Unlocking the Promise of AI for the State Department
Some government officials circulated a draft executive order this past week outlining a potentially radical reorganization of the State Department. Secretary of State Marco Rubio called it a “hoax” and “fake news” on social media, and this week announced his own “comprehensive reorganization plan.” While most of the attention has focused on which bureaus and offices might be cut, a notable section of the draft order directed the State Department to securely integrate AI into diplomatic operations. This directive signals a promising direction for AI in diplomacy—but to truly transform how the U.S. engages the world, the State Department should aim higher.
The draft order lays a solid foundation. First, it highlights high-value, labor-intensive areas where AI could improve workflows, including drafting internal documents, developing and reviewing policy, and planning operations. These are appropriate initial use cases with clear benefits. Second, it prioritizes security by restricting AI systems to classified networks and preventing external data sharing. Third, it creates a sense of urgency by requiring the chief information officer (CIO) to develop operational protocols within 60 days.
Despite these strengths, the proposal has room for improvement. While it reflects a cautious and thoughtful first step, it would benefit from a bold and more clearly articulated long-term goal. The document omits any reference to pilot programs, scaling strategies, or feedback loops to refine AI tools based on real-world use. Because AI is evolving rapidly, the department’s strategy should remain dynamic. For instance, the draft calls for AI tools that meet “GPT-4o intelligence levels,” but a more forward-looking approach would tie benchmarks to the evolving state of the art.
The draft also leans too heavily toward risk avoidance at the expense of innovation. While security remains essential, the State Department should also focus on maximizing AI’s strategic potential—such as synthesizing multilingual documents, forecasting global trends, and amplifying U.S. policy messages. A more effective plan would explicitly support experimentation through rapid prototyping, sandbox environments, and collaborative efforts with interagency partners and allies to push the limits of AI-enabled diplomacy. None of these appear in the draft.
Cultural acceptance and workforce development are also missing. Successfully integrating AI into diplomacy will require upskilling foreign service officers, embedding AI fluency throughout the workforce, and aligning incentives for adoption. Without these investments, even the best tools will go unused.
Whether or not this draft order becomes official policy, it reflects growing momentum for AI integration in diplomacy. But to truly transform how the United States uses AI for diplomacy, the State Department needs to go further. One immediate step should be to create an AI Diplomacy Innovation Lab within the Bureau of Diplomatic Technology. This lab would be tasked with building and testing AI tools for strategy, protocol, and public engagement. The CIO should oversee technical compliance, but mission-aligned applications will require coordination with leaders across policy and operations.
The lab should also lead a new AI upskilling program for foreign service personnel, including a requirement that all foreign service officers complete an AI literacy course within six months. Staff should be expected to use AI tools in their daily work and provide structured feedback. Operational protocols should include mechanisms to collect and act on this feedback, allowing the CIO’s office to iteratively improve tools. Finally, the State Department should establish a clear innovation pathway for scaling successful pilots globally, guided by performance metrics and user insights.
The opportunity is clear: With the right infrastructure and vision, the United States can become a global leader in AI-enabled diplomacy. The State Department should seize this moment—not just to experiment with AI and increase organizational efficiency, but to embed AI at the core of how it conducts diplomacy in the 21st century.
