When governments don’t get along, scientists are key
A small but truly international professional community
It has been almost 25 years since I obtained my PhD in astrophysics. I have been really fortunate to have held a range of jobs in my chosen discipline ever since. As I gradually became more senior, I made a number of international moves, from my native Netherlands to the USA, then to the UK, to China, and most recently to Australia.
My professional community is relatively small (the International Astronomical Union’s worldwide membership directory contains just over 11,000 names), and state-of-the-art equipment is incredibly expensive. This has inevitably led to a high degree of internationalisation, which has resulted in turn in significant benefits in terms of often freely shared expertise, resources (including data, software and brainpower) and hardware. Among my best friends, I count many international scientists around the world.
Despite these generally excellent international links, we still live in the real world, where our governments are not always on amicable or even on speaking terms. Yet, this is where scientists can make a crucial difference. As an early example of where astronomers managed to use science diplomacy to reach a geopolitical compromise, the admission in 1959 of the People’s Republic of China as national member to the International Astronomical Union (IAU; the world body of professional astronomers and astrophysicists), alongside existing member Taiwan, led to heated disagreements as regards the use of the designation “China”. Since 1979, both far Eastern members have been referred to as “China Nanjing” and “China Taipei”, reflecting the locations of their respective academy headquarters. Needless to say, to reach this solution required extensive and careful negotiations behind the scenes!
Bringing nations together
During the early years of my appointment in Beijing (2010–2018), the prospects of welcoming our colleagues from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK; more commonly known as North Korea) back to the international community looked somewhat promising. Around the same time, the IAU had just established its global Office of Astronomy for Development, which aims at leveraging the skills of our professional community for the benefit of their local society. I took the initiative to establish the East Asian Regional Office of Astronomy for Development (EA-ROAD), whose geographical remit covers most of East Asia, including the DPRK. At the IAU’s 2012 General Assembly, held in Beijing, the EA-ROAD was formally established and I had the opportunity to meet with colleagues from Pyongyang Astronomical Observatory.
Discussions held at that 2012 meeting eventually led to placements of a few pairs of DPRK astronomers in both Beijing and at Leiden University in the Netherlands. Although communications with our DPRK colleagues were complicated in the run-up to their placements, we persisted in the hope of facilitating their renewed international engagement. One might expect that colleagues from the Republic of Korea would have taken the lead, but South Korean citizens are forbidden by law to maintain direct communications with their counterparts from north of the Korean Demilitarised Zone.
Unfortunately, geopolitical developments have since made even scientific engagement with the DPRK near-impossible. As a case in point, in early 2018 I was invited to join a mission under the auspices of the American Association for the Advancement of Science to visit Pyongyang, following approaches made by DPRK diplomats at the United Nations. Since the visit was postponed a few times, I eventually had to pull out given my impending move to Australia. I was later told that a visit to Pyongyang Astronomical Observatory had not been given clearance.
Geopolitical tensions
Geopolitics has also been hampering international scientific engagements more recently. The environment in the United States has become increasingly hostile for scientists of Chinese descent, with authorities often citing national security concerns as a blanket excuse. Since the start of the current pandemic, geopolitical tensions have also increased between China and Australia. We learn from our national news channels that Chinese ministers and senior government officials don’t pick up the phone or return calls to their Australian counterparts.
These tensions are slowly trickling down to the coalface. At the present time, this specifically affects research grant applications submitted to the Australian Research Council, where references to ongoing or proposed collaborations with our Chinese colleagues are all but banned (if not formally, then certainly in practice). Nevertheless, while politics at the highest levels has led to barriers in direct communications, operational collaborations between Australian and Chinese scientists are continuing largely unhindered. The National Foundation for Australia–China Relations continues to fund active collaborations, whereas the Australian Government’s Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources maintains an active interest and representation in the Australia–China Consortium for Astrophysical Research’s Australian Advisory Board (on which I serve).
Promising developments
Meanwhile, the IAU’s Office of Astronomy for Development runs a flagship “Astronomy for Peace” project. Known as the Columba–Hypatia project, it aims at bringing together children and educators from the separated communities on the divided island nation of Cyprus. The idea is to use astronomy as a tool for promoting meaningful communication, a feeling of global citizenship and a culture of peace and non-violence in post-conflict regions, which aligns directly with United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).
Obviously, these are just a few examples of the power of science diplomacy. My key message is that while nation states may have chosen not to engage with one another at the highest levels, communication and engagement at the coalface is often possible and may eventually contribute to positive outcomes and the diffusion of international tensions.
Science and technology are inevitably and increasingly becoming cross-border and interdisciplinary endeavours. Think of tackling the impacts of climate change – or of the current pandemic, among many other examples. If it wasn't already, international collaboration is rapidly becoming the norm rather than the exception. And as demonstrated by the examples used in this post, collaboration among scientists from around the world usually serves the greater good.
Despite possible obstacles at the higher levels of government(s), grassroots collaborations are often still encouraged – or at least condoned. Obviously, you will have to ensure that you comply with the legal framework in your jurisdiction, particularly where research with implications for national security or so-called "dual-use" (civilian/military) applications is involved. More often than not, however, cross-border pursuits in scientific research may be less affected by intergovernmental tensions than the news headlines might suggest, so don’t be discouraged from exploring such opportunities!
Please let us know in the comments about science diplomacy initiatives you are familiar with.
Richard de Grijs is an academic and journal editor with more than 25 years of experience in the physical sciences. In March 2018, he joined Macquarie University (Sydney, Australia) as Associate Dean (Global Engagement). Richard is an AuthorAID Steward and presently serves as Managing Editor of the News section of the AuthorAID website.