not followed up on some of the technology transfer agreements signed with Japan and the FSX after five years of that negotiation?
ADMIRAL PELAEZ: That would be my impression.
WILLIAM KELLER: I will tell you what I would do. If you want to get a general agreement on science and technology between the United States and Europe, I would not use the word "reciprocity." I would use something very different.
It is possible to move toward that, but it is clearly against the drift. If you mean by that excluding other countries, either developing nations, or developed nations in other parts of the world, then it is against the drift toward a more multilateral framework in trade and investment models and, by extension, into technology development programs.
But it might be a way to start where there is a good deal of commonality and understanding and a lot of projects already in play and already going on. So it might be a good place to start and then to open up from there. The problem is that it does not work, particularly in this area of national technology funding, if one country is more open than another. There are just too many interests that would come in to play. We have to start with as multilateral a framework as possible.
ADMIRAL PELAEZ: I would like to add something. Nothing is absolute. Obviously there is technology transfer; individual companies do it in performing their job on their factory floor. The government has access to all that information, and I am not so sure we have taken advantage of the agreements to the extent that we could. That is my real comment. There has obviously been some technology transfer both ways.
PARTICIPANT: Is this in an area of composites?
ADMIRAL PELAEZ: There was some composite work, particularly in the electronics areas and in radionics.
CHARLES WESSNER: There may be grounds for some debate here. There are two broader points. First there is the necessity of constancy of effort over a long period of time, which not all political systems seem equally well adapted to provide.
You have also identified weaknesses in the U.S. acquisition system. Some of those weaknesses for commercial acquisitions seem to be aggravated by the fact that the military programs are the initial acquirers. So the transfer of these technologies is harder.
There is also some debate as to whether or not the technology has been made freely available under the FSX program. Sometimes it is available in principle, but not in fact. During a stint as a diplomat in Europe, I came to understand that when a diplomat says he agrees with me in principle, you know you have a long hard road ahead to reach an agreement.
Last, I would like to point out that some of these principles of cooperation, some of the difficulties of organizing broad international groups, are exactly the issues that we will be discussing in the next session.