Although at first glance technology and diplomacy are unrelated, Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) have revolutionized interactions between people, nations and institutions and, as their name indicates, they deeply affect the two pillars of diplomacy: information and communication. As a result, in diplomatic practice there is a constant emergence of new actors, tools and processes. Below we examine five ways diplomats incorporate technology into diplomacy or adapt diplomacy to the international environment shaped by technology.
Technology as a tool of traditional diplomacy
Diplomats are often perceived by the public as backward or even averse to technology. However, the gradual improvement of technology, from the invention of writing, to the telegraph, the telephone and the internet has accelerated diplomatic communication to the point of achieving immediacy. and all this without making the figure of the diplomat obsolete, despite prevailing concerns among officials, such as the pessimistic sentence of Lord Palmerston, Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom, “My God, this is the end of diplomacy!”, pronounced in relation to the telegraph, or the classification of the telephone as “a dangerous little instrument” by the diplomat and writer Harold Nicolson.
The International Telecommunication Union, the specialized agency of the United Nations, appropriately became the pioneer of remote diplomacy by introducing online participation in 1963. Since then, the use of the technology has spread both across which refers to its frequency, as well as its reach, for example, enabling ways of civil participation in Question and Answer sessions or dedicated platforms. However, it was not until the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic that diplomacy became completely online due to cross-border traffic restrictions and social distancing measures.
Technology is increasingly being used not only to transfer existing information, but also to generate, collect and analyze new data. The emerging concept of data diplomacy encompasses the application of big data in areas as diverse as negotiations, consular tasks, policy planning, international trade, development aid, humanitarian and emergency action. In this sense, the ability to know the public becomes especially important in the field of public diplomacy.
e-diplomacy
Among the abundance of interchangeable prefixes -cyber, digital, tech, net, e- that refer to the use of digital technologies - social networks, mobile devices, multimedia formats - for diplomatic purposes, highlights the area of public diplomacy. This constitutes more than a methodological change: it is a new facet of diplomacy, which lacks the secrecy and exclusivity of the past, extending the reach of the message communicated both in space and in time.
The preferred tool for diplomats is Twitter, which is known as twiplomacy, since it allows an exchange of opinions on current topics through the use of hashtags. Thus, 50% of the Ministries of Foreign Affairs have a Twitter profile, and 48% have a Facebook page. We must not forget the use of our own resources, such as blogs and wikis.
Taking into account the complexity of the infrastructure and the speed of change in new technologies, to move with agility in the digital environment, diplomats need five e-skills: communicate, collaborate, create, criticize and curate. The time needed to the acquisition of these skills It is estimated at: one day to learn digital tools, one month to learn to listen, and one year to become an active e-diplomat.
The key to success online is the ability to generate commitment, That is, getting the public to interact with the published content, unlike the unilateral projection of yesteryear. However, analysts conclude that states continue to use social networks to disseminate information and promote a positive image. The evaluation for the consequent improvement of the digital strategy requires examining the type of information provided, its scope, and the feedback mechanism.
The potential of social networks only caught the attention of the academic world with the emergence of the Arab Spring in 2011. In this sense, e-diplomacy is not limited to reducing the costs of public diplomacy, but offers a new way of manage the change at an international level - the essence of diplomacy - in a collaborative and interconnected way - since the decentralization of the network involves the redistribution of power from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to embassies and even to non-governmental actors.
Therefore, the crisis communication stands out as one of the main tasks of digital diplomacy. Similarly, it is essential to confront attempts to disinformation -commonly known as fake news-, whether by state actors or not. These have experienced a marked increase during the COVID-19 pandemic, accompanied by official statements that border on propaganda. A clear example of the war of words is the controversy surrounding the theory of the leak of the virus from the Wuhan laboratory, launched by Donald Trump on Twitter.
However, e-diplomacy It is not limited to the use of social networks and is closely related to terms such as e-participation and e-governance. Furthermore, despite accelerated digitalization, online media do not replace offline, but there is observed a hybridization, which translates into the need for holistic strategies that combine traditional communication with new media. In short, online presence is not enough but it is a mandatory part of active diplomacy.
Scientific and technological diplomacy
In addition to being a means, technology can also be the object of a state's external action. The scientific and technological diplomacy encompasses, on the one hand, “science for diplomacy”, That is, it is used as a tool at the service of diplomacy and serves as a meeting space -especially when formal relations are stagnant-, and, on the other hand, “diplomacy for science” or, in other words, competitiveness and the attraction of talent and international investment are promoted. Consequently, it is an example of the adjectival diplomacies of the 21st century, such as environmental diplomacy, cultural diplomacy, or vaccine diplomacy.
In the pioneering report of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, published in 2016 under the title “Scientific, Technological and Innovation Diplomacy”, this is defined as “the set of initiatives carried out to promote research and innovative collaboration, in the field bilateral and multilateral, to search for solutions to problems of common interest, to promote the mobility of researchers and scientific, technological and industrial capabilities.” Its benefits include solving global challenges -such as climate change and pandemics (the report anticipating the global COVID-19 crisis)-, achieving sustainable development in accordance with the SDGs, as well as the increase in soft power the country.
As the leader in R&D&I investment, the United States also leads scientific and technological diplomacy, largely thanks to the Scientific Advisor to the Secretary of State, the equivalent of the Minister of Foreign Affairs. The Department of State collaborates with the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) to offer training and exchange opportunities. Similarly, the United Kingdom has the Science and Innovation Network in 28 countries, as well as the Newton and Global Challenges Research funds, closely linked to development cooperation.
At the European level, the German Agency for Academic Exchange (DAAD) stands out, subsidizing more than 100.000 researchers every year. It is also worth mentioning Denmark as the promoter of the figure of the technological ambassador: launched in 2017, now the offices in Beijing, Copenhagen and Silicon Valley strive to increase the country's influence on issues of Artificial Intelligence, social networks, data privacy. personal data, etc. In Spain, the technological component is under the Directorate of Cultural and Scientific Relations of the AECID, but the report mentioned above concludes that it must be given greater priority. In regards to the European Union As a whole, it is still in the process of establishing its technological diplomacy strategy, through its regulatory power and initiatives such as Digital4Development (D4d).
Digital cooperation and international technological law
Taking a step beyond the unilateral action of advanced states, technology has come to be positioned at the top of the multilateral agenda. In 2018, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, convened the High Level Panel for Digital Cooperation with the aim of moving towards an inclusive and human digital future. The way to achieve this goal is through the exchange of opinions between stakeholdersof the digital sphere: from governments, through the private sector and the technological community, to academics and civil society.
In 2019 the Panel published the report "The age of digital interdependence" which recommended developing human and institutional capacities, protecting Human Rights, and promoting global cooperation in digital matters, among others. Regarding the last point, the Group proposes three alternatives of global architecture. It is worth mentioning that, although technology is described as key to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals - although no SDG is dedicated to science and technology - digital benefits coexist with the digital divide since half of the global population It does not have an internet connection.
Based on this report, in June 2020 - in a virtual event - the Secretary-General presented "Roadmap for Digital Cooperation", that identifies eight priority areas: connectivity, digital public goods, digital inclusion, digital training, digital Human Rights, Artificial Intelligence, digital trust and security, and global digital cooperation. Guterres advocates the creation of a high-level, strategic and empowered body, capable of addressing urgent issues and coordinating the actions of the various stakeholders involved.
If the proposal materializes, the digital areas that this body would have to face are as diverse as: infrastructure, cybersecurity, Human Rights, legal and regulatory issues, economic issues, development, and sociocultural issues. These are already present on the international agenda, although the focus varies depending on the actor: while lawyers focus on jurisdiction and dispute resolution, politicians seek to resonate with voters - such as techno-optimism or digital threats. .
The truth is that there are already mechanisms for digital cooperation and regulation - such as Internet GovernanceForum, WSIS+10 Process or Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence (GPAI)-, but these usually produce non-binding statements or recommendations. For its part, UNESCO is contributing through the Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence and the Guidance on the Digital Environment. Similarly, the World Intellectual Property Organization conducts a dialogue on cutting-edge technologies.
Beyond the United Nations system, 130 countries have joined the unified tax on the digital giants of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development - known as the “Google tax” - and negotiations on e-commerce are underway within the World Trade Organization. The bottom line is that COVID-19 has provided an impetus for technology regulation, and one issue that is starting to gain importance is green technology.
As mentioned above, The European Union has consolidated itself as a regulatory power in the technological field with pioneering initiatives, later copied by other countries, such as the Digital Services Law, the Digital Markets Law, the Package of measures on digital finance, the Regulation relating to cryptoasset markets, the General Regulation of data protection, the Regulation on privacy and electronic communications, or the proposed Artificial Intelligence Law.
The digital war
When diplomacy is unable to promote cooperation in technology, it gives way to digital war, its lightest manifestation being the competition for industry leadership. This is precisely the geopolitical reality since the trade war between United States and China went from Donald Trump's initial economic approach to technological career. The situation can be considered the arrest of Meng Wanzhou, the financial director of Huawei, in Canada on December 1, 2018, who is still awaiting the extradition decision to the USA. What is at stake is the global economy: it is estimated that 5G technology and Artificial Intelligence will generate about 30 trillion dollars until 2035.
On the one hand, the United States is fighting to retain its position as a role model, driven by Silicon Valley and companies that are no longer multinational but global - known as GAFAM (Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft) -. Hence, Joe Biden allocates some $550.000 billion to the already aging infrastructure. On the other hand, there is Xi Jinping's assertive China, with its equivalent BATX (Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent, Xiaomi), the more than 17.000 billion invested in the Digital Silk Road, and the goal of becoming the leader in Intelligence. Artificial before 2030.
In between is the European Union, which advocates the humanistic approach but It lacks its own way - like the “Sinatra Doctrine” -. While the EU claims its digital sovereignty - a masked criticism of American dominance - this competence is distributed among several Commissioners and the European External Action Service does not have a position specialized in digital affairs. To overcome the balkanization of technology, the EU needs a Cyber Diplomacy Toolbox more ambitious, gaining the support of other countries, directing diplomatic efforts not only towards like-minded countries but also towards China itself, thus avoiding the erosion of interconnectivity, a cornerstone of globalization.
In its broadest meaning, the technological war It refers to the transformation that the media and digital technologies produce in the way we fight, experience, live, represent, conceptualize, remember and forget wars. Therefore, hacking, cyberattacks, digital civil wars, or surveillance by the state or private companies - known as surveillance capitalism - are included under this umbrella. But we also find lethal autonomous weapons, the subject of dystopian representations in numerous films. And that is why the biggest challenge It comes from the way technology is nationalized and weaponized.
Conclusion
No technology is bad or good per se, but depends on the use that human agents give it. Similarly, geopolitical competition in technology is not inevitable. To take advantage of the opportunities that this offers to face common challenges and even rebuild relations between states, it is appropriate to influence their responsible, inclusive and collaborative use, from the personal level to the state level. The fact that technology policy blurs the traditional dichotomy between geopolitics and domestic politics justifies the involvement of new actors - from private companies and digital experts to civil society - in diplomatic affairs. This is of special importance in this decade since digital diplomacy is in the process of defining and expanding - as the Ministries of Foreign Affairs digitalize more areas of action - before reaching the stage of maturity. This broad alliance of diverse stakeholders It will prevent their individual biases or disadvantages, such as decentralization, deregulation or technological determinism.
Graduated in International Relations and Protocol, Event Management and Corporate Communication. I am passionate about technology and cultures, which is why I did my final degree research on the cultural diplomacy of the European Union and China. I identify myself as a citizen of the world, but also a convinced Europeanist.
