Diplomacy, Science and Technology

I believe that science and technology have a more important role in diplomacy that is usually recognized. In part my views come from my knowledge of U.S. foreign policy initiatives using scientific and technological cooperation as a tool of diplomacy. Thus the Middle East Regional Cooperation Program sought to build peaceful linkages between Israel and its Arab neighbors by funding collaborative research projects involving Israeli and Arab scientists. The International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis was created cooperatively by the Soviet Union and the United States as a Cold War initiative, building confidence by cooperating in an research and analytic field in which both countries were strong. For decades the National Academy of Sciences held joint activities with counterpart Academies in the Soviet Union and its client states, again to build linkages of understanding and to diffuse Cold War tensions.

I am not addressing scientific and technological advice within the governmental agencies involved in foreign policy. That scientific and technological advice is rendered to the Secretary of State or the Administrator of the foreign assistance program by the Science Adviser to the Secretary of State and her staff, to the president by the Office of Science and Technology Policy, by similar offices in other agencies of the government, and by a variety of scientific advisory panels focusing on specific programs and sectors. That advice is vitally important and too often undervalued and underutilized,, but here I am addressing the use of science and technology as an instrument of foreign policy. Perhaps I will return to S&T advice for foreign policy in some future posting

Objectives of Diplomacy

The United States Government stresses national security and economics in its foreign policy. It also carries out programs of development assistance and disaster relief in support of humanitarian objectives.

There are also other foreign policy efforts to deal with problems that can not be solved working solely within the country's border. I tend to think of these as "global systems problems". Climate change is an obvious example. So too is the control of infectious diseases. (The regular annual flu epidemic, which starts in Asia and sweeps across the world kills ten times as many Americans each year as Al Qaeda did on 9/11. A flu pandemic is much more dangerous. Yet we spend relatively little protecting against the import of the flu.)

Long Term versus Short Term Diplomatic Objectives

In foreign policy, as in other areas, there are problems that require urgent response and others where responses are less urgently required. So too there are problems that can not be solved quickly, but require extended attention. Indeed, there are urgent problems that require immediate attention, but that also will require long term efforts.

Foreign policy problems also range in potential impact and in the magnitude of the effort required for their resolution.

Climate change is an example of a problem that has very great potential impact increasing over the 21st century, that will require very long term diplomatic efforts. For that very reason, it is an urgent problem, since the longer we delay effective action, the worse the potential impact, and the more draconian the necessary steps for its solution. Climate change is of course a problem which is has been identified and clarified by science, and science is clarifying the nature of the remedial actions that will be needed.

I would point out that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is a very interesting example of scientific diplomacy. It was clearly a scientific initiative, involving thousands of scientists all over the world, and using strict criteria to clarify the conclusions that could legitimately be drawn from the body of scientific research that bears on climate change, its causes and its effects. By establishing this intergovenmental panel, governments first could establish an intention of collaboration on climate change, and could establish a body of agreed information on which to base negotiations.

Military Technology

I suppose that because of the heavy expenditure that the United States Government makes on military research and development, and the consequent superiority of the high military technology the country has developed, that technology is an important element in both our security and our economic foreign policy. I don't know much about the area, but it seems obvious that we share lots of military technology with our allies and deny even dual use technology to others. It also seems obvious that as the world's leading exporter of military technology, we sell military technology for economic purposes (amortize the R&D via sales of goods and services).

It is perhaps less well understood that the military plays other scientific and technological roles in foreign policy. Again, I am not an expert, but consider that the Corps of Engineers provides engineering expertise to other nations, the military medical services conduct biomedical research on tropical diseases and other medical problems worldwide, and military remote sensing technology plays a role in disaster assistance worldwide. These services, in addition to their nominal purposes, build good will and thus contribute to American security.

Technology in the Business Sector

The multinational corporation has become, obviously, the prime mover in the globalizing economy. In the absence of inhibiting regulation, it transfers technologies wherever management feels that they will be most profitable. Technologically and economically strong nations can utilize their regulatory powers to modify the flow of technology through corporate mechanisms in order to achieve security and other diplomatic objectives.

More commonly, nations engage in diplomatic offensives to attract corporations to their own shores in order to achieve economic objectives. Note too, that there are many dual use technologies, and attracting firms interested in their commercial application also results in their availability for other applications.

Increasingly, however, as corporations seek to exercise social responsibility in visible and effective ways, they enter into partnerships with non-governmental organizations, governments and intergovernmental organizations to jointly advance humanitarian objectives. In these efforts, the corporations are especially likely to apply and transfer their technology or technological expertise.

Technology in the Governmental Sector

Government as a service industry has been revolutionized by advances in information and communications technology. U.S. governments at the federal, state and local levels have often been leaders in that revolution, and as such have had an opportunity to gain diplomatic advantage by sharing the knowledge and technology. So to, the transfer of ICT for government has played a role in our development assistance policies. Comparably, infrastructure is often developed and managed by government. As was mentioned above, the Corps of Engineers provides engineering services and technologies abroad, achieving foreign policy as well as nominal objectives.

Standards and intellectual property rights are areas of intensive intergovernmental negotiations that are intrinsically technological in purpose. So to there is a wide range of technological issues in relations among nations, from the guarantees of quality of products involved in international trade, to international public health cooperation, to international efforts to prevent the spread of agricultural pests and diseases. The negotiations of treaties dealing with oceanographic concernes, fisheries, and biodiversity similarly are deeply connected with scientific and technological issues.

Science and Technology in Foreign Assistance

I have spent most of my career seeking ways to utilize science and technology to realize the humanitarian purposes of U.S. foreign policy. The Green Revolution created by the dissemination of high yielding varieties of grains to developing countries was made possible by agricultural research, and was led by the International Agricultural Research Centers and support for agricultural extension systems. The eradication of smallpox was made possible by strong epidemiological support for national strategies as well as by the development of better vaccines, cold chains, and management techniques. However, there has been a lack of support for science and technology in foreign assistance, at least in the United States government.

That is unfortunate. Scientific and technological cooperation could be an efficient means to advance our humanitarian goals. The U.S. scientific and technological capacity is much admired worldwide, and collaborative efforts in science and technology can not only advance our humanitarian goals, but also build good will and advance our goals in public diplomacy. The scientific viewpoint can help to combat more ideological thinking in recipient countries, thinking which is sometimes inimical to our interests. Foreign technological policy leaders who work with Americans learn how and why we do things, and are more likely to become allies in international standards and similar fora. Finally, scientific and technological cooperation helps acquaint people in other countries with American technology helping to build markets for our exports.