scientific meetings at government insistence;¹ consideration was given to removing the exemption for basic research in the executive order on classification; heightened enforcement efforts have detained foreign students returning home; and universities have been asked to help monitor and enforce restrictions on the movements of foreign scientists and foreign students on campus.

The current situation creates large dilemmas for U.S. policymakers. The U.S. military establishment wants to end the flow of militarily sensitive information to the Soviet Union, but finds that the controls available may also slow down the development of the United States’ own military capabilities. This nation wants to keep its economy strong and to help other nations acquire know-how for their own economic growth, but there is fear that some of that know-how will later be turned to military ends that may endanger U.S. security.

In the heat of the current debate, it should be remembered that science contributes to several national goals that we all share, including the maintenance of U.S. military and economic strength, and a system of higher education and the pursuit of knowledge that serves as a world standard of excellence; U.S. research also may contribute to Soviet military strength. The Panel on Scientific Communication and National Security has attempted to make an initial net assessment of the extent and seriousness of U.S. technological losses, the effectiveness of present control mechanisms in dealing with the problem, and the costs of imposing controls on open scientific communication. In the process, the Panel has examined the problem from a broad range of perspectives in as comprehensive and objective a fashion as possible. It has sought to develop solutions that will provide maximum benefits, both in terms of maintaining the health of the U.S. scientific enterprise and safeguarding national security, while incurring minimum national costs.