Page images
PDF
EPUB

(1) the need for global prioritization of "big science" initiatives,

(2) the need to share new basic knowledge which could benefit, for example, the environment or the commercial sector atlarge;

(3) the need in the future for consideration of a protocol which allows nations to share in the design, development, and decision-making of "big science" projects, and to take turnsover a period of decades-underwriting basic science with global implications;

(4) the need to continue to advocate international respect for intellectual property rights, and

(5) the need to increase the presence of U.S. scientists, engineers, and business people abroad, comparable to the numbers of foreigners who work and study at U.S. institutions.

While the administration-under the creative leadership of the Office of Science and Technology Policy-seems to be moving in the right direction in its policies, implementation does not yet reflect these policies. Many important opportunities for cooperation (for example, with Eastern Europe and Latin America) seem to be falling through the cracks. We urge the State Department and other relevant agencies to move quickly to meet the high ideals articulated in President Bush's transmittal letter to this report.

Nineteen hundred and eighty nine was a remarkable year, with the tremendous moves toward democratization occurring in Eastern Europe. It is fitting that new bilateral science and technology agreements are viewed as a cornerstone of U.S. policy toward the newly emerging democracies. The expectation is that science and technology will continue to enhance cooperation and will foster democratization and economic growth in Eastern Europe and elsewhere.

The realities of the changing world and the democratic momentum which is taking hold in Eastern Europe and elsewhere should be a further catalyst to the U.S. foreign policy establishment to seize the opportunities which science and technology offer, as a way of providing new responses to emerging democracies. A decade since the enactment of Title V has validated its usefulness in this regard, as well as the need to rethink the U.S. Government's organization and response to this growing challenge.

This Eleventh Annual Report lists some 600 bilateral and multilateral agreements, many of which are described and covered in depth in the report. While the report has consistently improved over the years, there are still some shortcomings around which the committees would like to encourage improvement: First, we reiterate our past requests for complete and consolidated funding data about international science and technology agreements. Second, the report is short-of-the-mark in terms of conveying the full extent to which science and technology play a role in foreign policy. Third, to be a useful tool, the report needs to be focused, better organized, and perhaps streamlined. In its current form, the sheer volume of information is an obscuring challenge to the reader.

The views expressed in the report which follows are those of the executive branch and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. House of Representatives' Committee on Foreign Affairs, or

the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. The committees do, however, commend those agencies and individuals who contributed to this eleventh Title V submission.

DANTE B. FASCELL,

Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs.
ROBERT A. ROE,

Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

Hon. THOMAS S. FOLEY,

THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, DC, March 23, 1990.

Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. SPEAKER: In accordance with Title V of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act of Fiscal 1979, as amended (Public Law 95-426; 22 U.S.C. 2656c(b)), I am pleased to transmit the annual report on international activities in science and technology (S&T) for fiscal year 1989.

A characteristic feature of our age is the unprecedented rate of change in science and technology. In 1989, however, the rate of change in foreign affairs, particularly in Eastern Europe, has surpassed even that of science and technology. These remarkable changes in Eastern Europe have provided expanded opportunities for S&T cooperation with countries of the Eastern Bloc.

For example, on July 13, 1989, during my visit to Budapest, Hungary, I committed the United States to work with Hungary to expand bilateral research exchanges between our two peoples. Subsequent negotiations resulted in the signing of an umbrella S&T agreement less than 3 months later. In addition, because of growing concern about the environmental problems that plague the countries of Eastern Europe, I announced the creation of a new, independent Eastern European Environment Center in Budapest, along with initiatives to improve the environmental quality of the historic city of Krakow, Poland. We will continue to look for opportunities to integrate mutually beneficial science and technology cooperation with our broad foreign policy goals that are aimed at encouraging independence, democratization, and economic growth in emerging market economies of Eastern Europe.

My desire to preserve and improve humanity's common heritage and to address issues of the environment and global change found expression in a number of other activities. During the Paris Economic Summit, I joined other heads of state in calling for decisive action to understand and protect the earth's ecological balance. The United States was instrumental in establishing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as the primary international forum on this topic. These and other efforts highlighted in this report emphasize the need for nations to work together to understand the interconnected earth system and the ways in which human activity is influencing that system.

Because science and technology are truly international activities, it is frequently the case that scientists and technologists collabo

rate more closely with colleagues on the other side of the globe than with those at the other end of the hall. This international dimension of science is built on the person-to-person and institutionto-institution bonds that are formed through shared education, collaboration in research and development, and communications.

We in the United States pride ourselves on open access to our educational institutions, not only for students of this country but for students around the globe. Many foreign students have been eager to take advantage of this access, because it remains a fact that the United States has the best system of graduate education anywhere in the world.

The free flow of students finds a parallel in the free flow of ideas around the world today, particularly in the area of basic scientific knowledge. Much of the international character of science derives from its universality. The United States is firmly committed to the free and open international flow of basic scientific knowledge.

This philosophy also underlies the U.S. approach to a very important subset of our scientific efforts today-namely, the megaprojects in science, such as the Superconducting Super Collider, the human genome project, and Space Station Freedom. The results of these projects are a global resource adding to the knowledge base of all countries. We are moving toward a day when the responsibility for supporting large basic science projects will be distributed around the world, reflecting the truly international character of modern scientific research and the shared financial and intellectual underpinnings of that research.

Perhaps the most important element of federally funded international cooperation in S&T is the over 600 bilateral science and technology agreements involving more than 20 U.S. agencies, 120 foreign countries, and numerous multilateral organizations. These agreements-many of which are highlighted in this report-differ from one country to another, reflecting the state of that country's development and its past relations with the scientific community in the United States. However, there are several broad principles that apply in all our international science and technology agreements: comparable access, shared responsibilities for both basic and applied research, adequate protection and fair disposition of intellectual property rights, and effective protection of sensitive knowledge.

These agreements provide exciting opportunities for cooperation between the United States and the rest of the world, but we must remain cognizant of the fact that the global marketplace is becoming increasingly competitive. The United States still has the strongest science and technology enterprise that the world has ever seen, but we no longer are in a leading position in all fields. By concentrating resources and focusing efforts, other nations have succeeded in equaling and in some cases surpassing us in specific areas of research and technology.

This is part of the orderly development of nations and is due, at least in part, to the help that we provided to other countries since the end of World War II. But the internationalization of the marketplace emphasizes that we can no longer take our leadership for granted. In an increasingly competitive world, only a continuing

« PreviousContinue »