The Mark
Through the successful practice of science diplomacy, Canada could make a real difference in the world – but significant reform is needed first.
daryl.copeland
Role of the FCO in UK Government
Written Submission to UK Parliamentary Inquiry
A Role for Science Diplomacy? Soft Power and Global Challenges – Part III
Parts I and II of this series have examined the role and place – or lack thereof – of science and technology in diplomacy and international policy. How do those observations play out in reference to Canada, and, by extension, for members of the international community more generally?
The Canadian case brings many of these issues, and in particular the aspect of unfulfilled possibilities, into stark relief. Notwithstanding its humiliating electoral defeat at the UN, Canada retains a significant comparative advantage vis-a-vis the global competition in terms of soft power. A large part of this advantage may be attributed to default, that is, to the things which this country doesn’t have or do, such as carry colonial baggage or harbor aggressive global ambitions. And however undeserved, Canada still enjoys a very positive international image and reputation. It’s brand was recently ranked the world’s best.
Unthreatening and nice.
Cosmopolitan and approachable.
Open and welcoming.
The globalization nation.
Canada, moreover, has the capacity – educational, scientific and representational – necessary to make a substantial contribution to science diplomacy. Before that potential can be realized, however, significant reform will be required.
Wikileaks: What you need to know
Toronto Star
Science, Technology and Global Change
The Mark
Science and technology should be central to international diplomacy, but most foreign ministries and multilateral organizations are short on scientific expertise and technical savvy.
WikiLeaks Revelations: The Implications for Diplomacy
e-International Relations
Wikileaks is releasing hundreds of thousands of classified diplomatic communications. But when the dust settles and the sensational tid-bits are forgotten, some of the longer-term impacts on diplomacy may in fact be positive.
WikiLeaks Revelations: The Implications for Diplomacy
N.B.: The post below was prepared as a guest editorial for e-International Relations. Some of the front end argumentation may be familiar to regular GD readers, but the topic is of sufficient currency that I have presented the piece in its entirety.
In my book Guerrilla Diplomacy, I argue that if development is the new security in the age of globalization, then diplomacy must displace defence at the centre of international policy.
More recently, in a short article on science diplomacy, I observe that when it comes to assessing the role of science and technology (S&T) in international relations, one is confronted by a significant paradox.
Unlike religious extremism or political violence, most of the threats and challenges which imperil life on the planet – climate change, resource scarcity, public health – are rooted in science and driven by technology. While S&T can provide the remedies which contribute materially to the achievement of security and development, for instance through remote sensing, agronomy, or the introduction of game changing information and communication technologies, it can also give rise to the opposite – insecurity and underdevelopment. Here I refer to the scourge of weapons of mass destruction, the mismanagement of toxic wastes, the repression of human rights and civil liberties, and so forth.
In other words, in addition to its key function as a driver of globalization, when it comes to understanding the dynamics of contemporary international relations, S&T plays the part of a powerful, two-edged sword. It can provide solutions to some of the world’s most vexing problems, even as it creates new ones.
Nowhere has this observation been brought into sharper relief than in the case of the most recent, and on this occasion phased release by WikiLeaks of what will amount eventually to hundreds of thousands of classified diplomatic reports. The very technologies which facilitate modern diplomatic communications have also made possible their unauthorized reproduction and mass dissemination.
A Role for Science Diplomacy? Soft Power and Global Challenges – Part II
Part I of this series examined the relationships – or lack thereof – between diplomacy, science and international policy, and noted the serious image problems which plague all three enterprises. These difficulties have hobbled the practice of science diplomacy, and are compounded by a host of substantial issues, which will be addressed presently. First, however, it may be useful to unpack the key terms.
Not unlike “intelligence” or “policy”, “science” and “technology” are words frequently invoked in both conversation and writing. More often than not, however, the users have little more than an intuitive sense of what these terms actually mean.
A Place for Science Diplomacy?
The Mark
In the age of globalization, public diplomacy – not defence – should be front and centre in international relations, and science diplomacy is a critical component.
A Role for Science Diplomacy? Soft Power and Global Challenges – Part I
Readers of Guerrilla Diplomacy will know that in that volume I argue that if development is the new security in the age of globalization, then diplomacy must displace defence at the centre of international policy.
Were policy-makers to accept this formulation, then diplomacy, and in particular public diplomacy (PD), would be placed front and centre in international relations. Science diplomacy (SD), a term which encompasses both the use of international scientific cooperation to advance foreign policy objectives and the use of diplomacy to achieve scientific ends, represents a critical component within the broader public diplomacy ambit. Science diplomacy is an expression of soft power. It is perhaps best understood as a way to liberate scientific and technological (S&T) knowledge from its rigid national and institutional enclosures and to unleash its progressive potential through collaboration and sharing with interested partners world-wide.
Diplomacy and War – Then and Now
The Mark
The history of war is that of failed diplomacy. By reflecting on past conflicts, we might begin to see how to avoid future ones.
War and Diplomacy – Part IV
Two weeks after the shock of Canada’s UNSC debacle, discussions concerning the larger implications of that disaster continue. And so they should. Among the many possible messages, it is clearly time to turn the page on Pearsonian Internationalism and to get on with the job of rebranding this country as the globalization nation.
Where else but in Canada could a professor named Naheed Nenshi get elected as mayor in a place like Calgary? That happened only days after the electoral meltdown in the General Assembly, and the two events taken together represent a powerful symbolic combination – an epochal coda, and quite possibly a new beginning in the history in our national life.
So… Out with the old, in with the new.
But, in the meantime, back to some final thoughts on diplomacy and war.
Guerrilla Diplomacy in D.C.
Washington Forum Network (PBS-NPR)
Can international relations be managed non-violently?
How the World Sees Canada
The Mark Radio
In light of Canada’s failed bid for the UN Security Council, is it time to rethink our foreign policy strategy?