What is cultural diplomacy

Theory of cultural diplomacy: definition, types and related terms

The most cited definition of cultural diplomacy is that of Milton Cummings, who describes it as "the exchange of ideas, information, values, systems, traditions, beliefs and other aspects of culture, with the intention of fostering mutual understanding”. The ultimate goal is to build trust and maintain a long-term relationship. Under the umbrella of cultural diplomacy are included language teaching; exchanges of students, teachers, scientists, etc.; the export of cultural products, for example, films and songs; and the holding of exhibitions, concerts or other events with a cultural focus. This is also known as positive or classical cultural diplomacy, that is, the promotion of one's own culture abroad, at the service of foreign policy objectives. 

On the other hand, negative cultural diplomacy consists of restrict access to one's own culture to prevent it from being influenced. Examples of this are quotas in broadcasting and the French Academy which is responsible for defending the purity of the language and translating foreign terms into French. The new school of cultural diplomacy emerged in Europe in the 90s and focused on the mere facilitation of access, showing both the strengths and weaknesses rather than promoting a certain image, and thus allow the public to make their own interpretations. It is less about projection and unidirectionality and more about listening and dialogue. 

In this sense, it is essential to keep in mind that, despite the Cold War practices that caused confusion between the terms, cultural diplomacy is not propaganda, understood as selective or misleading information with the purpose of manipulating the audience to achieve a certain objective. Cultural diplomacy is seen as a subfield of public diplomacy that aims to promote the national interest by informing or influencing foreign audiences through the provision of information about state policies and actions. Public diplomacy, in turn, is encompassed by soft power, a term coined by Joseph Nye in 1990 to express the ability of a State to influence the behaviors of other States through attraction and co-option rather than coercion. whether of a military or economic nature. New It specifically lists culture, political values, and foreign policies as sources of soft power, highlighting the importance of cultural diplomacy. 

As he says Walter Laquer, in the new of world order, Cultural diplomacy has become more important, while traditional diplomacy and military power are of limited use. Contrary to Huntington's gloomy prediction of a clash of civilizations, culture is the perfect tool to prevent conflicts and strengthen peace. By fostering trust and mutual understanding, bringing people together and allowing them to collaborate, cultural diplomacy contributes directly to the main goal of diplomacy: encourage cooperation. This is even more true in the interconnected and multipolar world created by globalization. Among the benefits of cultural diplomacy we find: creating relationships that last beyond changes in government, reaching influential members of society, cooperating despite political differences, providing a neutral platform for people-to-people contact, transforming conflicts, combat the negative image and counteract misunderstandings, among others.

History of cultural diplomacy until the end of the 20th century

As he says Arndt, early diplomacy was not about relations between nation-states but between cultures. Since the Bronze Age, ceremonies and rituals (especially the exchange of gifts, including information, goods, and even people) have been of utmost importance. Adaptive cultures such as the Greek, Persian, and Roman thrived by absorbing information from foreign societies. Although during the Middle Ages in Europe learning went underground, rulers like Charlemagne promoted the arts and even dialogue between cultures. The 16th and 17th centuries are known as the heyday of cultural diplomacy thanks to people like Francis II, Louis XIV, and Matteo Ricci. 

The birth of classical cultural diplomacy is generally attributed to the creation of the Alliance Française in 1883. Other cultural institutes followed: the Istituto Dante Alighieri in 1923, Deutsche Welle in 1924, the German Academic Exchange Service and the Society for the Cultural Relations with Foreign Countries in 1925 and the British Council in 1934. In the context of the Cold War, cultural institutes continued to proliferate: American House Institution in 1945, Goethe Institute in 1951 and the Japan Foundation in 1972. The dates show that the efforts of Cultural diplomacy multiplied after a great war.

Due to the intense ideological battle during the Cold War, the study of cultural diplomacy focused on United States, so it is pertinent to examine it in more detail. To enter World War I, the United States first had to convince its own citizens through internal propaganda through the Public Information Committee, which was closed at the end of the war. In 1938 a division dedicated explicitly to cultural relations was established but on the eve of World War II it was soon joined by other offices dedicated to black and white propaganda. After the war these were combined rather than being abolished as before, and in 1953 the US Information Agency (USIA). These propaganda origins, along with the fact that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) funded many of the cultural diplomacy initiatives during the Cold War, have been the main cause of the marginalization of foreign policy culture. 

After the unexpected end of the Cold War, Fukuyama proclaimed the end of history as we know it, but history repeated itself: The US government discontinued the USIA in 1993 even though jazz and rock had contributed to that victory.. However, there was renewed interest in public diplomacy in the aftermath of 11/XNUMX and the subsequent invasion of Iraq. Furthermore, as newcomers, Spain and China established the Cervantes Institute and the Confucius Institute in 1999 and 2004 respectively, and the latter has since flooded the world with its more than 500 offices. In summary, the commitment to cultural diplomacy is increasing, especially in emerging and developing countries.

Cultural diplomacy in the 21st century

New agents

Unlike the traditionally unilateral national cultural diplomacy, global governance institutions are driving the emergence of a new multilateral form that embodies the new school of cultural diplomacy. Two international organizations stand out: the United Nations and European Union. The example par excellence is the UNESCO, which as its name attests is dedicated to promotion of education, science and culture with the aim of contributing to world peace. Another UN initiative is the Alliance of Civilizations, promoted by Spain and Turkey in 2004. Being a direct response to 11/XNUMX, it promotes interreligious dialogue with the ultimate goal of dissipate tensions between the West and the Muslim world.

The most successful and well-known initiative of the European Union is undoubtedly Erasmus +, which since 2014 combines all education, training, youth and sports programs, with a special emphasis on mobility and access. To these we must add the Creative Europe program, which extends to neighboring countries, and the network of national cultural institutes (EUNIC), which has recently launched the creation of European Houses of Culture, the multilateral equivalent of national cultural institutes. 

The private sector is increasingly committed to Corporate Social Responsibility, and corporate cultural diplomacy can be seen as its improved version. Whether this is merely a response to consumer demand, or instead there is genuine concern for the environment and local communities is of secondary importance as long as businesses have a positive impact. Examples of companies that strengthen their relationships with customers through grants, exchanges or volunteering include Deutsche Bank y British Petroleum.

The proliferation of civil society initiatives signals a return to the popular origins of cultural diplomacy and provides a participatory and sustainable model. NGOs usually enjoy high levels of legitimacy and credibility, but the local context must be taken into account due to the substantial differences between civil societies between democratic countries and countries in conflict or under dictatorship. Some citizen initiatives include the Istanbul Foundation, the International Center for African Culture and Arts, the Coalition for Citizen Diplomacy, and the American Islamic Forum for Democracy.

New vehicles

Music, arts and sports are recognized as universal languages that connect people on an emotional level that transcends any physical or linguistic barrier. They are especially useful as tools of informal cultural diplomacy when formal relations cannot be established, as is the case with Israel and Palestine. Projects in this area include Daniel Barenboim's orchestra, Jeddah United, Street World Football y Right to Play, among others. 

Although national branding has traditionally been separated from cultural diplomacy, a partnership between the two would be beneficial, since as stated Anholt who coined the term country brand, the only way to change the image of a place is to change actions. Country branding campaigns have become a trend around the world, with India, Nigeria, South Korea and Romania being just a few examples. 

Finally, the Arab Spring forced the world to recognize the extraordinary power of social media. In 2011, the need to pay more attention to local audiences by listening to their needs and concerns, as well as to empower citizens and independent media to prevent conflicts, became clear. In this sense, accelerated digitalization and border closures due to COVID-19 have presented a new impetus to online cultural diplomacy.  

View: Academy for Cultural Diplomacy