The Future of U.S. Cyber Diplomacy

Reinvigorating Our Digital Alliances

An illustration of a digitized globe connected by a network, representing cyber diplomacy.
August 14, 2025

In a time of rising geopolitical tensions, social disruption, and technological revolution, prudent diplomacy is more important than ever. To address these challenges, Secretary of State Marco Rubio has called for reforms at the State Department, and has initiated a reorganization with the goal of becoming leaner, more efficient, and more focused in its stated mission to secure American interests abroad.

Perhaps the most promising approach to these challenges is cyber diplomacy–the promotion of American interests and power within the interconnected digital environment in which all nation-states participate. Cyber diplomacy, led most recently by the State Department’s Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy (CDP), matters because nation-states and their citizens increasingly make decisions and retain their most important assets within the digital ecosystem, making it a crucial domain for security, economic vitality, and national prestige.

In pursuit of the United States’ cyber diplomacy goals, CDP and State in general should approach reform with care. Many organizational designs are not bad, but poorly-suited for the function for which they are intended. Before embarking on this reform, we need to ask ourselves: what is the State Department supposed to do in pursuit of cyber diplomacy and how should they be structured to do that?

With that in mind, Aspen Digital convened a discussion on the future of cyber diplomacy: bringing together former and current leaders across government, the private sector, and civil society. Our discussions were not intended to create a comprehensive roadmap for redesigning CDP, but to figure out what the goals, or “destination,” of cyber diplomacy ought to be. We discovered common ground on core principles that reformers would be wise to heed as they push through organizational change. 

For a reorganization of CDP to be successful, it should keep these principles in mind:

  • Preserve coordination and effective prioritization among cyber and digital issues
  • Prioritize digital security including collective defense
  • Promote cyber diplomacy’s role in building the American economy
  • Enhance the partnership between cyber diplomacy and defense

Preserve Coordinate and Effective Prioritization Among Cyber and Digital Issues

The existing CDP mandate, and the structure called for in the bi-partisan Cyber Diplomacy Act, includes the full spectrum of cyber and digital issues ranging from international security, cybersecurity, economic and regulatory issues, emerging technologies, and human rights online.  The rationale for this structure was to ensure close coordination and deconfliction among overlapping policy issues to avoid bureaucratic wrangling and to give the Department a more unified and strong voice – both in the interagency process and with foreign partners and adversaries. Moreover, CDP was placed under the Deputy Secretary both because it was cross-cutting and important across multiple geographical regions and areas of policy, including both economic and national security affairs. 

In the proposed reorganization, CDP would be split into separate functional parts each reporting to a different Undersecretary. As proposed, this split will need to be carefully managed to avoid both the perception and real risk of demoting cyber and digital priorities. Both the private sector and partner governments alike had benefited from having a centralized one-stop shop to streamline their engagement. To avoid fragmentation and conflict, the proposed split, at a minimum, should (1) offer a clear delineation of roles and responsibilities for each successor, (2) have well-designed reporting chains to ensure that cyber and digital issues get the attention they need from leadership, and (3) design strong mechanisms to coordinate and de-conflict on policies.

Prioritize Cyber and Digital Security, Including Collective Defense

The capability gap among nations, including the United States, is smaller than it was in the past. At the same time, nation-state and other threats in cyberspace continue to rise in sophistication, scope and impact. Technological innovation can only work in America’s interests if our digital foundation is secure from cyberattacks. As such, cyber diplomats must elevate security aspects of cyber diplomacy and work with allied nations on coordinating cyber defenses effectively.

Since cyberattacks are not typically a direct vector for kinetic impacts, the guiding principle should be the preservation and expansion of American interests – including security. American industry cannot operate freely and productively if it is inhibited in the global digital ecosystem and American citizens cannot live their lives fully if they live in fear of cyberattacks disrupting the critical infrastructure such as energy, healthcare, and the defense-industrial base. That is why it’s important for cyber diplomats to continue to (1) improve our ability to attribute and shame countries that engage in bad behavior, (2) develop partnerships that reduce the effectiveness of cyberattacks, and (3) promote coordinated responses to malicious actors including material and timely consequences for their actions. 

This approach will require American leadership and engagement with like-minded governments, as well as domestic and foreign companies as well, to preserve American freedoms in the digital domain where they increasingly spend the most time. In addition, targeted capacity building, like the existing FALCON (Foreign Assistance Leveraged for Cyber Operational Needs) program that works to bolster the cyber defenses of partners should be continued. The digital ecosystem does not fall within borders; attacks on our partners are a stepping stone to attacks on us.

Promote Cyber Diplomacy’s Role in Building the American Economy

Cyber diplomacy doesn’t exist for its own sake; it exists to support domestic goals. One of the defining challenges today is the need for more infrastructure to facilitate the provision of critical public and private goods. To build a more dynamic economy, we need to reduce the barriers that keep us from scaling critical technologies and services, such as in artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, cloud services, and IT more broadly. While policy discourse around abundance and dynamism often focuses on domestic barriers, there are also international barriers we need to tackle, such as conflicting standards and regulations. Diplomacy, including cyber diplomacy, should continue to play a role in removing these barriers to help leading American tech companies sell their services abroad. It should continue to operate in close partnership with American industry so that the private sector has an advocate representing them abroad when such regulations are designed and implemented.

Enhance the Partnership Between Cyber Diplomacy and Defense

Cyber diplomats can bring a diplomatic lens to proposed military actions and plan an integral role in building alliances and collective response to cyber incidents. By virtue of their engagement with both allies and adversaries, they can provide useful insights into partner and adversary capabilities and intent. A productive relationship between CDP and the Department of Defense should be strengthened and enhanced. These reorganized institutions, including perhaps the new Bureau of Emerging Threats, should work closely with the U.S. Cyber Command to help (1) understand the second order effects of cyber operations; (2) prioritize and understand adversary capabilities; and (3) develop more effective partnerships with our allies to better coordinate on campaigns, including imposing consequences and costs on hostile behavior. This partnership should be a two-way street: State provides Defense with critical analysis and insight on our adversaries’ interests and capabilities while simultaneously conveying to our allies how our offensive cyber operations are (1) being deployed, (2) to what end, and (3) how they can work with us on commonly-held strategic goals.

In terms of organizational design, it is crucial  that allied areas of statecraft cannot exist in silos. Cyber diplomacy represents one such possible bridge to integrate diplomacy and defense so that they can work together towards a common interest.

Moving Forward

All reorganizations face the same balancing act: to achieve new goals without compromising existing capabilities, synergies, and coordination. At Aspen, we will continue to explore these continuing reforms and identify opportunities to implement them in ways suited to the challenges of the day. The Cyber Diplomacy Act of 2021 which gave birth to the modern Bureau was introduced in the House by Republican leadership during a Democratic majority. This is exactly the kind of issue that both sides of the aisle can work on together in pursuit of the common good: the preservation of American leadership, security, and sovereignty.

Browse More Posts


We’re Hiring a Project Manager for Take9

The Project Manager will facilitate Take9, a public service awareness campaign, and drive various tasks and workstreams with excellence.


Building Cyber Defenses in the Age of Agentic AI

The evolution of agentic AI, the kind that can act independently and make decisions, calls for a shift in how we think about cybersecurity.