?
Научная дипломатия ЕС как инструмент стратегической автономии
This article examines European Union science diplomacy as an instrument of exter-
nal action aimed at strengthening the EU’s international actorness, strategic autonomy, and
technological sovereignty. It argues that EU science diplomacy is undergoing a significant
transformation: from a liberal-normative model centered on international scientific cooper-
ation, soft power, and global public goods toward a more strategic and geopolitical model
shaped by technological competition, security concerns, and the fragmentation of the inter-
national order.
The article identifies the conceptual and institutional foundations of EU science diplomacy
and assesses their role in the broader evolution of EU foreign policy. Methodologically, the
study is grounded in institutionalism, which allows science diplomacy to be analyzed as a de-
veloping system of norms, strategic documents, organizational structures, expert networks,
and practices formed under the auspices of the European Commission. The empirical basis
includes European Commission documents, reports of EU working groups on science diplo-
macy, materials related to Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe, initiatives of the EU Science Di-
plomacy Alliance, and relevant academic literature.
The article examines two contrasting cases: the SESAME synchrotron project in Jordan and sci-
entific cooperation in the Arctic. SESAME illustrates the liberal logic of “science for diplomacy,”
where research infrastructure is expected to promote dialogue and confidence-building in a
conflict-prone region. The Arctic case, by contrast, shows science diplomacy as a tool of strate-
gic positioning in a region where scientific knowledge is closely linked to climate governance,
natural resources, security, sanctions, and geopolitical rivalry.
The article concludes that EU science diplomacy can no longer be understood solely as a form
of soft power or international cooperation. It is increasingly becoming a mechanism for con-
solidating the EU’s geopolitical subjectivity, technological sovereignty, and strategic autono-
my in a fragmented world order.