THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 2025 41 But diplomats can’t afford to improvise on S&T. They need clear structures to bring expertise into strategy development, not just crisis response. As a trained systems engineer who has worked across State, USAID, Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), and the UN, I’ve seen this from both the field and headquarters. The good news? We don’t need more bureaucratic layers. We just need smarter scaffolding. The path to more science-informed diplomacy doesn’t require reinventing the department; it requires rethinking how insight flows. Across embassies, bureaus, and leadership, the fixes are less about expansion and more about intentional design: roles with a mandate, tools with a purpose, and structures that anticipate rather than react. The Diagnosis S&T are no longer fringe issues in foreign policy, they’re central. Artificial intelligence (AI) governance, digital surveillance, antimicrobial resistance, food security, climate adaptation—these are now staples of diplomatic portfolios. Yet while the issues have evolved, the State Department’s internal systems for engaging S&T expertise have not. In most cases, it’s not that expertise is unavailable. Rather, it’s uncoordinated, underutilized, or arrives too late to shape the conversation. S&T insight still depends too heavily on personal networks, informal taskers, or a scramble for outside help once a crisis is underway. In some bureaus, technical engagement is strong; in others, it’s patchwork or peripheral. Field posts may have environment, science, technology, and health (ESTH) officers, but these roles are unevenly distributed, underresourced, and rarely backed by dedicated support structures. We’ve seen moments of progress: the launch of the Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy in 2022; the 2021 establishment and 2023 expansion of the regional technology officer program; and the elevation of S&T issues in high-level strategy like the U.S.-EU Trade and Technology Council; the AUKUS tech agreements between the U.S., the U.K., and Australia; and the U.S.-India initiative on Critical and Emerging Technology (iCET). But without institutional scaffolding—dedicated roles, clear coordination channels, and agile tools—those gains remain vulnerable to staff turnover and shifting leadership priorities. If we want science-informed diplomacy to be the norm, not the exception, we need to move beyond ad hoc fixes. What we need now is a system: lean, intentional, and built for complexity. Rewiring the Front Lines If you want to understand how science meets diplomacy, don’t start at headquarters, start at the front lines. Overseas posts are where global health threats emerge, environmental trends are first noticed, and regulatory shifts take shape. Yet, as my colleagues and I at the State Department’s Office of the Science and Technology Adviser to the Secretary (STAS) found, most embassies lack the consistent tools, training, or personnel to engage meaningfully with S&T. Through my work with STAS, I helped pilot a tool designed to address this gap: a rapid-response “Ask-a-Scientist” platform for diplomats in the field. When embassy staff had questions on topics like semiconductors, green hydrogen, or sustainable fishing, we matched them with vetted experts who could respond within days. The demand was there, and so was the relief. In complex environments, even a small injection of tailored insight can shift how diplomats prepare, negotiate, or respond. But a tool is only as effective as the people empowered to use it. That’s why we also need to strengthen the personnel side: better training for officers assigned to ESTH portfolios and a more deliberate approach to placing S&T-literate staff in strategic posts. A formal focal point model—where officers are designated, trained, and supported—could go a long way. Diplomacy increasingly depends on technical fluency. We don’t need every post to have a lab coat on staff. But we do need to give embassies the tools and confidence to quickly spot, elevate, and act on science-relevant developments. Breaking the Silos to Empower Bureaus Inside the State Department’s domestic bureaus, technical talent isn’t absent; it’s often just isolated. Expertise tends to The path to more scienceinformed diplomacy doesn’t require reinventing the department; it requires rethinking how insight flows.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODIyMDU=