Science and Diplomacy

Geneva, 19 November 1985. Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan met for the first time. During this summit mainly devoted to disarmament, the Soviet leader proposed to his American counterpart an ambitious program of research and experimentation on a subject on which scientists of his country had been devoting much attention for years: verifying the scientific and technological feasibility of nuclear fusion as a new source of energy. Very consistent with the detente and cooling of tensions in the post-Cold War world, this proposal for a peaceful use of nuclear energy had considerable symbolic meaning. More importantly, it had huge prospects for controlling the process of nuclear fusion in order to produce clean and virtually limitless energy from abundant elements in nature, provided a long-term scientific investment was made. The following year, the United States, the European Union and Japan agreed to join the Soviet Union and conduct this program, whose economic reach, if successful, would be considerable: the ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) was born. Later, China, India and South Korea joined the adventure. On 17 November 2010, the foundation stone of the experimental reactor was laid in France on the Cadarache site.

When we speak of science diplomacy, we use a vocabulary that did not exist prior to the present millennium. We also deal with an issue which has tended to be of recent interest these days, so we will try to specify the meaning being given to this concept. But behind the new vocabulary, science diplomacy appears to be rooted in the distant past: history gives evidence of ancient ties between science and foreign policy. This chapter, both conceptual and historical, is guided by this question: what is science diplomacy?

In all its forms of expression, diplomacy is based on the sovereignty of states. This framework is the starting point of our analysis: science diplomacy is a national issue. We examine its mechanisms here. But in order to understand the relationships between the world of scholars and the world of diplomats, it is first necessary to observe the characteristics specific to each of them.

How is science diplomacy taken into consideration and implemented in diplomatic apparatus? To answer these questions, we turn to an examination of science diplomacy of five major European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, United Kingdom), three developed countries outside Europe (Canada, Japan, United States), two emerging countries (China, India) and Russia.

When political relations between two countries are fraught, or even non-existent, could science be in the vanguard of diplomacy? What this chapter endeavors to show is that particular situations exist in which this question is answered to the affirmative—exchanges between researchers can represent a special relation and, sometimes, even the only form of dialogue between countries sharing awkward relations, or not officially communicating any longer. Scientific relations will therefore be a substitute to usual diplomacy. However, in the very different context of spaces that escape national sovereignties (such as Antarctica) or that are in the process of supranational integration (the European Union), science also provides evidence of its capacity to open up the way to diplomacy. It is to this “science for diplomacy” that this fourth chapter is devoted.

Multilateral issues did a lot for revealing science diplomacy. The negotiation of international agreements and the often difficult search for consensus between countries on key global issues are among the main tasks of multilateral diplomacy. Scientists take their part in it. They contribute to the definition of the international agenda and they help in finding solutions, thereby supplying the “science in diplomacy” section in the three reference points for interactions among science and diplomacy. This final chapter describes the system of international scientific relations in which global issues arise. It focuses on one of the key issues, that of climate change, in order to examine how science nourishes and supports diplomacy.