CHEMICAL & ENGINEERING
NEWS
NOVEMBER
29,
1965
MCA Speakers Favor Increased Trade Between U.S. and Soviet Union The question is not "Shall we?" but "Can we?" The often-heard question of whether U.S. trade with Communist countries helps or hinders us was again the topic of lengthy discussion last week among the 1125 (a record) registrants at the MCA meeting in New York City. In contrast to the views that prevailed 10 to 15 years ago, speakers at the semiannual meeting of the Manufacturing Chemists' Association generally favored increasing such trade. Delving deeper into the question than most speakers, Robert C. Swain, executive vice president of American Cyanamid, says the question is not, "Shall we do business behind the Iron Curtain?" but rather, "Can we?" Mr. Swain sees too many differences in the economic systems of the U.S. and Iron Curtain countries to be able to answer "yes." "Whether we want to develop trade with present-day Russia or not, there is no place to go. Present-day trade with Russia is a self-liquidating dead end." Mr. Swain claims that even today the U.S. does not trade with Russia. "The United States had wheat for sale and the Soviet Union purchased it." This is not really trade, but occasional, single-purchase transactions. In Mr. Swain's opinion, the future of East-West trade lies more with what happens in Communist countries rather than what the U.S. may do to increase trade. In his view, the Soviet Union must: • Develop the confidence in its own heritage to open its gates to for-
eigners and to foreign business without the false fear of corruption. • Have the courage to delegate industrial power, to allow managers to manage, to move the point of business authority to the point of responsibility. • Discover that there is and must be a difference between politics and economics, between diplomacy and international business. "They must learn to render unto Marx only that which is Marx'." Mr. Swain predicts that, should the Soviet Union learn these lessons, it will, in time, become a major factor in international business. Furthermore, if these changes occur, Mr. Swain says, "It is possible, one must assume, that some day, without having been buried by the Soviets or destroyed in nuclear conflict, through peaceful change, we will see a Soviet-owned and -operated plant on U.S. soil. "It is also possible that the next generation of business leaders in the
Robert C. Swain Differences in economic systems
United States will be choosing sites in the Soviet Union for their plant operations." According to William Persen, senior vice president of Business International, a New York City firm that provides business advisory services in international trade and investment, Free World sales to seven Communist countries reached $5.64 billion in 1964. This market is expanding rapidly and particularly so in the chemical area. U.S. firms, Mr. Persen told the MCA gathering, are generally not effective competitors for these markets. "The countries that are supplying the overwhelming bulk of the growth product areas—machinery and chemicals—are in western Europe, specifically West Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, and France, with Japan, Austria, and Sweden also significant competitors." Why is this true? Mr. Persen says it is because very few U.S. firms have tried to get a share of this market. European countries, on the other hand, are aggressively cultivating it, creating a demand for their products by exhibiting them at trade fairs. Another reason is that American management tends to feel that doing business with Communists may be bad policy. It fears, Mr. Persen says, that such sales will become known and somehow adversely affect their market at home. Related to this second point are the U.S. export control laws. While they may be vexatious, Mr. Persen feels that, in most cases, licenses are granted with some ease for chemical products and for most chemical knowhow. There are also obstacles to trade on the part of the eastern European nations. These obstacles, Mr. Persen claims, relate in some degree to the hindrances that the U.S. places in the way of imports from the Red bloc. Even with all these roadblocks torn down, no vast market for U.S. exports will open up, Mr. Persen says. "The NOV. 2 9,
1965 C & E N
23
eastern Europeans and the Russians are desperately short of foreign ex change and their total imports will be limited by their ability to export. These countries will continue to think and trade in bilateral terms and it would be some time before U.S. pur chases would increase substantially. Most important, because of the fact that western European companies have a big lead and more experience, it will be hard for U.S. companies to break into the market." Perhaps the strongest advocate of a
West Germany Was Biggest Free-World Supplier to Red Bloc in 1964: West Germany Canada United States United Kingdom India Italy France
$839 million 443 million 340 million 291 million 277 million 276 million 220 million
Almost all the Canadian sales are de liveries of wheat; all but about $60 million of the deliveries from the U.S. are food grains. Source: William Persen, Business In ternational
greater effort to increase East-West trade was Malcolm D. Gilchrist, vice chairman of the board of Universal Oil Products. Mr. Gilchrist touched on one point which has annoyed U.S. businessmen on both sides of the EastWest trade question, "The trade poli cies of the U.S. and its allies should be coordinated to prevent the exportation of strategic goods to the bloc. How ever, a re-examination and re-evalua tion of the controls on nonstrategic goods should be made so that Ameri can companies are not at a competitive disadvantage," he says. The frank discussion by these top executives may have buried, at least for the time being, the question of whether the U.S. should trade with Communist countries. Mr. Persen even went so far as to answer the ques tion of whether doing business with these countries is patriotic. "The an swer, of course, is that it is—if it is our policy to defend the dollar through in creasing exports, to work toward a more peaceful world, and to assist men everywhere to be freer than they are now." 24
C&EN
NOV.
2 9,
1965
Chemical Abstracts Service's Computer Search System Nears Operational Status Chemical Abstracts Service's substruc ture search system passed its first fulldress test during the technical review of the R&D contract between Chemi cal Abstracts Service and the National Science Foundation. The system makes use of a computer-based regis try of chemical compounds which is to be the foundation of a national chemi cal information network now under study at CAS. The technical review focused on the techniques and processes developed by CAS for a computer-based registry of chemical compounds and on improve ments it has made in the system since the contract was signed in June (C&EN, June 7, page 23). Paul D. Olejar, project officer of NSF's chemi cal information program, pointed out that the review was intended as a progress report for the Government's technical and administrative persons involved in the program. In addition, CAS described several areas where more research is needed to build its planned integrated computer-based chemical information system. One of the highlights of the two-day session was the demonstration of the CAS substructure search system. The system is based on structural features and uses an IBM 1410 computer to
retrieve compounds from the registry file. The search will handle questions about any part of an organic com pound. Questions may specify one or more substructures (connected groups of atoms) with "and," "or," and "not" logic. It is possible to specify, for ex ample, that substructure A must occur with either Β or C present, but with D absent. Any atom may be left un specified or fully defined. Moreover, several alternatives may be given for each atom. Bonds may be left un specified, defined fully, or used in combination. The system does not make use of a traditional "fragment code." This gives a searcher con siderably more freedom to frame his questions to suit his needs. Dale Baker, CAS director, says that by the end of 1966 (when there will be about 400,000 compounds in the registry file at CAS) the substructure search system could be operational and available as a service. But in or der to make it available, the program must be converted to the faster IBM 360 computer which is installed at CAS. In addition, the system must be rigorously tested by having ques tions submitted to it by chemists in universities and industry, as well as in government.
SEARCH. Personnel code questions for screen and iterative substructure searches of organic compounds stored in the registry file at Chemical Abstracts Service
