1026 



U.S. PARTICIPATION IN INTERNATIONAL S&T COOPERATION 13 



that they have served the political purposes of member states, rather than the 

 international vocation of UNESCO. ^^ 



Both the Shultz letter and subsequent public statements by senior ad- 

 ministration officials— including the President himself— left open the 

 possibility that the United States would reverse its decision if certain 

 changes were made in the tone and substance of UNESCO's work, and 

 if the budgetary and management shortcomings were resolved. 



Leaders of the U.S. science community met during the months fol- 

 lowing the announcement to consider what, if anything, could be 

 done to encourage the administration not to implement its announced 

 decision. While it was generally agreed that the science-related activi- 

 ties of UNESCO are not the primary source of the difficulties within 

 the organization, it was also recognized that those supporting contin- 

 ued multilateral scientific cooperation have only limited influence on 

 the larger political process and must therefore wait for the right target 

 of opportunity before acting. 



Whatever the ultimate outcome of the U.S. policy regarding 

 UNESCO, it would appear unlikely for the foreseeable future that the 

 United States will further expand the level of its multinational S&T 

 participation, since it continues to maintain serious political reserva- 

 tions about the effective use of such resources. On the other hand, 

 given the global, interconnected nature of many current S&T prob- 

 lems, the United States is equally unlikely to disengage further from 

 the world research system. 



Regional multilateral arrangements are another common channel 

 for promoting S&T cooperation. The United States has been a strong 

 supporter of the NATO Science Committee, which has promoted the 

 advance of basic science through the mobility of scientific personnel, 

 and of the Committee for Scientific and Technological Policy of the 

 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 

 In both cases, the principal functions are education and information 

 exchange, which were the principal emphasis of U.S. multilateral S&T 

 cooperation before 1973. ^-^'i" Also, in both cases U.S. participation 

 contributes to its broader foreign policy agenda (national security in 

 the former case and economic development in the latter). 



The United States has, in addition, supported other types of multi- 

 lateral cooperative arrangements that have circumvented some of the 

 political, economic, and organizational problems on which multina- 

 tional programs have often foundered. There is, for example, the 

 unique joint sponsorship arrangement of the Global Atmospheric Re- 

 search Program (GARP), supported both by the World Meteorologi- 



