36 MAY-JUNE 2026 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL 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 If we do not offer our own tech solutions—or if we are offering outdated, one-size-fits-all platforms—we lose strategic ground.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. n
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODIyMDU=