How Nations Work Together on Science in a Divided World
Using knowledge to prevent crises before they start.
From climate models and AI rules to pandemics and space travel, science and world politics now influence each other in big ways.
Even when trust between nations fades, they can still work together on science. Understanding how this cooperation survives is the key to understanding global power today.
Diplomacy is no longer just for embassies. It happens in labs, computer networks, and research groups. In a world of war, sanctions, and tech competition, science and technology are used both to help nations work together and as a way to gain power.
This creates a difficult balance for science diplomacy.
On one hand, the biggest challenges of our time, like climate change, diseases, and AI, are scientific and require nations to work together. On the other hand, the world where this work must happen is divided, suspicious, and focused on security.
Science diplomacy has not gone away, but it is changing into something new.
From Idealism to Pragmatism
For the last twenty years, science diplomacy was seen in a positive way: as something neutral and naturally helpful that brought people together. That view is no longer enough.
Major organizations are changing how they look at the field. Groups like the American Association for the Advancement of Science now see it as a strategic tool — one that helps nations protect their interests, guides foreign policy, and manages global risks. Similarly, the U.K.’s Royal Society now recognizes that private companies and national security are a major part of the picture.
The European Union has also been forced to rethink its old ideas. The invasion of Ukraine made it clear: sharing scientific research cannot be separated from security, values, or power.
The result is a shift from hopeful ideals to practical reality. Science diplomacy is no longer just about building friendship. It is about managing how nations depend on each other while they are also competing for power.
A Long History of Cooperation During Rivalry
The term “science diplomacy” is new, but the practice is not.
Science cooperation has often continued even when political relations were bad. During the Cold War, scientific meetings provided a secret way for people to talk when official government communication failed. For example, the Pugwash Conferences allowed scientists from opposing sides to discuss nuclear risks and global security long before politicians reached agreements.
Created after World War II, CERN became a model for how nations can work together on a large scale. Today, it brings together 22 member nations and many partner nations, proving that shared labs and equipment can survive even when politics pull people apart.
The 1959 Antarctic Treaty is another example. It turned an entire continent into a place for science, banning military activity and pausing arguments over who owns the land so that research could be shared. Even during intense competition, science helped keep the peace in a huge physical space.
More recently, the International Space Station has shown how scientific cooperation can last in sensitive areas. Since 1998, it has kept the United States, Russia, Europe, Japan, and Canada working together even as their relationships on Earth got worse.
These examples do not mean science is above politics. Instead, they show that when nations have shared scientific interests, they can work together while still being rivals.
What is Different Now
Today, things are more complicated.
Scientific teamwork now involves national security, business competition, and control over data and equipment. We also deal with “dual-use” technologies, things like AI, biotechnology, and quantum science, that can be used for both everyday life and military power. Because of this, the old idea of being completely open with research is now being questioned.
This has led to a more forward-thinking approach. Newer groups, such as GESDA in Geneva, focus on spotting new technologies early. The goal is to understand them before they become sources of conflict or make inequality worse between nations.
At the same time, science diplomacy isn’t just happening in big capitals like Washington, London, or Brussels anymore. New hubs are appearing in nations across the Global South and even in individual cities. Science diplomacy today happens at many levels: between nations, within regions, and through global networks.
What Survives and Why
Even though the world is divided, science diplomacy continues for a few simple reasons:
Big problems need teamwork: No single nation can solve global issues on its own.
Shared tools: Scientific labs and equipment are connected across borders.
Expertise is power: Being a leader in science gives a nation influence in global talks.
A safer way to talk: It gives nations a way to interact that is less likely to lead to war or major conflict than traditional politics.
What has changed is not if nations work together, but how. Cooperation now comes with more conditions. Trust is lower, and the consequences of these decisions are much more important.
Looking Ahead
Science diplomacy has never been truly neutral. What has changed is that today, no one even expects it to be.
In a divided world, the real question isn’t whether science diplomacy will survive; it already has. The real question is what it looks like when trust is low, technology is a source of power, and working together is tied to national interests.
Understanding how this field is changing is the only way to see how the world itself is being reshaped.