If we are serious about AI-powered diplomacy, we need to look beyond our borders and learn from our strategic partners and competitors.

BY VIRGINIA BLASER

While many in Washington, D.C., still debate whether artificial intelligence belongs in diplomacy, other countries are already putting it to work. We are seeing AI developed for use in diplomatic operations worldwide—from chatbots assisting overseas citizens with emergency support to AI-driven policy planning tools, to massive cross-national data platforms modeling bilateral relationships.

Here’s the catch: Much of this innovation happens outside the United States.

If we are serious about AI-powered diplomacy, whether for national competitiveness, operational resilience, or global development leadership, we need to look beyond our borders—to not only assess risk or benchmark ourselves but also learn how our strategic partners and competitors are managing the technology.

The Global Field Lab

Diplomacy remains a profession shaped by precedent. We read cables from prior posts, study past communiqués, and interpret protocol through the lens of tradition. But AI shifts the ground beneath that entire model. When data moves faster than deliberation, and the tools that sort, translate, and predict are built with black-box algorithms, relying solely on precedent will no longer suffice.

Fortunately, there is a field lab already running—with other governments doing smart, sometimes bold, often replicable, work. Here are just a few examples that deserve attention.

In Estonia’s “KrattAI” initiative, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs pairs its digital infrastructure with AI tools for everything from real-time translation to document authentication. A national framework for interoperable AI assistants, the initiative is a model for how ministries can adopt shared bots for tasks like consular Q&A, identity verification, and cross-agency document workflows.

Similarly, India’s “MADAD Portal” (MEA in Aid of Diaspora in Distress), run by the Ministry of External Affairs, digitized and automated the global management of consular grievances, allowing citizens abroad to file, track, and escalate cases through a centralized platform used by Indian missions worldwide. Internal reporting credits the system with improving response times by more than 25 percent. Across government, India has also begun incorporating AI-driven analytics into public grievance platforms such as the national Centralized Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS) system to improve case routing and resolution.

In North America, Canada’s Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) department similarly leverages machine learning algorithms to sort visa applications, helping officers prioritize cases and detect fraudulent submissions. This allows for faster processing of straightforward applications, freeing up officers to focus on complex or sensitive files.

Several nations deploy AI for strategic analysis. For instance, Australia’s “SmartGates” uses AI-powered facial recognition and biometric data for automated border control, reducing wait times and enhancing security at airports. Across the region, Singapore has integrated biometrics, automation, and AI-enabled systems into immigration and border processing, including passport-free clearance using facial and iris recognition and large-scale automated screening designed to streamline traveler processing and enhance security.

Croatia’s “Bilateral Navigator,” profiled in Sinisa Grgic’s AI Diplomacy: Insights and Innovations from the Bilateral Navigator (2024), has been developed using dozens of datasets to map bilateral ties between 193 countries. This AI-powered platform combines economic, cultural, social, defense, and demographic indicators to generate real-time profiles of how two countries relate. With more than 18,500 pairings tracked, this tool gives even small foreign ministries strategic insight usually reserved for major powers.

Looking at international collaboration and humanitarian efforts, the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) launched “La Chama,” an AI-driven chatbot that is accessible via WhatsApp in Brazil, in 2021. A Venezuelan term meaning “young woman,” La Chama provides Venezuelan refugees and migrants in Brazil, with reliable information on documentation, health services, and employment, demonstrating how AI can extend critical support in crisis regions.

Similarly, using a supply chain planning tool developed by researchers at ETH Zurich, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) optimizes the delivery of critical medical supplies in war zones, showcasing AI’s potential to improve logistical efficiency in humanitarian diplomacy. The World Bank’s Famine Action Mechanism similarly leverages an AI algorithm to spot areas at risk of food shortages and famine, enabling anticipatory action, further demonstrating AI’s humanitarian potential.

China, meanwhile, takes a broader strategic approach. Through AI-enabled language translation tools and open-source platforms deployed in the Global South, China positions itself not just as a technological power, but as the partner of choice for countries looking to digitize their own governance. AI is embedded into China’s public diplomacy strategy, development partnerships, and education platforms. This tech diplomacy now accompanies Beijing’s physical infrastructure diplomacy, forming a combined soft power offensive.

These are not future promises—they are already deployed. Running and tested, not in Washington, D.C., labs, but in foreign ministries, at border checkpoints, and in refugee camps.

Should We Worry?

Some will argue the United States already possesses worldclass technology, and that is true. But AI innovation inside the U.S. government is often fragmented, cautious, and heavily siloed. Meanwhile, other countries move quickly and collectively, often out of necessity.

What they build challenges the notion that only the biggest players can lead in diplomatic tech. It also raises uncomfortable questions.

• If smaller foreign ministries can adopt interoperable AI chatbots across multiple missions, why can’t we?
• If AI helps triage and resolve consular emergencies in India and Canada, why do many U.S. embassies still manage cases by Excel spreadsheet?
• With AI-powered policy modeling used from Tallinn to Zagreb, why are we reinventing tools deployed by others?
• If AI can streamline critical humanitarian logistics for the ICRC or provide vital information to refugees via WhatsApp, what prevents us from adopting similar augmentations to our own extensive development and consular networks?

This moment matters for several reasons.

Operational pressure is real. As staffing levels stagnate and demand for services grows, U.S. diplomatic posts need technology that augments, rather than replaces, human capacity. AI can help automate repetitive tasks, surface trends across huge datasets, and reduce the time it takes to respond to crises. If peer ministries use it now, we should too.

Geopolitical influence shifts. Many countries accepting AI tools from China, India, or Estonia are also U.S. diplomatic partners. If we do not offer our own tech solutions—or if we are offering outdated, one-size-fits-all platforms—we lose strategic ground. In some cases, we may unintentionally cede narrative power to rivals by failing to show up at all.

Learning beats duplication. Governments worldwide pilot consular AI, multilingual bots, procurement triage systems, and natural language processing media trackers. Replicating that work from scratch is inefficient and wasteful. Smart nations adapt proven models rather than rebuilding them.

AI norms and values are being set now. If the United States wants to help shape the ethical use of AI globally—especially in diplomacy, migration, and governance—it must first understand how others are already deploying these tools.

What’s Blocking Us?

The U.S. is not asleep at the wheel. Dozens of excellent AI pilots are in development across the State Department and other federal agencies. But despite these efforts, three structural issues slow our progress.

Fragmentation. Tools built by one agency or mission often are not shared or accessible across the system. That lack of interoperability, due to policy, security, or bureaucratic caution, means even successful pilots struggle to scale. Federal AI initiatives frequently encounter significant hurdles due to a fragmented data infrastructure, where information remains locked in silos across systems and departments.

Mindset. Too often, there is a belief that innovation must come from Washington or from the U.S. private sector. However, the best ideas might originate from a field post in Nairobi or from a health ministry in Estonia. We need a mindset that rewards scanning outward, not just upward. Bureaucratic inertia and an administrative mindset often limit innovation to slow, incremental improvements, rather than embracing transformative potential.

Security overuse. While cybersecurity is nonnegotiable, too often it is used as a blanket excuse to avoid engagement with open-source tools or foreign-developed platforms. The irony is that other governments already embed these tools successfully, often with better vetting processes than we use internally. An overly cautious approach to cybersecurity and compliance can create significant friction for AI adoption, particularly in managing complex systems and the need for more flexible “allow by default” controls.

What Can Be Done—Now

This is not a call for massive investment or a moonshot initiative. It is a call for practical, near-term action. Here is what we can do today.

Map the landscape. Task an interagency team (with support from trusted outside partners) to track AI deployments across peer diplomatic services and relevant international organizations. The goal is to create a comprehensive dashboard of global best practices in consular tech, diplomatic modeling, multilingual support, and crisis triage, updated quarterly.

Reward adaptation, not just invention. Create a fast-track system for U.S. missions to test or adapt vetted foreign government tools for local use. This could include Estonia’s chatbot templates, India’s case triage design, or even Croatia’s data mapping frameworks. We should specifically consider tools such as visa processing analytics used by partners like Canada; the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office’s consular inquiry triage; or AI-supported logistical planning used by organizations like the ICRC.

Fund a peer exchange fellowship. Piloting a six-month AI diplomacy fellowship that embeds U.S. officers into foreign ministries or multilateral bodies doing cutting-edge work would allow them to bring those lessons back and implement them directly.

Open up sharing inside the U.S. government. Many existing AI tools remain siloed or difficult to access across the system. We should inventory what already exists, assess where tools can be shared, and create protocols for internal distribution. This is about ensuring not only efficiency but also equity of access across missions.

Learning as Diplomacy

The global AI conversation is not just about technology. It is about values, norms, and leadership. If the U.S. wants to lead on responsible AI in diplomacy, it needs to show that it can learn as well as lead. This exchange must be reciprocal: If we expect to learn from the innovations of partner governments, we should also be willing to share our own tools, experiences, and lessons in return. We must be willing to listen to partners, to adopt good ideas—wherever they originate—and to scale them with integrity.

Some of the best diplomatic innovation today comes from unlikely places. From tiny ministries. From startup governments. From diplomats who see a gap and fill it—not with a grant but with a chatbot or AI agent.

We must learn from them. Because smart diplomacy does not always start in Washington.

Virginia Blaser retired after 34 years in the U.S. Foreign Service, where she served four tours as a deputy chief of mission and principal officer, including five years as chargé d’affaires. She is the author of The Manager’s Workbook: Six Worksheets for the Evaluation Cycle, available for free on Amazon, and the co-author (with retired FSO Don Kilburg) of AI Use Cases for Consular Affairs: Smarter Passports, Visas, and Border Security, forthcoming from Routledge. She now works on leadership development and the practical use of emerging technology in government and international organizations.

Editor’s Note: This article was originally submitted in 2025. Since then, AI adoption across governments has continued to accelerate. The examples above are intended as illustrative of broader global trends in the use of AI across diplomatic, consular, and humanitarian operations, rather than as news of the latest developments.

Read More...

• “Digital Diplomacy: Will State Ever Take the Plunge?” by Amelia Shaw, The Foreign Service Journal, May 2017
• “Lessons from Silicon Valley: Practical Suggestions for a Modern Workplace” by Andrew R. Moore, The Foreign Service Journal, June 2020
• “A Practitioner’s Framework: Science & Technology Integration at State” by Lee E. Voth-Gaeddert, The Foreign Service Journal, September-October 2025