Can Science and Diplomacy Have Mutual Impact in the Trump & Musk Era?

President Trump sees himself as a dealmaker and Elon Musk sees himself as a science-based innovator. Might this fabled partnership lead to a confluence towards what is termed “science diplomacy?” Musk and Trump’s mutual desire for us to be an extra-planetary species, with the potential colonization of Mars, would likely require some form of international scientific cooperation. For example, Space-X announced a $1.4 billion investment in building research and manufacturing capacity in Vietnam. Musk has noted, quite vehemently, his desire to support international talent in science through his support of the H1B visa program. He is a member of the U.S. National Academy of Engineering and also a Fellow of the Royal Society, though there have been calls for his fellowship to be revoked. Such protests from scientists are due to pronouncements from Musk on reduced funding for research as well as perceived misinformation that is being spread through his social media empire. However, some commentators have also argued convincingly that Musk should not be alienated at this critical moment when his voice as a champion of science could be most influential with the Trump administration.

In this midst, the American Association of the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and the Royal Society in the United Kingdom have launched a new framework and report on “Science Diplomacy in an Era of Disruption,” at a major conference in Boston today. Their approach to linking science and diplomacy has changed since they first approached the topic fifteen years ago with a report that considered a three-way categorization: i) science in diplomacy; ii) diplomacy for science; and iii) science for diplomacy. This categorization has led to a vast literature and AAAS has also hosted a center and a journal on science diplomacy. The new approach is simpler and aimed to align with contemporary realities of a less multilateral world order. Their new framework is simply categorized in terms of i) science impacting diplomacy and ii) diplomacy impacting science. In this report they have particularly focused on the Arctic and on the role of the private sector as case studies that exemplify “disruption.”

Considering, the Arctic, environmental organizations could use this report to amplify the importance of continued cooperation on science in some of the more intractable areas of geopolitics. For example, the United States and Russia used to have a longstanding scientific cooperation program in the Bering Sea, which has largely been in abeyance due to the conflict in Ukraine. AAAS has a distinguished history of using science to build epistemic bridges between adversarial regimes. They have been leading the way for scientific collaborations between the United States and Cuba. When Nobel laureate Peter Agre was the President of AAAS, I remember attending a meeting in 2010 that he convened with the North Korean ambassador to the United Nations. Agre has now established the science diplomacy hub at Johns Hopkins University along with chemistry doctoral student Ona Ambrozaite.

The Director of International Affairs at AAAS, Dr. Kim Montgomery also spent three years at one of the great hallmark institutions of science diplomacy – the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA). IIASA was established at the height of the cold war to ensure there was good systems-level data on global environmental change concerns. The first director of the organization of was American mathematician and systems scientist Howard Raiffa whose famous book the Art and Science of Negotiation remains a fundamental text on the anatomy of conflict resolution. IIASA is also in the process of honoring his legacy with the establishment of a center on science diplomacy named after him. Resonating with this momentum towards harnessing the power of science diplomacy a group of Swiss philanthropists have launched the Geneva Science Diplomacy Anticipatory" (GESDA) which aims to train the next generation of science diplomats.

With the publication of this new report from AAAS and the Royal Society, alongside the aforementioned initiatives on science and international relations, we may be well-positioned to provide some new “deal strategies” for the Trump administration. What may seem like a dark year for science, could potentially see a glimmer of hope if we can be strategic in linking science to disruptive opportunities for building trust between erstwhile adversaries. The Artificial Intelligence Summit convened by President Macron of France and Prime Minister Modi of India earlier this week exemplified how science and diplomacy are intersecting. As the new report argues, we must strive to simultaneously advocate for the salience of science for national security while also highlighting the inherent need for scientific collaboration at a planetary level. Both national and global scales are intrinsically linked, and science is the conduit through which nation states and communities in general can find a sustainable path forward for our civilization.

Follow me on Twitter or LinkedIn. Check out some of my other work here.