T [JOINT COMMITTEE PRINT] United States. The daert, SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, AND AMERICAN DIPLOMACY 1988 Ninth Annual Report Submitted to the Congress Stanford Law Library JUL 28 1988 154 83-714 488 APRIL 1988 Serial M-Committee on Science, Space, and Technology Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON: 1988 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office STANFORD LAW W LIDDADV COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS DANTE B. FASCELL, Florida, Chairman LEE H. HAMILTON, Indiana HOWARD WOLPE, Michigan GEO. W. CROCKETT, JR., Michigan PETER H. KOSTMAYER, Pennsylvania EDWARD F. FEIGHAN, Ohio TED WEISS, New York GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York MORRIS K. UDALL, Arizona CHESTER G. ATKINS, Massachusetts JAMES MCCLURE CLARKE, North Carolina JAIME B. FUSTER, Puerto Rico JAMES H. BILBRAY, Nevada WAYNE OWENS, Utah FOFO I.F. SUNIA, American-Samoa WILLIAM S. BROOMFIELD, Michigan BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York ROBERT J. LAGOMARSINO, California JIM LEACH, Iowa TOBY ROTH, Wisconsin OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine GERALD B.H. SOLOMON, New York MICHAEL DEWINE, Ohio DAN BURTON, Indiana JAN MEYERS, Kansas JOHN MILLER, Washington DONALD E. "BUZ” LUKENS, Ohio JOHN J. BRADY, Jr., Chief of Staff COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY ROBERT A. ROE, New Jersey, Chairman GEORGE E. BROWN, JR., California RALPH M. HALL, Texas TIM VALENTINE, North Carolina ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey RICHARD H. STALLINGS, Idaho C. THOMAS MCMILLEN, Maryland MANUEL LUJAN, JR., New Mexico CLAUDINE SCHNEIDER, Rhode Island DON RITTER, Pennsylvania SID MORRISON, Washington RON PACKARD, California ROBERT C. SMITH, New Hampshire HARRIS W. FAWELL, Illinois D. FRENCH SLAUGHTER, JR., Virginia ERNEST L. KONNYU, California CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland DAVID R. NAGLE, Iowa JIMMY HAYES, Louisiana DAVID E. SKAGGS, Colorado PAUL E KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania GEORGE J. HOCHBRUECKNER, New York HAROLD P. HANSON, Executive Director *Ranking Republican Member. FOREWORD FT J154 1986 This ninth annual report prepared by the Department of State pursuant to section 503 of Public Law 95-426 (the Foreign Relations Authorization Act for fiscal year 1979) represents more of a compilation of data and agreements rather than an in depth analysis of the foreign policy implications of science and technology activities as required by the law. We appreciate the effort of the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress in providing an insightful and detailed analysis and critique of this year's report, and we support the findings and recommendations contained in the CRS critique, which was prepared by Ms. Genevieve J. Knezo. In brief, the 1987 Title V report on Science, Technology, and American Diplomacy summarizes highlights of selected bilateral and multilateral science and technology agreements and does not provide, as required by the statutory language, a discussion of the foreign policy implications of these agreements. The major changes in the reports organizational structure have resulted in more of an inventory of data and activities together with an abbreviated assessment of activities rather than a detailed discussion of the foreign policy implications of U.S. Science and Technology agreements as required in the law. It is extremely difficult to ascertain the overall importance which the executive branch places on such activities and the benefits which may be accrued from a particular bilateral or multilateral science and technology agreement. The letter of transmittal from the President of the United States is replete with reference that, especially with respect to developing countries, science and technology agreements are instrumental in furthering U.S. foreign policy objectives. And yet, the text of the report does not elaborate on this important Presidential statement but merely reiterates this concept. Further as in previous year's reports, the Title V report does not provide the required funding analysis of science and technology related activities in the various agencies. The transmittal also notes that the report reflects a U.S. commitment to international scientific and technological cooperation of impressive range and depth. The committees would expect that this should be the essence of the Title V report and yet the committees believe that the report falls far short of addressing this fundamental issue. The committees have in the last several years noted the distinct improvement in the quality of the Title V report although, the committees continued to recommend areas for improving the Title V report, i.e. the need for improved analysis of the foreign policy implications of science and technology activities, and the need for enhanced funding data. Unfortunately, this year's Title V report does not represent a continued improvement over previous years reports and the committees strongly recommend that the Title V report process be reinvigorated and redirected to better achieve the goals and objectives as envisioned in Title V of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act (Public Law 95-426). However, the committees wish to emphasize the inherent value of the Title V report and both committees stand ready to work with the executive branch in an effort not only to improve this report but to fully implement all the requirements of the Title V amendment. The views expressed in this report are those of the executive branch and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Committee on Foreign Affairs or of the Committee on Science, Space and Technology of the House of Representatives. The committees do, however, commend those who contributed to this ninth Title V submission. DANTE B. FASCELL, Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs. Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, DC, March 14, 1988. To the Congress of the United States: In accordance with Title V of the Foreign Relations Authorizations Act for Fiscal Year 1979 (Public Law 95-426), I am transmitting the Administration's annual report on international activities in science and technology (S&T) for Fiscal Year 1987. The report reflects a U.S. commitment to international scientific and technological cooperation of impressive range and depth. New breakthroughs in 1987 demonstrated the increasing importance of international cooperation in science and technology. The discovery of superconductivity at high temperatures has the potential to revolutionize the way we work and live; international agreement on a protocol concerning protection of the ozone layer was a major accomplishment which will benefit future generations. Öfficial, government-to-government science and technology cooperation, such as our highly successful cooperative programs with India and China, supports our foreign policy objectives, as well as the mission objectives of the domestic agencies involved. Through the space sciences and environmental agreements we engaged in practical cooperation with the Soviet Union, while the signing of an S&T agreement during the Vice President's September 1987 visit to Warsaw provided a visible signal of our desire to improve relations with Poland. Such international cooperation should provide positive science and technology benefits to involved domestic U.S. agencies commensurate with their cost. United States preeminence in science and technology has been a major force in our leadership of the free world since World War II. Today we are putting new emphasis on assuring continued U.S. strength in science and technology in the years ahead. Employing science and technology to improve American industry's competitiveness is a major objective of this Administration. On April 10, 1987, I issued an Executive order to facilitate industry access to federally funded research and development and to assure more effective access by American researchers to developments in science and technology abroad. In negotiating new S&T agreements, we are seeking equitable access by American researchers to foreign research facilities, balance in the contributions and benefits for countries participating in the agreements, and assurance of protection for intellectual property rights. We are working with our economic partners and allies to ensure that all industrialized countries make equitable contributions to the world scientific enterprise. We are negotiating with Japan to |