The term ‘dual-use technology’ is used to denote technologies that may have both civil and military applications. Such is the case with Global Positioning Systems or GPS which are used to help track and identify targets for missile attacks and are also used to help drivers navigate in cars. Another example is drones which may be used by news channels to cover a protest, by individuals to record family events and by armies to attack various types of targets including infantry units, tanks and infrastructure.
Increasingly, the term ‘digital diplomacy’ can be classified as a sort of ‘dual-use terminology’. On the one hand digital diplomacy refers to the impact that digital technologies have on the norms, values and working routines of diplomats and diplomatic institutions. When used in this way, digital diplomacy refers to a host of diplomatic activities that are now conducted using digital technologies. This can include Ambassadors’ use of WhatsApp to coordinate votes at the UN or draft joint resolution; multilateral summits that are held virtually using Zoom; the growing use of smartphone applications to conduct diaspora diplomacy; Embassies use of social media to narrate state policies and diplomats’ use of visuals and memes to contextualize global affairs.
On the other hand, the term ‘digital diplomacy’ also refers to the diplomatic management of technology-related issues. This may include international accords used to regulate the development of various technologies; technology-based collaborations between states as was the case during the race for the Covid19 vaccine; using multilateral institutions to create norms and standards that impact the development of innovative technologies and using diplomatic settings to address issues raised by new technologies. For example, WIPO is increasingly called upon to help define intellectual property rights in the age of generative AI. A necessity given that AI tools such as ChatGPT rely on the works of others to provide answers to prompts. Another example is a UNESCO roadmap for the ethical development of AI.
In other words, digital diplomacy means two different things. It can either mean conducting diplomacy through digital technologies or the diplomatic management of technology-related issues. For many years, the former use was more dominant. When people used the term ‘digital diplomacy’, they were referring to diplomats’ use of social media or MFAs’ use of big data analysis to track and disable fake social media accounts. Later the term included other elements such as using digital platforms to debunk disinformation campaigns. Yet the War in Ukraine, and growing tensions in various parts of the world, have led to a shift in terminology and increasingly when people talk about ‘digital diplomacy’, they are referring to digital policy making.
One notable example is the concept of ‘digital sovereignty’ in which states seek to ensure the safety of national data or to prevent manipulation of data generated by the state or by its citizens. Digital sovereignty also refers to a state’s right to manage its digital ecosystem and the recognition that just as states have physical borders so they may have digital borders within which citizens’ data must be protected. Of course, as is the case with physical sovereignty, digital sovereignty can only exist if states recognize one another’s digital borders. This is akin to diplomatic recognition between states and is an example of how traditional concepts in diplomacy are being reshaped by digital technologies. Offline tensions between states can lead to disputes or even violations of digital sovereignty as is the case with cyber attacks that have taken place at an increasing rate since the start of the Ukraine War.
Another example of digital policy making is the growing number of diplomatic missions to Silicon Valley. Although some states created Embassies or missions to Silicon Valley years ago, since the Russia Ukraine War the number of representations to the Valley has grown. This may be the result of Ukraine’s ability to enact a tech boycott of Russia. Indeed, states may have opened Embassies or missions to Silicon Valley to foster ties with Tech CEOs and to ensure that their state will not be boycotted in the future. Additionally, states may have deployed diplomats to Silicon Valley given Ukraine’s reliance on Tech moguls, such as Elon Musk, whose Star Link system has enabled Ukraine to maintain its internet connectivity and use connected warfare on the battlefield. Whatever the motive, diplomats assigned to Silicon Valley conduct routine diplomatic functions in new settings. Their task remains to manage relations of friendship and enmity between entities.
The question that comes to the fore is whether there is a need for a new term that better captures the ways in which diplomats are increasingly called upon to manage issues related to technology. In the past, some scholars and diplomats have used the term ‘Cyber Diplomacy’ and yet this term is often associated more with national security concerns and ways of safeguarding states from cyber-attacks. Others have used the term ‘Tech-Plomacy”’ yet this is a rather narrow term used to denote the diplomatic efforts of specific states. Still others have suggested the term ‘E-Diplomacy’ which seems somewhat dated, or ‘network diplomacy’, which again is too narrow.
Whether a new term arises or not, what is evident is that scholars must pay growing attention to the additional meaning of ‘digital diplomacy’. The majority of digital diplomacy articles, book chapters and volumes still focus on diplomacy through digital technologies and not on the digital management of technology-related issues. MFAs too must consider whether the diplomatic management of technology related issues should impact their daily operations and structures. As diplomacy will increasingly deal with technology related issues, and as technology related issues may lead to collaborations between states or rivalries, MFA may need to create digital desks staffed with diplomats who are experts in communications and negotiations, on the one hand, and domain experts in digital technologies on the other. A digital desk is very different from existing digital diplomacy departments that oversee MFA digital communications. As the focus of ‘digital diplomacy’ shifts, so must the gaze of scholars and diplomats.
