For me, the Summer School was a chance to stress-test my own thinking against peers doing this work in different geopolitical contexts and to build the kind of relationships that turn into practical cooperation long after the programme ends.

Why did you decide to participate in the EU CyberNet Summer School?

Digital technologies are evolving at a pace that outstrips the adaptability of existing governance models. As a result, senior leaders must commit to lifelong learning and adopt adaptive strategies, both of which are essential for effective leadership in this field.

I was drawn to the Summer School because of its commitment to convening diverse perspectives. In cyber diplomacy, valuable insights often arise from understanding how issues intersect across fields such as foreign policy, cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, economic and democratic resilience and human rights. This intersection renders the work particularly meaningful. I came for the pivot this school is built around: cyber diplomacy moving from two decades of the UN Group of Governmental Experts process into the newly established Global Mechanism. That’s not an academic distinction – it changes how practitioners like me advise on norms enforcement, accountability and what “responsible state behaviour” actually means in practice.

Equally important are the informal conversations: sharing experiences with peers from various regions and sectors, hearing stories that challenge my assumptions and discovering common ground in unexpected contexts. These exchanges foster genuine learning and growth.

For me, the Summer School was a chance to stress-test my own thinking against peers doing this work in different geopolitical contexts and to build the kind of relationships that turn into practical cooperation long after the programme ends.

Capacity building extends beyond knowledge sharing; it involves nurturing communities. While knowledge opens doors, sustained human networks ensure they remain open over time. […] Capacity building only works if it produces a network, not just a training certificate.

What do you see as the biggest challenges facing cyber diplomacy today?

A significant challenge is the tension between an increasingly interconnected digital world and growing geopolitical fragmentation. Today, a technical decision in one region can have global repercussions, yet building trust and cooperation has become more difficult. This challenge extends beyond traditional cybersecurity concerns to include artificial intelligence, digital infrastructure, data governance, economic resilience and emerging technologies. Senior experts must develop integrated strategies that address these interconnected domains while safeguarding international stability.

Simultaneously, technological innovation outpaces institutional adaptation. Policymakers are frequently required to govern technologies whose societal impacts are still unfolding.

This situation necessitates a shift in cyber diplomacy, moving from reactive responses to isolated crises toward building governance approaches that are flexible, empathetic and centred on trust and openness, even as technology evolves.

This is not solely a technical challenge; it is also a human and institutional one. We must design governance systems that adapt to uncertainty, foster collaboration and inspire trust as circumstances evolve.

This week gave me the clearest version of a challenge I see everywhere in my work: the EU now has real instruments – the Cyber Diplomacy Toolbox, the cyber sanctions regime – but foundational questions of sovereignty, non-intervention and the use of force in cyberspace are still being worked out case by case, not settled.

The simulation made that gap concrete: working in teams representing different sectors, we responded to a cyber incident hitting critical infrastructure, and it was immediately clear that agreeing on norms in a seminar is not the same as applying them in the first hour of a live crisis.

That is the real challenge in cyber diplomacy today: building governance that survives contact with an actual incident, across institutions that don’t share a command structure, a language or sometimes even a threat model.

What role can initiatives such as EU CyberNet play?

Capacity building extends beyond knowledge sharing; it involves nurturing communities. While knowledge opens doors, sustained human networks ensure they remain open over time.

A key strength of initiatives such as EU CyberNet is their capacity to connect professionals across institutions, disciplines and regions, thereby creating trusted networks that endure beyond the programme.

Capacity building only works if it produces a network, not just a training certificate. What this week showed me is that EU CyberNet, LAC4, EU Cyber Direct and Global Gateway are no longer operating as separate initiatives, they’re functioning as one pipeline, bringing diplomats, private-sector and technical experts into the same room to build a shared vocabulary before a crisis forces them to find one.

At its core, cyber diplomacy is fundamentally about partnership. No single actor possesses all the answers, and the most effective solutions emerge from collaboration among diplomats, technical experts, policymakers, civil society and the private sector, each contributing unique strengths and perspectives. That’s the strength I’d point to: EU CyberNet doesn’t just teach cyber diplomacy, it builds the trusted, cross-institutional relationships that make the EU’s Toolbox and sanctions regime usable in practice, not just on paper.

This is why programs such as the Summer School are essential: they help build the human infrastructure that enables international cooperation to be possible, sustainable, and effective.

These discussions reinforced my belief that cyber diplomacy is fundamentally about people. While frameworks and technical solutions are important, lasting resilience is achieved through relationships, empathy and the willingness to engage in challenging yet necessary dialogue. For me, this is the greatest value of the programme: it helps create trusted communities that shape collaborative efforts, both now and in the future.

What has been your main takeaway from the Summer School?

What stands out most for me is the diversity of voices and the genuine connections established during the programme. In cyber diplomacy, trust is not a byproduct but the foundation. It develops through honest dialogue, collaborative problem-solving and a willingness to listen to each other’s experiences. Participants brought unique backgrounds, yet found unity in working toward resilient, secure and inclusive digital societies.

Participants addressed similar challenges from diverse institutional, regional and professional backgrounds. Despite these differences, many shared concerns, including strengthening resilience, preserving trust, governing technological change responsibly and sustaining meaningful international cooperation in a complex geopolitical environment.

What stuck with me wasn’t a single answer; it was how differently “trust” gets built depending on where you sit, and how much of cyber diplomacy is quietly about translating between those different starting points.

These discussions reinforced my belief that cyber diplomacy is fundamentally about people. While frameworks and technical solutions are important, lasting resilience is achieved through relationships, empathy and the willingness to engage in challenging yet necessary dialogue.

For me, this is the greatest value of the programme: it helps create trusted communities that shape collaborative efforts, both now and in the future.

Looking ahead, what gives you optimism?

Despite rising geopolitical tensions, I remain optimistic because I consistently observe practitioners reaching across institutions and borders with humility, creativity and a genuine desire to solve problems collaboratively.

Technology evolves rapidly, but the global community dedicated to governing it responsibly is also advancing.

I believe the future belongs to those who connect across boundaries, bridging diplomacy and technology, policy and practice and innovation and governance, while respecting the unique contributions of each field.

If we maintain open conversations, invest in trust and ensure digital transformation remains people-centred, I am confident that we can build digital societies that are resilient, secure and truly inclusive.

I do believe this is the goal of cyber diplomacy: to build resilient, secure and inclusive digital societies through trust, cooperation and responsible governance. This collective effort depends on sustained dialogue and shared commitment. I remain optimistic that this work will continue to unite people across disciplines, institutions and borders.

Background

EU CyberNet Summer School 2026, titled “Cyber Diplomacy: From Norms to Actions – Governing Cyberspace in a Fractured World” was organised by EU CyberNet in partnership with EU Cyber Direct, and Cyber 4.0 with expertise from the European External Action Service at the European University Institute in Florence, Italy from 29 to 31 July 2026. Summer School 2026 was led by Isabella Brunner (EU CyberNet instructor),  Andrea Calderaro (EU Cyber Direct, European Union Institute for Security Studies – EUISS) and Michal Aendenhof (European Union External Action Service – EEAS) . Read more here.