86 



by policy goals for internal security and global politics. Eecent de- 

 velopments at the United Nations suggest that the People's Kepublic 

 of China will not remain long out of the U.N. membership. In anti- 

 cipation of this eventuality, it is conceivable that both the United 

 States and the Soviet Union could have reason to form an international 

 regime and a legal framework for the oceans so that when the People's 

 Republic of China joins the United Nations she would encounter a fait 

 accompli^ whose acceptance the community of nations desires. Com- 

 munist China's progress in diplomatic, economic, and nuclear status 

 may also explain the urgency and pressure to resolve issues of terri- 

 torial limits, continental shelf boundaries, and seabed resources, as 

 well as the banning of nuclear weapons from the ocean jfloor. 



In formulating policy, the United States has had the benefit of 

 considerable scientific giiidance. A number of scientists have par- 

 ticipated in advising both the legislative and executive branches of 

 Government. Scientists from academic, industrial, and Government 

 institutions were instrumental in assisting and contributing to the 

 formulation of U.S. policy on the seabed. Some scientists have par- 

 ticipated in the actual deliberation and drafting of resolutions such 

 as the Draft U.N. Convention on the International Seabed Area. 



Despite the initiatives of the Marine Council staff and the increased 

 participation of scientists in the formulation of U.S. seabed policy, 

 the evolution of this policy has been relativelv slow. Undoubtedly 

 the marine scientists and technologists would have preferred a 

 brisker pace than the diplomats were prepared to take. For its part, 

 the Cone:ress was ready to move faster than was the Department of 

 State, although in what direction is still not evident. In the case of 

 oceanography. Congress has had the initiative for more than a 

 decade; its efforts culminated in passage of the Marine Resources 

 Act of 1966, despite some opposition by the executive branch. 



It has been demonstrated that scientists can work effectively in 

 helping to formulate policy and in participating in the diplomatic 

 process. Modern diplomats are becoming increasingly aware of the 

 effect of science and technology in shaping their endeavors. The 

 diplomatic process is in some ways inherently ambiguous and in- 

 direct. Traditional diplomatic ambiguity is often difficult to reconcile 

 with scientific precision and explicitness, and few persons can com- 

 bine the subtleties and intuitive approach of the diplomat with the 

 straightforward factual approach of the scientist to perform ade- 

 quately across both fields. Nevertheless, the number of those who 

 can — the new breed of scientist-diplomat, or policymaking scientist — 

 is rising rapidly. It is to the advantage of a nation to capitalize on 

 the skills of such individuals in the pursuit of the national interest, 

 for they may represent mankind's hope for the effective conduct of 

 decisionmaking in a world society of nations increasingly interde- 

 pendent and influenced by scientific discovery and technological 

 change. 



