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.
Cultural diplomacy encompasses language teaching, student, teacher, and scientific exchanges, and other activities. the export of products cultural activities, such as films and songs; and the holding of exhibitions, concerts, or other culturally-focused events.
This is also known as positive or classical cultural diplomacy, that is, 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's 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 which 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 specific 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.
La public diplomacy, in turn, falls under soft power, a term coined by Joseph Nye in 1990 to express a state's ability to influence the behavior of other states through attraction and co-optation rather than coercion, whether of a military or economic nature.
Nye 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 desworld order, Cultural diplomacy has become more important, while traditional diplomacy and military power are of limited use.
Contrary to Huntington's grim 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 enabling them to collaborate, cultural diplomacy directly contributes to the primary objective of diplomacy: encourage cooperation.
This is even more true in the interconnected and multipolar world created by globalization.
Among the benefits of cultural diplomacy are: creating relationships that endure beyond changes in government, reaching influential members of society, cooperating across political differences, providing a neutral platform for people-to-people contact, transforming conflicts, combating negative imagery, and countering misunderstandings, among others.
History of cultural diplomacy until the end of the 20th century
As Arndt argues, 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 Greeks, Persians, and Romans 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 height 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.
followed other cultural institutes: the Istituto Dante Alighieri in 1923, Deutsche Welle in 1924, the German Academic Exchange Service and the Society for 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: the American House Institution in 1945, the Goethe Institute in 1951, and the Japan Foundation in 1972.
The dates show that cultural diplomacy efforts multiplied after a major 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 the First World WarThe United States first had to convince its own citizens through internal propaganda via the Committee on Public Information, 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 white and black propaganda.
After the war these were combined instead of being abolished as before, and in 1953 the US Information Agency (USIA).
These propagandistic 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 WarFukuyama 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, a renewed interest in public diplomacy emerged in the aftermath of 11/XNUMX and the subsequent invasion of Iraq.
Furthermore, as newcomers, Spain and China established the Instituto Cervantes and the Confucius Institute in 1999 and 2004 respectively, and the latter has since spread across the globe with its more than 500 offices.
In short, the commitment to cultural diplomacy is on the rise, especially in emerging and developing countries.
Cultural diplomacy in the 21st century
New agents
In contrast to 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 the European Union.
The quintessential example 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, launched by Spain and Türkiye in 2004.
Being a direct response to 11/XNUMX, it promotes interfaith 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 programme, which extends to neighbouring 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 whether 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 grassroots origins of cultural diplomacy and provides a participatory and sustainable model.
NGOs often enjoy high levels of legitimacy and credibility, but the local context must be taken into account due to the substantial differences between civil societies in 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 relationships cannot be established, as is the case with Israel and Palestine.
Projects in this field include the Daniel Barenboim 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 by changing actions.
Country branding campaigns have become a trend around the world, with India, Nigeria, South Korea, and Romania just a few examples.
Lastly, la 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 empowering citizens and independent media to prevent conflict, became clear.
In this sense, accelerated digitalization and border closures due to COVID-19 have provided a new impetus to online cultural diplomacy.
View: Academy for Cultural Diplomacy
Graduated in International Relations and Protocol, Event Management and Corporate Communication. I am passionate about technology and cultures, which is why I did my final degree research on the cultural diplomacy of the European Union and China. I identify myself as a citizen of the world, but also a convinced Europeanist.
