“If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.”
– Karl Popper, The Open Society and its Enemies (1945)
The Estonian Research Council’s Brussels Office organised an IGLO OPEN seminar titled “Science Diplomacy and Security at the Intersection of Knowledge, Power and Values” at the Permanent Representation of Estonia to the EU, bringing together policymakers and representatives of academia on 10 February 2026.
The topic could hardly have been more timely. As global competition intensifies and emerging technologies become increasingly tied to economic strength, defence capabilities and societal resilience, science and technology have become geopolitical assets. Research cooperation has become inseparable from questions of power, trust and strategic autonomy.
At the heart of the discussion lay a central dilemma: how can Europe remain open in science while addressing growing security concerns in a rapidly changing geopolitical landscape?
Opening the seminar, Kristel Oitmaa, a representative of the Estonian Research Council’s Brussels Office brought out that according to the OECD’s 2023/2024 report Integrity and Security in the Global Research Ecosystem, 43 percent of higher education institutions in the EU have experienced concrete incidents where external offers compromised research ethics or threatened intellectual property.
H.E. Katrin Juhandi, Ambassador and Deputy Permanent Representative of Estonia to the EU, stressed in her opening words, that Europe is entering a new phase. Scientific excellence alone is no longer sufficient to guide international partnerships. Decisions about cooperation increasingly require careful assessments of risk, reciprocity and reliability.
Dr. Riin Tamm, Vice-Rector for Research at the Estonian Academy of Security Sciences, highlighted in her keynote address, that:
“A changed security environment requires a change in how we understand research security. In the new research-security paradigm, the cornerstone is sustained cooperation between academic community and security authorities, cooperation grounded in mutual understanding and dialogue.“
The long-standing assumption that openness is always the default setting for science is increasingly being questioned. Yet the aim is not to close doors. As several speakers emphasised, the challenge is to manage openness and security simultaneously.
Jan Marco Müller, Team Leader Global Approach, Multilateral Dialogue and Science Diplomacy at the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, outlined how the EU’s approach to science diplomacy has evolved. He stressed that the EU must defend its values and strategic interests and that science diplomacy and research security are key instruments to achieve that.
The panel discussion, moderated by Dr. Carmen Kivistik from the Estonian Research Council Brussels Office, focused on the collision point between research security and science diplomacy, and what this means in practice for universities and the wider research community.
Panellists agreed that the world is currently shifting away from the ideal of fully open global cooperation toward more fragmented and competitive models. In such an environment, universities cannot remain passive actors. However, significant gaps remain. Many universities lack clear mandates, risk management tools and institutional support to navigate geopolitical pressures effectively. Researchers themselves may not always be fully aware of the risks associated with international cooperation.
Dr. Pantelis Savvas Ioannou, Research and Innovation Policy Attaché at the Permanent Representation of Cyprus to the EU, explained that elevating science diplomacy on the political agenda reflects a recognition that fragmented approaches are no longer sufficient. The goal is to move towards coherent action across Europe, while respecting institutional autonomy.
In addition, the European Commission is currently developing risk assessment tools to help Member States and institutions better identify risks and reduce potential threats in international cooperation. While frameworks and guidance can support institutions, responsibility cannot be outsourced. Universities and research organisations must build their own internal capacities and awareness.
Eric Piaget, Science Diplomacy Coordinator at EUTOPIA and researcher at UNU-CRIS, argued that university alliances can help institutions act collectively on shared values and take principled positions internationally. He highlighted the often-overlooked “fourth dimension” of science diplomacy — diplomacy in science — stressing that scientists themselves could serve as spokespersons for the global knowledge commons. In a fragmented and politicised world, knowledge needs its own diplomats to counter misinformation, strengthen evidence in public debate and improve dialogue with policymakers.
If one conclusion stood out from the seminar, it was this: If the EU wants to persevere in a world that is increasingly hostile towards multilateralism, a rules-based international order, the rule of law, and even science itself, scientists and diplomats in Europe must work together and with like-minded partners around the world, based on mutual trust and respect and with the necessary safeguards in place.
Balancing openness with security is not a binary choice. They are a continuum requiring a continuous process of assessment, dialogue and adaptation. In a world where knowledge is power, Europe’s ability to remain both open and secure will shape not only its research landscape, but its place in the global order.
Text: Carmen Kivistik and Kristel Oitmaa
