Technological strength is no longer merely an economic advantage – it is a strategic instrument. The 21st century is seeing a shift in the levers of state power: alongside territory, resources and military capacity, technological capabilities are shaping influence, alliances and competition.
From nuclear design to a broader technopolitics
Science historian Gabrielle Hecht's concept of technopolitics — originally developed to explain how political aims were encoded into nuclear technology — now helps to explain a wider phenomenon. States are not only producing technology for industry; they are actively designing and controlling it to serve diplomatic, economic and security objectives.
That shift is becoming explicit in national strategies. Last August, the United States published its National Security Science and Technology Strategy, signalling that science and technology have become core elements of national security. The move marks an acknowledgement that scientific and technological capabilities affect deterrence, alliance structures, supply-chain resilience and economic security.
Three faces of science diplomacy
Science diplomacy — the intersection of science and international relations — plays three complementary roles as states navigate technopolitics:
- Science in diplomacy: using scientific knowledge to inform foreign-policy decisions and negotiations.
- Diplomacy for science: employing diplomatic channels to enable cross-border research, exchanges and collaboration.
- Science for diplomacy: fostering cooperation through joint scientific endeavours to build trust and tackle shared problems, even between politically distant countries.
| Dimension | Role |
|---|---|
| Science in diplomacy | Informs policy with technical expertise |
| Diplomacy for science | Secures agreements and mobility for research |
| Science for diplomacy | Builds relationships through cooperative projects |
AI and the strategic ecosystem
Artificial intelligence is accelerating this realignment. The technology ties together elements that are now strategic inputs: semiconductors, data centres, power supply, critical minerals and skilled personnel. As these elements are treated collectively, states are responding with measures such as export controls, investment screening and tighter research-security rules to protect strategic advantage.
In practice, that means technical cooperation will often be judged not only on scientific merit but on national-security implications. Research integrity, talent migration and access to key hardware and raw materials are increasingly viewed through a geopolitical lens.
What this means for countries like South Africa
While the reporting focuses on global trends, the implications are pertinent for South Africa and other middle powers. As technology becomes politicised, governments must weigh participation in international research networks against risks to supply chains and critical capabilities. Science diplomacy can offer ways to protect national interests while maintaining collaboration, but it requires deliberate policy: integrating technical advice into foreign-policy processes, negotiating access to research infrastructure and managing the movement of highly skilled workers.
These dynamics also raise questions about governance and equity. If advanced technologies become instruments of state power, countries with limited manufacturing capacity or restricted access to critical inputs risk marginalisation. Cooperative mechanisms and multilateral approaches to standards, ethical frameworks and resource governance will therefore be important to prevent a fragmented global research landscape.
In short, the era of technopolitics reframes science from a primarily economic driver into a strategic asset. Science diplomacy will be essential for states that want to harness scientific capability while navigating competition and building constructive international ties.
