The diplomatic approach in science propagation.

1. NEED OF A SMART SCIENCE DIPLOMACY!
The most pressing issues and developmental challenges facing nations
in recent times exposed the scientific and technological dimension. To
address the multifaceted challenges, the Science and Technology led
innovation of each country provides an opportunity to address these
global challenges.
The most diversified country like India is expecting the Science and
Technology Innovation to make the common citizen life easier. This
Science and Technology interventions have to be able to address both
national needs and aspirations — by being inclusive — and, at the same
time, they have to meet the international obligations of a responsible
country. Thus Science diplomacy is a crucial policy dimension.
The importance of S&T innovations in achieving the 2030 Agenda for
UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) demands a cross-border
collaboration in scientific research and development and for which the
science diplomacy play a crucial role.
The Global Innovation and Technology Alliance (GITA) launched in India
has provided an enabling platform for frontline techno-economic
alliances. Enterprises from India are tying up with their counterparts from
partnering countries including Canada, Finland, Italy, Sweden, Spain,
and the UK. This industry-led collaboration, with the government as an

2. equal partner, is aimed at supporting the last phase of technology-based
high-end, affordable product development — which can connect to both
global and domestic markets.
The India-led International Solar Alliance (ISA), with more than 79
sunshine countries as signatories and nearly 121 prospective countries
as partners, is another excellent example of modern-day science
diplomacy. The vision and mission of the ISA is to provide a dedicated
platform for cooperation among solar resource-rich countries. Such a
platform can make a positive contribution towards achieving the
common goals of increasing the use of solar energy in meeting the
energy needs of member countries in a safe, affordable, equitable and
sustainable manner.
The global Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure (CDRI)
announced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the UN Climate Action
Summit in New York. The CDRI is yet another example of international
partnership piloted by India in consultation with 35 countries that will
support developed and developing nations in their efforts to build climate
and disaster-resilient infrastructure, required to face the vagaries of
climate change.
The CDRI will provide member countries technical support and capacity
development, research and knowledge management, and advocacy and
partnerships. It is aimed at risk identification and assessment, urban risk
and planning, and disaster risk management. Within two-three years, the
coalition aims to have a positive three-fold impact — in the member
countries‟ policy frameworks, future infrastructure investments and
endeavours towards a reduction of economic losses from climate-related

3. events and natural disasters across sectors. Through this international
coalition, we can mitigate the fallout of earthquakes, tsunamis, floods
and storm by ensuring that affordable housing, schools, health facilities
and public utilities are built in line with the robust standards required to
survive natural or man-made hazards.
It is evident that international collaborations in S&T innovation is not
merely cosmetic. Today, it is a necessity. No nation alone has the
capacity, infrastructure and human resources to address the massive
challenges that the earth and mankind faces, threatening our very
existence. It is inevitable; therefore, that science, technology and
innovation should increasingly become an intrinsic diplomatic tool for
India.
This will require proactive engagement of the scientific and technological
community with stakeholders — including the polity, the diplomatic corps
and the knowledge enterprises — in order to design and develop
effective tools for international engagement through S&T. After all, these
will be required to meet the national aspirations and global challenges
that we face in a connected and yet shrinking world.
Science diplomacy', meaning international cooperation with science at
its core, is the key to overcoming COVID-19.
• Science paired with diplomacy can bring about unprecedented global
change, as shown by the recovery of the ozone layer.
• Building bridges between science and policy, and between countries,
will help us solve the problems of today and tomorrow.

4. In 1987, an improbable collaboration between scientists and diplomats
led to a global ban on chemicals that were damaging our planet‟s
protective ozone layer. Harmful radiation was passing through the
growing hole in this ozone shield, threatening life on the planet. In
response, countries around the world agreed on the groundbreaking
Montreal Protocol, which ended the use of ozone-depleting substances
in cars, fridges and air conditioners. By 2018, the ozone layer was on
track to recover completely, making this one of the most successful
diplomatic agreements in history.
Decades later, humanity is facing another common threat: the COVID-19
pandemic. But this time, cooperation between governments and
international institutions is at an all-time low. Many countries are
responding to the pandemic with sweeping unilateral actions and
belligerent, threatening language. But to overcome this crisis, we need
international collaboration, strong relationships and effective diplomacy.
To see how powerful such global ties can be, governments need only
look to scientists.

5. What is the World Economic Forum doing about the coronavirus
outbreak?
Scientists have long formed relationships with colleagues across the
globe, even when their governments didn‟t get along. Countries are
increasingly recognising the diplomatic value of such cross-border
scientific projects and networks, known as “science diplomacy”. These
international networks can re-establish trust and diffuse tensions when
political relations are strained.
After World War II devastated Europe, the European Nuclear Research
Laboratory (CERN) encouraged post-war contact between German and
Israeli physicists. During the Cold War, space cooperation enabled
symbolic relationships between American and Soviet astronauts in orbit
that were not possible on Earth. The 1959 Antarctic Treaty, a milestone
for environmental protection, dedicated the last unexplored continent to
science and peace. In 2015, long-standing cooperation between U.S
and Cuban scientists paved the way for re-opening diplomatic channels
between the two countries after nearly six decades of political strain.

6. Today, the SESAME particle accelerator in Jordan is bringing together
countries in the Middle East.
These projects show the power of science diplomacy. Scientists have
worked across political barriers, and ultimately, helped overcome them.
As the new coronavirus spreads, such efforts are more vital than ever.
n recent years, outbreaks of SARS, H1N1 (swine flu), MERS and Ebola
were contained through rapid multilateral action. However, the cross-
border response to COVID-19 has been less effective. There has been
friction both within international organizations, and between
governments and global bodies such as the World Health Organization
(WHO).
Under the legally binding International Health Regulations of 2005, all
countries must develop capacities to prevent, detect, report and respond
to public health emergencies. Many have not had the resources to do
this. Some have been unable to secure medical supplies due to
sanctions that block the required bank transactions. UN Secretary-
General António Guterres has called for a global ceasefire and rolling

7. back of sanctions, saying they are worsening the health risk for millions
of people.
To be clear, scientific projects should not have political goals, nor can
they replace diplomatic and peace-building efforts. Vaccination
programmes, for example, have sometimes brought about a short-term
cessation of hostilities to allow medical teams to carry out their work. But
help during health crises and other disasters does not necessarily lead
to lasting peace. After the crisis, hostilities often resume.
Indeed, many scientific achievements rely on political cooperation to be
fully effective. A WHO-led campaign to vaccinate the world‟s population
led to the eradication of smallpox. If a single nation had chosen not to
vaccinate its people, it would have endangered the entire world.
Scientists have played a crucial advisory role in the COVID-19 crisis,
informing governments, anticipating risks and ensuring research findings
guide policy. But many countries lack such advisory systems, making it
harder for them to form evidence-based decisions.

8. The answer is for governments to actively integrate science into their
domestic and foreign policy agendas. The Swiss foreign ministry
recently launched a public-private foundation to encourage science
diplomacy. For example, it supports efforts to study and protect corals in
the Red Sea, bringing together a range of countries in the region. France
and Denmark appointed ambassadors to the tech industry, marking a
new era for digital diplomacy and governance. Chile and South Africa
are engaged in astronomy diplomacy to build soft power through space
cooperation. There are many more initiatives around the world that
promote such ties.
Another way to boost science and technology diplomacy is to empower
the next generation of leaders. In March, young scientists around the
world called for solidarity and international action to stop the spread of
COVID-19, including better exchange of information. They gave practical
recommendations for researchers, such as sharing experiences,
communicating complex facts to the public in clear and simple terms,
and translating scientific texts into local languages. The networks and
trust created by communities such as the Young Global Leaders can
enable quick action when a crisis hits.

9. We are immersed in the biggest real-time science lesson the world has
ever seen. Scientists are more visible and valued by politicians and the
public than ever. Molecular biology terms like DNA, RNA or polymerase
chain reaction (PCR) have gone mainstream. Mathematical concepts of
linear, exponential and logarithmic growth are explained on prime time
television. Public health and epidemiological concepts like flattening the
curve, physical distancing and herd immunity are trending on social
media.
This is a golden opportunity for scientists to engage with the public. We
have an urgent responsibility to pass on our knowledge and expertise,
but also our values. Science relies on openness, transparency and
international collaboration. Promoting these values can pull down
divisions and bring about the change we need to solve the problems of
today and tomorrow.
A notable point we make in our policy brief1 is that while science has
played a central role in establishing and shaping the policy narratives
around COVID-19, it is not yet well understood and thus, needs further
research to investigate among other things: How science advice worked
in the crisis, how it formed narratives in non-traditional policy spaces
reliant on social media and the internet, how many efforts did not get the

10. time or attention they might have deserved and which kind of dedicated
fora should be in place for future crisis. The measures taken now in
addressing the COVID-19 crisis will inform not only future answers to
infectious diseases, but also to other global societal challenges, e.g.
climate change, food security, green energy, etc. We also highlight the
importance for scientists to share, in a well-organised way, accurate and
trustworthy data. One of our case studies7 looked at open science
policies as a matter of science diplomacy and the crisis has
demonstrated the importance of an open and broad exchange of
information efficiently in order to understand the situation, and to
develop and test a vaccine or necessary medication as quickly as
possible: “Open Science is central to this, and with it the sharing of
results, data and methods. We are experiencing a shift towards Open
Science at a speed that was previously unthinkable.”8 We believe that
Europe played and plays an important role to pave the way for Open
Science, including through science diplomacy activities. It is now
necessary to build and foster the bridges built by providing robust legal
and governance frameworks for sharing and reuse of data and methods
and to secure the infrastructures for the exchange. In this context, we
also call for more solidarity and leadership at the different interfaces
between science, policy/diplomacy and also industry. These sectors

11. share different values that require resolution in policy-making and “while
there is a political and public imperative to provide information quickly,
great care must be taken to maintain the critical and deliberate
processes of science that serve to ensure quality and accuracy”1 , and
this needs to include in particular the social sciences and humanities.
Particularly, in case of COVID-19, we want to highlight how aspects
such as (i) narratives, (ii) interests, (iii) values and (iv) interdisciplinarity
matter in this crisis and we have narrowed down five specific policy
recommendations: “(1) Create interactive spaces, (2) Promote bi-
directional science and diplomacy fluency, (3) Engage the full spectrum
of science, (4) Ensure open and interpretable science for diplomacy, and
(5) Exert bold values-based leadership. In combination, these will create
a strong foundation for addressing not only the ongoing issues in this
crisis, but also other global challenges, both known and unexpected.
One key avenue is science. As a common and apolitical language,
science brings allies and adversaries together with technology and
innovation to address cross-border challenges that exist across the
Earth—think climate, disease pandemics and international trade—which
are out of reach for a single nation to address alone.
The term “science diplomacy” is recently coined, with the first book in
this new field emerging from the 2009 Antarctic Treaty Summit. But this

12. diplomatic approach has long existed in practice. As both an academic
who studies science diplomacy and a practitioner who implements it, I
suggest that science can help bridge contemporary political differences
between the superpowers as well as other actors, promoting cooperation
and preventing conflict across the world. Science diplomacy also
supports economic prosperity, balancing environmental protection and
societal well-being through innovation. Countries are sharing and
collaborating on technologies that will help transition resource-based
economies to knowledge-based economies. This kind of cooperation
can yield poverty-alleviating solutions along with progress across a suite
of sustainable development goals. Science diplomacy is also about
contributing to informed decision-making by sharing evidence and
options, without advocacy. This kind of exchange helps ensure the
diplomatic process is objective and inclusive, relying on our leaders to
make decisions that have legacy value. Imagine if a group of diplomats
got together in a negotiating room to assess and design a response to a
pandemic without consulting and involving medical and public health
experts. It wouldn‟t make sense. The recent Iran nuclear deal, for
instance, relied on scientists‟ expertise to build common interests among
nations as the prelude for an agreement, providing an ongoing basis for
cooperation despite political variability.
Collaboration between scientists from different countries can help create
pathways for working together on controversial issues, more generally.
For example, SESAME is the Middle East‟s first major international
research center. It‟s designed to host both Israeli and Palestinian
scientists. Instead of career diplomats and statesmen focused on
pushing national agendas, researchers and practitioners with particular
scientific expertise are focusing on research to address shared
questions, divorced from politics. The CERN particle accelerators in
Europe have demonstrated the value of this kind of scientific
collaboration among nations since the 1950s.
ADVERTISEMENT
And with cooperation and trust among scientists from diverse nations,
there can be a ripple effect of goodwill between the nations involved,
including agreements that would otherwise be difficult or impossible to
negotiate at the time with any hope of continuity.
AN ARCTIC ENVIRONMENT EXAMPLE

13. My own involvement with U.S.-Russia relations started with chairing the
first formal dialogue between NATO and Russia regarding environmental
security in the Arctic Ocean. This 2010 dialogue at the University of
Cambridge was funded by NATO along with other organizations and co-
directed with the Moscow State Institute of International Relations. It
involved four Russian ministries with representative to the president of
Russia as well as experts and senior diplomats from 16 other nations.
As academics, my Russian colleagues and I were able to create an
apolitical platform for a conversation that had never taken place. Matters
related to military security had otherwise prevented open consideration
of strategies to promote cooperation and prevent conflict around the
North Pole, which remains a region of significant strategic interest with
nuclear submarines. Here, science diplomacy brought together two long-
estranged actors to productively address a security issue of common
interest to both.
Since 2009, and despite ongoing diplomatic tensions, the U.S. and
Russia have co-chaired three task forces under the auspices of the
Arctic Council, the region‟s intergovernmental forum for sustainable
development and environmental protection. And they‟ve successfully led
to three binding legal agreements among all eight Arctic states: Canada,
Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, along with Russia and
the U.S.
The most recent agreement just came into force in May 2018 to enhance
international Arctic scientific cooperation. It reflects an understanding
among these nations: International scientific collaboration is essential to
pursue sustainable solutions, transcending national interests to maintain
peace, stability and constructive cooperation in the Arctic. Science
diplomacy offers a route that works both politically and practically.
Science is a neutral platform that allows for less politically charged
dialogues, which in turn create bridges that help overall diplomatic
efforts.
Over the years, science diplomacy has helped build common ground
and peacefully manage international spaces, as well as achieve
technological breakthroughs that have global relevance, from health
care to the digital revolution. There is every reason for science to

14. continue helping to maintain important channels of communication in the
face of current tensions and all yet to come.
For today‟s globally interconnected and growing civilization, which is
confronting rapid transformation on the back of advances in science,
technology and innovation, science diplomacy offers a unique process to
build our common future. As science diplomacy becomes increasingly
popular, and traditional approaches of diplomacy use science diplomacy
in emerging ways, the question of whether the two forms of diplomacy
cope and respond in the same ways to the challenges faced by
contemporary diplomatic practice becomes prudent. In order to address
the question „How does science diplomacy cope with the challenges
facing diplomacy more broadly?‟, it is necessary to compare the context,
trends and contemporary challenges facing diplomacy more broadly at
four levels: domestic, bilateral, multilateral, and polylateral (meaning the
inclusion of civil society and other non-state actors). The polylateral level
is an important inclusion as scientists often represent research
institutions and academia independent of the state.
A critical step for science diplomacy is the framing and contextualising of
science and technology priorities within domestic foreign
policy.[6] Practises and approaches to science differ greatly between
states; domestic governments will define science objectives and its
application according to national, and sometimes „parochial‟,
interests.[7] A 2012 survey of science diplomacy across six countries by
Tim Flink and Ulrich Schreiterer revealed a skew in underlying rationale
of states to engage in science diplomacy.[8] Expansion of political
influence was a key driving factor for the United Kingdom (UK) and the
United States of America (USA). In contrast, it was shown that
Switzerland, France, Germany, and Japan primarily used science and
technology as a way to access new markets and innovative
developments in R&D, and to produce and promote their high-tech
products, in the process, emphasising higher education and research.
Despite increasing recognition of the importance of science and
technology, a disconnect exists between science advancement and
foreign policy that can be described as, at best, “fuzzy”.[9] The disparity
of political agendas and the lack of mechanisms to enable effective
dialogue between scientists and policy makers at a domestic level
impacts, and undermines, the ability of science to adequately inform
foreign policy objectives
Overall there are many factors, including policy disagreement between
parties, which can result in science diplomacy being overlooked as a

15. serious diplomatic tool. A prudent example of short-sighted political
vision and unsuccessful integration of an innovative international science
strategy into domestic foreign policy, is the two acts that were rejected
by the US Congress in 2012 which focussed on improving science
diplomacy opportunities. The „International Science and Technology
Cooperation Act of 2012‟ (H.R. 5916) and the „Global Science Program
for Security, Competitiveness, and Diplomacy Act of 2012‟ (H.R. 6303)
aimed to “increase the coordination and support for US science
diplomacy in developing countries, such as low- or lower-middle-income
countries, countries with a Muslim majority, and countries in the Middle
East and Sub-Saharan Africa”.[10] Despite the potential to increase the
number of diplomatic envoys of American researchers travelling and
partnering with scientists in these countries, the bills were never passed.
Existing political disagreement on other policy matters were cited as the
reasons that caused a „gridlock‟ in Congress and resulted in their failure
to be enacted.[11]
Image and reputation are known to be exceptionally powerful in inter-
state relations. For states with strength in the science, technology and
innovation sector this can translate into an expression of a state‟s „soft
power‟.[12] Strength in science builds soft power, which holds a unique
place in transnational interactions, due to the recognition of science as a
universal activity that can often transcend the political interests of the
state.[13] The power of reputation generated through trustworthy
science can also counter negative perceptions and can result in an
increase of political goodwill amongst adversarial nations. A survey of
Islamic countries demonstrated that while overall they held an
unfavourable view and low level of trust for the USA and its policies
overall, in contrast, these same states had a high level of respect and
admiration for American science and technology.[14]
Science diplomacy can offer a mechanism to build trust, create dialogue
and allow access between nations. Vaughan Turekian and Norman
Neureiter argue that effective science diplomacy was at its peak during
the Cold War.[19] At a time of heightened inter-state tensions, when very
few citizens of the USA were permitted to enter the Soviet Union science
provided the conduit for researchers to travel and work alongside their
Russian, relationships that were seen as central to building trust and
maintaining communication channels between the two
countries.[20] The situation in Iran and North Korea are contemporary
examples of this type of initiative. Notwithstanding, this lauded success
in science diplomacy, states are not always at ease about establishing
these forms of bilateral science connections.

16. Potential Application of Science Diplomacy
The world has changed in the decades since the end of the Cold War
and is going to change in ways we do not yet understand in the decades
to come. In our globalised world, while contemporary science diplomacy
is effective in many areas Flink and Schreiterer warn against relying on
science diplomacy as a “panacea” for all conflict resolution. However,
areas for future opportunity lie in a) the balancing of sovereign interests
in „international zones‟ and b) accelerating the advancement of
developing nations.
A globally significant use of science diplomacy at an international scale
was the resolution of territorial disputes in Antarctica, preserving it as a
place for peace and science, through the Antarctic Treaty in
1959.[60] The development of the Antarctic Treaty required international
cooperation and legal ingenuity not seen in previously during that
era.[61] The precedent of international collaboration was driven by the
protection of the conduct of science research. The Treaty an example of
high-level cooperation between states in the name of global stability and
is an enduring legacy of what can be achieved through science
diplomacy. Through this experience, states have demonstrated a
capacity to build an effective foundation of trust for future challenges in
the governance of international areas that are beyond the jurisdiction of
any one state, such as the Arctic, deep sea, outer space and the high
seas. However the success of these outcomes will be highly dependent
on the acumen of the diplomatic negotiation team, requiring both political
savvy and comprehensive appreciation and application of science
knowledge, understanding, and diplomacy.
There is also a large knowledge gap between developed and developing
nations. This creates a huge potential for science diplomacy to be the
conduit for lasting partnerships with developing states to build bridges of
trust and transfer of knowledge. Policy and practical changes can have a
much greater impact where governments apply science to aid delivery
program or infrastructure. In 2006 the US Department of State launched
a digital portal known as the Iraqi Virtual Sciences Library.[62] This
initiative connects the majority of Iraqi research institutes and
universities with full access to an extensive collection of science and
engineering journals. In combination with international research
initiatives, such as collaboration to bring low-cost infrastructure for
wireless connection two remote parts of Africa,[63] the potential to use of

17. science as a proxy for improved education and literacy is vast. Closing
the „digital divide‟ as a means to help provide the scientific currency and
practical tools to lift these states out of poverty will provide
immeasurable assistance to help such states grow their economies and
trade.[64]