Geopolitical Tensions and the International Mediation Role of the Academic Profession

This contribution seeks to interrelate two fields of study that both foreground the mediating role of the academic profession. Within the sociology of professions, there is a long-standing tradition that conceptualises professions—most notably the academic profession, often described as a meta-profession—as key mediators between knowledge, power, and society. Less explicitly, but no less significantly, mediation is also central to the emerging field of science diplomacy. Science diplomacy is widely regarded as a mechanism for fostering trust between states by providing credible expertise that informs foreign and international policy. Other scholars further emphasise the role of science in mediating geopolitical power relations and advancing soft power through attraction and legitimacy. This paper brings these two strands of scholarship together to develop a Gramscian conception of international mediation through scientific collaboration. Against this theoretical backdrop, it examines how escalating geopolitical tensions and the erosion of the global liberal order reshape the mediating role of international scientific collaboration. Empirically, the study adopts a comparative country perspective, focusing on the recent introduction of foreign influence registration schemes in Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom. These schemes, which encompass but are not limited to international scientific collaboration, have been established to monitor activities conducted at the direction of foreign states or state-controlled organisations. They provide interesting insights into the challenges of scientific diplomacy encounter at a time when the liberal world order is on the verge of collapse. They no longer frame international scientific collaboration as a force of good but rather as a threat to national interest. Drawing on critical discourse analysis and process tracing, the study examines in greater detail how these schemes envisage international scientific collaborations and their role in mediation. It compares them with the response of the professions to tease out the different impact the scheme has on international scientific collaboration, including chilling effects.