of the Office of Science and Technology Policy 

 stated, 



international cooperation is not synonymous with Federally sponsored co- 

 operation. American scientists and engineers cooperate in a great many interna- 

 tional ventures— often through the universities or the industrial firms that employ 

 them — in which the Federal Government acts, at most, as a facilitator.'' 



Other evidence suggests, however, that the U.S. government con- 

 tinues to maintain interest in cooperative activities (witness, for exam- 

 ple, the recent U.S. -India bilateral S&T agreement). This is further 

 demonstrated in the NSF FY 1984 budget for international cooperative 

 scientific activities ($12.9 million), which represents a 30.3 percent in- 

 crease over the FY 1983 budget for this category ($9.9 million). ^° 



Intergovernmental Organizations 



Many pressing global problems can be handled only by organiza- 

 tions with global representation. The United States and other nations 

 that contribute substantial resources to international organizations 

 such as UNESCO, WHO, or the International Oceanographic Com- 

 mission (IOC) have found multinational channels useful as a means of 

 promoting international cost burden sharing and of facilitating activi- 

 ties, individual scientific contacts, and access to research localities 

 that, for political reasons, would not be feasible on a bilateral basis. ^^ 

 On the other hand, supranational organizations— UNESCO chief 

 among them — have become increasingly politicized in recent years, of- 

 ten on issues having little to do with their stated mission and in a man- 

 ner that is inimical both to U.S. interests and the general health of 

 international science. Moreover, many of these organizations are 

 characterized by large bureaucracies where progress occurs slowly 

 and where resources may be used inefficiently. 



Growing dissatisfaction with the operation of UNESCO was brought 

 sharply into focus on December 28, 1983, when Secretary of State 

 George P. Shultz informed the organization's director-general. Ama- 

 dou Mahtar M'Bow, of the intention of the United States to withdraw 

 effective at the end of 1984. In his letter, Secretary Shultz stated: 



For a number of years, as you know from statements we have made at the Execu- 

 tive Board and elsewhere, we [i.e., the United States] have been concerned that 

 trends in the policy, ideological emphasis, budget, and management of UNESCO 

 were detracting from the Organization's effectiveness. We believe these trends 

 have led UNESCO away from the original principles of its constitution. We feel 



