Exploring the Brazil-U.S. Diplomatic Landscape

 Science diplomacy happens all over the world. It spread all over the world during the 1970s, a time that historians say was very important for the globalization processes and institutions that are still important today (Ferguson et al. 2011; Hellema 2019; Heymann 2017). More and more newly independent countries are joining the UN, regional geopolitical powers and alliances are forming, and science and technology are playing a bigger role in connecting economies and societies that are far apart. These changes have had a big impact on science diplomacy, as well as on the global economy, pop culture, and geopolitics (Turchetti et al. 2012; Oreskes and Krige 2014; Adamson and Lalli 2021; Krige 2022). Along with commercial, cultural, and economic globalization, this globalization in science policy should be seen as a new trend from the early 1970s. This kind of method is needed to give a full historical account of how what we call "global science diplomacy" came to be. We look at science as something that happens across borders and from many different points of view and stories (Turchetti et al. 2012; Oreskes and Krige 2014; Adamson and Lalli 2021; Barrett 2022; Krige 2022). Our method with multiple authors shows that the globalization of science diplomacy was sped up by a number of transnational frameworks, such as South–South frameworks. 

As the field of science diplomacy grows in terms of geography and inclusion, it shows how power is distributed across different diplomatic, scientific, and political groups

We find five main themes that showed up in different areas of science and diplomacy. These themes were all important to the world growth of science diplomacy. First, growing multipolarity, which came about because developing countries wanted and felt like they had more power, changed the world of science diplomacy at the same time it changed the economy, energy sources, and culture around the world. Second, this agency was especially clear in how newly independent countries fought back against the impact of Cold War hegemonies and former colonial powers in the field of technology. Third, international technocratic organizations played a big role in this form of science diplomacy. They were either places for disagreement and conflict or, more often than not, places to avoid when UN rules and structures strengthened traditional geopolitical power instead of weakening it. Fourth, world agreement couldn't be reached, even in scientific areas that seemed like they would be good for it. Lastly, the early 1970s saw the rise of new groups in science and diplomacy. These groups included ambitious newly independent countries as well as new regional partnerships. Although none of this may seem very important at first, the current state of science diplomacy is still marked by multipolarity, resistance, and agency; a lack of global consensus; regional alliances and interests; and the UN system's central role in protecting transnational science (Gluckman et al. 2017). All of them started around 1970, which is partly because the world had already hit a certain level of decolonization at that time. The UN had a list of 76 countries in 1955, the year of the Bandung Conference of nonaligned states (Bandyopadhyaya 1977; Lewis and Stolte 2019).

By 1970, 127 countries had joined the UN (UN 2022)

Every country in the UN would have one vote, so this process of freedom could have swung power to what Willy Brandt called the "Global South" in the 1980s.2 As we'll see below, these newly independent states used their newfound power to fight old powers in technology and international relations. In the early 1970s, science diplomacy projects from the Global South were common, though not as shocking as the first-ever oil embargo put in place by Arab members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries against the United States and other countries that had sided with Israel in the Arab-Israeli War (Bösch and Rüdiger 2014). Science diplomacy has become a worldwide trend thanks to the involvement of countries in the Global South in international science, especially within the UN system. This way of looking at the history of the world of science is more unique than it seems at first. Some researchers have noticed that the rise of "global challenges" is often seen as the start of the globalization of science policy (Rungius and Flink 2020). But Tim Flink has said that this is not true in terms of history (Flink 2020). Instead, by the early 1970s, this historical change was caused by the growing number and variety of countries around the world calling for a more fair distribution of scientific knowledge and technical power (Secretary-General, U.N. 1977). A lot of the work of groups like the G77 and the Non-Aligned Movement has been focusing on the UN's scientific and technological organizations (Friedman and Williams 1978; Standke 2006). Their fight to be taken seriously in this system was based on science. This made science diplomacy more important in other decolonialization efforts, such as those to fix economic problems (Boleslaw 1984). However, transnational science and the globalization of science diplomacy in the 1970s were not just caused by the growing importance of the Global South or the strong worry many countries had with development. Instead, these latter events made it possible for global science diplomacy to begin. 

In order to get a better sense of where this type of globalization came from and what it is like

Our look at science diplomacy's globalization in the early 1970s covers a wide range of technological areas. In the field of space technology, the multipolarity of technology was seen in both the start of major new programs and the formation of alliances between well-known programs. At the same time, ocean science was formed by opposition to colonial and Cold War hegemonies in the UN and in the formation of regional alliances, even though these alliances were short-lived. New developments in the environmental sciences' diplomacy showed that "global challenges" don't bring people together and demonstrated how science diplomacy forums can become places for important conversations. At the time, no one would have thought that the nuclear sciences were an area where people could agree on much. However, by the early 1970s, many people did agree that international treaties and the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) were important to the field's continued growth, either as a place for transnational nuclear scientific activities and affairs to happen or as steps that should be avoided. Lastly, our survey looks at health and population diplomacy. Post-colonial concerns led to important South–South cooperation and the creation of regional groups to question the science of former colonial powers.