Cultural diplomacy as a key component of foreign policy of states

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv

CULTURAL DIPLOMACY AS A KEY COMPONENT OF FOREIGN POLICY OF STATES

Shynkarenko T.I. PhD in Historical Sciences, Associate

Professor at the International Organizations and diplomatic

Service Chair of the Educational and Scientific

Institute of International Relations

Abstract

cultural policy diplomacy international

The article highlights the place of cultural diplomacy in the system of foreign policy of states. It considers different models of cultural diplomacy, its forms and instruments of implementation. New tendencies of the cultural diplomacy development nowadays, as well as the correlation of notions of public diplomacy, cultural diplomacy, international cultural policy, are analyzed.

Key words: public diplomacy, cultural diplomacy, international cultural policy, soft power, Institutes of cultural diplomacy.

Анотація

КУЛЬТУРНА ДИПЛОМАТІЯ ЯК ВАЖЛИВА СКЛАДОВА ЗОВНІШНЬОЇ ПОЛІТИКИ ДЕРЖАВИ

Шинкаренко Т.І.

Кандидат історичних наук, доцент кафедри міжнародних організацій і дипломатичної служби Навчально- наукового інституту міжнародних відносин Київського національного університету імені Тараса Шевченка.

У статті висвітлено місце культурної дипломатії у системі зовнішньої політики держав. Розглянуто різні моделі культурної дипломатії, її форми та інструменти реалізації. Проаналізовано нові тенденції в розвитку культурної дипломатії в наш час, а також співвідношення понять публічної дипломатії, культурної дипломатії, зовнішньої культурної політики.

Ключові слова: публічна дипломатія, культурна дипломатія, зовнішня культурна політика, м'яка сила, інститути культурної дипломатії.

Definition of the problem

Cultural diplomacy has a long history and today remains an important component of foreign policy of many states. In Ukraine cultural diplomacy has begun to develop actively in recent years. Thus, the experience of international cultural policy in different countries, particularly in modern conditions, are important to analyze.

The aim of the article is to analyze a definition, models, forms and instruments of cultural diplomacy.

The analysis of recent research and publications

In a scientific discourse of the study of influence of cultural instruments on diplomacy intensified due to Joseph S. Nye's works and his concept of “Soft power” in 1990. Numerous studies in this field focused on the role of a state in cultural diplomacy. These are, for example, the works of Simon Mark, Kirsten Bound, Rachel Briggs, John Holden, Samuel Jones, Jan Melissen. The works of practitioners of cultural diplomacy, namely diplomats, are important to scrutinize. For instance, Ruth McMurry's and Muna Lee's (the USA), Jerzy Onuch's (Poland), Dmytro Kuleba's (Ukraine).

Among the Ukrainian scholars the issues of cultural diplomacy, particularly in the theory of international relations, are studied by S. Hutsal, O. Zernetska, M. Ozhevan, O. Kuchmiy, Y. Konstantynova, O. Lytvynenko, A. Lutsenko, I.Misiuk, N. Musienko, Y. Makarenko, O. Rozumna, T. Peresunko, I. Piskorska, O. Potiekhina, M. Protsiuk, H. Pocheptsov, I.Sukhorolska, O. Tyshchenko-Tyshkovets, N. Serbina, Y. Turchyn etc.

Presentation of the main research outcomes

Nowadays countries that are aware of their national goals exert all necessary efforts and invest significant funds to promote their cultural diplomacy. Cultural diplomacy as a “soft power” tool is recognized as an important direction of state policy in the terms of addressing issues of national security, creating a positive international image and enhancement of intercultural dialogue.

France is deeply experienced in implementing cultural diplomacy, where back in XVII-XVIII centuries French ambassadors began to perform cultural functions, and in 1883 a non-governmental public association Alliance Frangaise was established in order to popularize the French language and culture abroad. The first French institutions in European states were founded at the beginning of the XX century. French political leaders had always understood the importance of cultural components in foreign policy and allocated a significant part of public funds to cultural diplomacy. With Charles de Gaulle coming to power, cultural diplomacy gained a new meaning and was seen as a tool of restoring the former greatness of the French Republic.

Unlike France, for Great Britain cultural diplomacy was not a foreign policy priority until the 1940s, as the status of a “colonial empire” determined the dominant position of British culture and the English language in Asian and African states. The British Council was established in 1934 with the view to counter fascist propaganda in Europe. The outbreak of the Cold War and the loss of “the colonial empire” status prompted Great Britain to seek new strategies of foreign policy, namely in the field of culture, which were aimed at providing the state an opportunity to remain an influential global political actor. Moreover, the implementation of foreign cultural policy fostered the cultural consolidation of the nation, since the people of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland considered themselves to be separate nations, not identical to the English one.

Modern peculiarities of German cultural diplomacy started developing after the Second World War, when the governments of both West and East Germany faced the problem of minimizing negative associations and identifications of everything German with Nazism, the Holocaust, genocide, intolerance to “others” and so on. That's why German cultural diplomacy was aimed at creating the image of “normality”, in contrast to France, for example, which focused on formation of the image of “national greatness”. German cultural diplomacy in the 1950s was also a part of indirect support for German export (“Learn German, Buy German”). After the unification of Germany in 1989, international cultural policy contributed to the creation of a new image of the unitary developed state as a driving force of the European integration. International cultural policy facilitated the accession to the EU of Central and Eastern European states, such as Poland.

The impetus for the development of cultural policy in Ukraine was the Revolution of Dignity and resistance to Russian aggression. It is cultural diplomacy that provides the necessary instruments not only for international presentation of Ukraine, creating the image of a modern country that has a lot to offer to the world, but also for self-identification and consolidation of the Ukrainians. In the case of Ukraine, it is crucial to counter a hybrid information war and hostile propaganda in different regions of the world, combating negative stereotypes. Therefore, the director of the Ukrainian Institute V. Sheyko called cultural diplomacy an important factor of national and information security, the opportunity of dialogue with the world as equals, a powerful tool for creating positive narratives about Ukraine in the international information field, a way to fight with negativity, prejudice and disinformation [Sheyko, 2020].

The notion of international cultural policy took on its increasing importance at the end of the XX century due to the promulgation of official concepts of international cultural policy in Germany and Russia. The appearance of these documents necessitated the development of theoretical foundations for this issue and became an incentive to elaborate concepts of international cultural policy in other states. Apart from that, cultural diplomacy was viewed as a part of the “soft power” policy, a concept which was grounded by American political scientist Joseph Nye. According to him “soft power” is a capability of a state to shape the preferences of other countries, based on three main components: the culture of the country, its political values and foreign policy.

The neoliberal concept of “soft power” states that transfer of social behavior, rules of international law from one country to another can harmonize international relations or make them more predictable. Proponents of constructivism emphasize that each state has its own perception of the world, different from other cultures and values, and this diversity is the basis for creating a stable peace and relations. The main prerequisite is to attempt to understand “others” through public diplomacy programs without denying their rights to have own identity. Thus, for constructivists cultural diplomacy is a means of understanding “other” cultures that will bring about the establishment of more humane relations between people and states. It is worth mentioning that realists see cultural diplomacy as a purely governmental instrument designed to address national security issues and influence the behavior of foreign authorities.

Therefore, cultural diplomacy as a form of “soft power” is a key component of international relations toolkit. It provides the opportunity to persuade through culture, values and ideas as opposed to “hard power” characterized by coercion with the help of military or economic pressure. “Cultural policy is an exquisite tandem of art and politics”, notes journalist, art expert and art manager Valentyna Klymenko [Klymenko, 2019].

The concepts of public and cultural diplomacy are related, since the nation reveals its identity to the world, presents its values and ideas through culture. Certain agencies of foreign affairs, for example in the USA, New Zealand, Canada, Great Britain, Australia and Japan, carry out their cultural diplomatic activity within the scope of public diplomacy. That is exactly why cultural diplomacy is frequently viewed as a part of public diplomacy. Thus, leading British expert in the field of public diplomacy Nicholas Cull believes that cultural diplomacy is one of the areas of public diplomacy, focused on establishing relations between a state and foreign public in the realm of culture. However, cultural diplomacy cannot be equated with public diplomacy, since the latter encompasses a wider range of tools, namely in the information sphere.

The term “cultural diplomacy” is believed to have been enshrined into a scientific discourse by American researcher F. Barghoorn in the 1960s, who defined it as “the manipulation of cultural materials and personnel for propaganda purposes”, referring to the propaganda policy of the USSR [Barghoorn, 1960]. The definition formulated by American political scientist Milton K. Cummings became even more widespread, according to which cultural diplomacy is the exchange of ideas, information, values, traditions and other aspects of culture that can foster improvement of mutual understanding among peoples. However, American scholar F. Taylor believes cultural diplomacy to be, a political activity that serves national interests “under the guise of culture”. He divides key elements of soft power into long-term (cultural and educational exchanges as well as building mutual trust) and short-term (communicating information through media). Cultural diplomacy serves not only as a bridge between countries and civilizations, but also as a platform for effective interactions between civil society, public sector and business.

In modern international relations the term “cultural diplomacy” is used by France, Poland, Ukraine and many others as a synonym for foreign cultural policy of states. Australia, the Netherlands and Sweden employ “international cultural policy”, and Great Britain, Australia, Canada and Singapore apply “international cultural relations” that symbolize international cultural interactions. In American practice cultural diplomacy is often equated with the public one, as it allows to promote interests of the state on the international arena by means of culture. Some countries, such as China, use the term “people's diplomacy” which means a large-scale nongovernmental interaction.

According to the Ukrainian Diplomatic Encyclopedia, cultural diplomacy is a foreign cultural policy (policy of culture) aimed at the perseverance of national culture, the defense of national and cultural identity in international cooperation, or the use of various factors of culture, art and education in order to protect and promote national interests on the international arena [Ukrainian diplomatic encyclopedia, 2013, p. 108].

In our opinion, the terms “cultural diplomacy” and “foreign cultural policy” are close in meaning, however not identical. The former is more appropriate for such types of cultural interactions when a greater influence of governmental bodies, including foreign-policy agencies and budget financing, is observed. The latter conveys closer interactions with non-governmental bodies and organizations, the employment of private funding. That is exactly the term used by the European Institutions to describe cultural activities [Forum of Cultural Diplomacy, 2020].

Cultural diplomacy is a special kind of diplomatic activity related to the use of culture as an object and means of achieving the main goals of foreign policy, creating a positive image of the country, promoting the culture and language of its peoples. It is both the sphere of diplomatic service aimed at the use of culture as an object and tool of attaining the goals of foreign policy, as well as a sphere of intercultural dialogue as a means of social and cultural development of a state. Thus, cultural diplomacy today performs two important and interrelated diplomatic and social functions in international relations. According to Ukrainian expert O. Rozumna, one can distinguish external and internal aspects of cultural diplomacy: the former involves ensuring the image and success of international relations, the latter - changing the paradigm of culture and cultural policy, including the content and quality of cultural product [Rozumna, 2016, p. 4].

The active usage of methods and forms of cultural diplomacy contributes to the establishment of an attractive image of the state as well as knowledge about it, that the representatives of other nations and communities have. Cultural diplomacy can also serve as a tool to form tolerance and mutual respect in modern world while creating the image of the state. Ukrainian scholar N. Rzhevska believes that the dissemination of information fosters the understanding of ideals and values of the representatives of other cultures, helps to shape a broader and unbiased worldview, that allows to treat the representatives of other countries without prejudice [Rzhevska, 2014].

Thus, cultural diplomacy is a subject of research and the reality of policy of intercultural cooperation, that has national peculiarities and implementation mechanisms and is used as a tool of intergovernmental cooperation or “soft power”, with the view to ensuring national interests at the global, regional and national levels. Nowadays cultural ties are not seen as complements to political and economic ones, but rather as independent factors, aimed at achieving state interests in foreign policy. Former director of the Polish Institute in Ukraine and the USA Y. Onuch points out that diplomacy is a constituent part of culture, not vise versa, which is often forgotten by professional diplomats and even more often by decision-makers [Onuch, 2015].

The main spheres of implementation of cultural diplomacy are culture, language and science, with the first two being closely related, since the language is a channel of information transmission and spread of culture, which contains the cultural code of the nation. Therefore, cooperation in the realm of science is directly connected to the stratum of development of cultural relations between countries, the due level of which guarantees more fruitful and scientific collaboration. Cultural diplomacy fosters the dissemination of information about the state, creation of its favorable image, improvement of bilateral relations with the host country, spread of political influence in those counties, as well as economic development of the state and its access to new markets.

Different counties choose divers models of cultural diplomacy, which is determined by various factors, including the duration of the use of this form of interstate cooperation. Cultural diplomacy of democratic countries will differ from non-democratic, well-developed states, from those with transitional economy, big ones from small. There are the following models of cultural diplomacy according to the form of organization: French, British, German. Also Italian, American and Asian ones can be emphasized.

French cultural diplomacy is characterized by strict centralization, direct control of the state and high levels of public funding. In 2011 the French Institute was established that became the only provider of the French cultural events abroad. Cultural diplomacy is an integral part of French foreign policy, with the head of the embassy overseeing the activities performed by cultural institutes at the local level. One of the main priorities of French diplomacy is the popularization of the language, particularly the widespread support of the Francophonie. The Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs plays a key role in promoting French cinematography and literature overseas. The know-how of France are audiovisual attaches (there are approximately 30 of them in 92 countries) - a network of agents working on implementation of audiovisual policy abroad, namely in the spheres of cinematography, video games, music, web content etc. They also facilitate the grant of access of French private and public mass media to local markets. The French model of cultural diplomacy is implemented on the basis of UNESCO, the Council of Europe, the European Union and bilateral relations; it envisages a priority role of the state while translating it into life, unlike the Anglo- Saxon and German models, where a large share of the functions concerning foreign cultural activities are taken over by the private sector. The French model of cultural diplomacy has both advantages and disadvantages. The latter include low involvement of the private sector in the funding of international cultural projects and excessive bureaucratization. The advantage of centralized institutions working with cultural diplomacy in France is the opportunity it gives to the Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs to devise the long-term strategy and priorities of cultural diplomacy, necessary in the context of increasing competition on the international stage in the field of culture.

The British model is based on the principle of indirect control (the so-called principle of “an outstretched arm”), where intercultural cooperation is completely or partially funded by the government, usually the Foreign Office, while administrative and coordinating responsibility for implementation is delegated to non-governmental institutions (the British Council, for instance). The success

Institute), Britain (British Council), Italy (Instituto Dante Alighieri), Spain (Cervantes Institute), China (Confucius Institute), that position themselves as the countries with rich cultural heritage. Foreign departments of the Institutes of cultural diplomacy have advantages of understanding the characteristics of the foreign audience, its preferences, national place in modern world culture. The Institutes of culture create a network of language courses and libraries, organize festivals and exhibitions, launch cultural projects, promote education and science in the state of accreditation.

The central Institution of Ukrainian cultural diplomacy is the Ukrainian Institute that was founded in 2017 and works under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It is a state Institution which represents Ukrainian culture in the world and creates a positive image of Ukraine abroad. The mission of the Ukrainian Institute is the following: “promoting the image of Ukraine as an international and domestic actor by means of cultural diplomacy”. The Institute and such agencies as the Ukrainian Cultural Foundation, Ukrainian Book Institute and Ukrainian State Agency, established in 2010s, became tools of cultural diplomacy both at the national and international levels.

At the same time effective cultural diplomacy is impossible without employing a cultural material of a certain number and quality. Key elements of modern cultural diplomacy are popular artistic culture, higher education, science, sport, tourism, and journalism. Diplomats need to rely on the symbols that are well of British cultural diplomacy is related to the spread and increasing of popularity of the English language, the prestige of British education and the important role of Great Britain in the world history and culture.

The German decentralized model of organization is based on the one hand, on the relative control of the state and to some extent on the centralization of international cultural activities, and on the other - on the principle of disassociation from the authorities, which is a characteristic feature of the federal political system of Germany. The Federal Foreign Office of Germany formulates official guidelines of the policy of intercultural cooperation and inserts them into bilateral agreements, while the practical implementation of foreign cultural strategy is the responsibility of the so-called partner organizations, the most prominent of which are the Goethe- Institute, German Academic Exchange Service, Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, Institute for Foreign Cultural Relations, Deutsche Welle, Central Agency for German Schools Abroad.

The peculiarities of German foreign cultural policy are the activities of German non- governemntal political foundations, the six largest of which are Friedrich Ebert, Friedrich Naumann, Konrad Adenauer, Hans Seidel, Heinrich Boll and Rosa Luxemburg. They are associated with various political parties and significantly provide the state with services to promote German culture. Due to the status of non-governmental organizations, they cannot be accused of interfering in the domestic affairs of other countries, so they may work with the public, where formal contacts are not always possible. The German model is considered to be more liberal, as cultural centers have greater autonomy, and the diplomatic mission performs the function of supervision (mentoring).

According to the practice of US foreign policy cultural diplomacy is inseparable from public diplomacy. There has never existed the Ministry of Culture in the United States, and cultural activities are carried out independently from the state. At the same time, American popular culture, especially Hollywood, is an important part of the US “soft power”. The country does not have any specific foreign agencies to work purely with cultural diplomacy. The American foreign cultural policy is conducted by embassies and funded by the Department of State.

The main feature of Italian public diplomacy is diplomacy of the diaspora. Italian communities are formed in foreign countries on the basis of cultural and ethnical kinship, and they permanently keep contact with each other and Italy. The most important task of these communities is to inform and familiarize emigrants and their descendants, as well as the citizens of the host state, with the peculiarities of modern Italian culture. The Directorate General for Italian Citizens Abroad and Migration Policies is the key institution coordinating this process.

In 2011 the Directorate General for Cultural and Economic Promotion and Innovation was established in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Italy, the main focus of which is to promote culture and economics of the country. The new changes concerned the increasing role of cultural diplomacy in the foreign policy of Italy. The concept of cultural and economic promotion encompasses all the institutions of the state: industrial, bureaucratic, economic, scientific, technological, cultural, designed to cooperate in the field of international relations. Thus, a key feature of the Italian model is the connection between culture, politics and economics.

Austria is one of a few European countries where culture is funded by the state, and expenditures on it exceed those on defense. Cultural policy is a basic component of the formation of Austrian identity and an important factor of its international perception. A foreign policy image of modern Austria is “a small country with great culture”.

Different states have common objectives in the sphere of cultural diplomacy, although set themselves specific tasks. For example, Austria, Germany, Italy and Great Britain seek to redesign their image through culture, art, education and cultural exchanges. China, for instance, operates in the realm of culture in Europe to establish credible partnership ties and to smooth over debates of the domestic issues of the state (the gravest of which are violations of human rights).

A significant element of Russian cultural diplomacy are measures taken in order to support “compatriots” abroad, protect their rights and interests in host countries. Cultural diplomacy gradually transformed into a tool of propaganda in foreign policy. The government tries to counteract reduction of the use and status of the Russian language in post-Soviet countries, limitation of influence of the Orthodox Church, especially the Moscow Patriarchate. By the decree of the President of the Russian Federation of June 21, 2007, the Russian Peace Foundation was established to promote the ideology of Russian culture abroad. It is important to note that such an approach of propaganda in cultural diplomacy entails distrust of those to whom it is addressed, and according to J. Nay destroys “soft power” of the state.

Cultural diplomacy has a different status in the system of foreign policy of each state. In France, Germany and Austria, for example, it constitutes a historically traditional and efficient instrument of foreign affairs; the USA views it as a part of public diplomacy, and in Russia it is funded on the leftover principle and is focused on post-Soviet states.

China is actively developing its concept of cultural policy and is dramatically strengthening its positions on the international stage. Confucius Institutes are usually located on the territories of partner universities of the Chinese ones. Their main programs are focused on language and art, although they increasingly include seminars and lectures on modern history and policy of China. Criticism of the Institutes is connected to their leaders efforts to avoid such controversial topics as human rights violations in China, Tibet and Taiwan. Another concern is related to inappropriate influence on education and research, industrial and military espionage, as well as the surveillance of the Chinese abroad. Some universities, where the Confucius Institutes were established, even decided to terminate contracts with them. During the years 2010-2020 many establishments were closed in the USA, Canada, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Sweden and Japan.

The Republic of Korea is expanding the net of its own cultural centers as a key component of the strategy of national branding. India also has ambitious programs on the enlargement of its cultural diplomacy net, especially in neighboring countries. Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia and other Asian states reconsider their concepts of cultural diplomacy as well. Nowadays Turkey, Brazil, South Africa and other countries show a growing interest in this notion.

The embassies' activities in the sphere of cultural diplomacy are aimed at facilitation of mutual understanding and development of friendly relations among nations. Cultural attachds nowadays must be able to engage with the public. Among their tasks are generalization and analysis of cultural events in the receiving state, preparation of cultural exchanges, supervision of cultural events of the native country and their media coverage. Such attachds prepare summaries of the ambassador's speeches on the events of cultural nature, maintain permanent contacts with local cultural figures etc. Sometimes the appointment of a prominent person in the field of culture for the position of cultural attachds is practiced, however in such cases it is customary to nominate a competent administrator as their assistant within the mission. For example, in October 2015, famous Ukrainian writer and journalist Irena Karpa was appointed as the First Secretary of the Ukrainian Embassy in France on cultural matters [The Ukrainian singer became the first secretary of the Embassy of Ukraine, 2014].

Nowadays the forms of cultural diplomacy are forums, festivals, tours, exhibitions, fairs, days of national language and culture, competitions, contests, congresses, conferences, research and education exchange programs, scholarships and grants, work of foundations, non-governmental organizations, etc. The history of cultural diplomacy includes such unique forms as “ping-pong diplomacy” and “panda diplomacy”.

In 2002 Thailand and in 2012 the USA launched “culinary diplomacy for partnership”. Under the program more than 80 American cooks travelled abroad to popularize American cuisine, forming the “American Chef Corps”. Italy pays a considerable attention to gastrodiplomacy that is a kind of cultural diplomacy. Italians encourage tourists to visit small towns throughout the country by organizing festivities and traditional celebrations dedicated to peculiar local goods. In 2020 the Ukrainian Institute, together with the academic information project “izhakultura” (“food&culture”) and the “izhak” Publishing House specializing in the books on the history of Ukrainian gastronomy, prepared a publication about Ukrainian culinary diplomacy as a key instrument of the cultural one. In the same year within the framework of the social network diplomacy of the Embassy of Ukraine to Japan, Ukrainian cuisine was recognized as the most popular topic by the Japanese audience. [Matyash, 2021, p. 232]

The Institutes of cultural diplomacy with their foreign branches, that help to form a positive attitude towards the accrediting state, became diplomatic instruments. Effective development of the Institution of cultural diplomacy can be observed in the practice of Germany (Goethe Institute), France (French -known by international community in order to evoke public interest with the cultural activities. It is getting increasingly difficult to attract foreigners' attention to the national culture in the context of globalization of culture and massive flows of information. The public expects to see cultural production with certain characteristics: it must be bright, clear, relevant and high-tech. Unless the national culture offers interesting material, cultural diplomacy of the state will be ineffective. In such a case diplomats can only count on informing foreign society about the very existence of national culture.

Almost all Europeans cultural institutions transmit to the host country advanced social ideas of their states, which accordingly affect the mutual interest in modern culture. Usually, cultural departments in diplomatic missions prioritize one or another form of art which they support. For instance, the Czech Center in Kyiv declares the support of young alternative music as a special sphere of its activity.

Japan has a negative experience of promoting national culture among unprepared and uninterested foreign public. Thus, in the early 80s the Japanese authorities launched an active promotion of its traditional culture (Kabuki theater, floral techniques of ikebana, sumo wrestling etc.) in foreign countries with the aim to impress the world with its uniqueness and centuries-old traditions. Some growth of interest to Japan did occur, however it had a limited coverage and quickly disappeared. In the 2000s Japanese diplomats focused on modern popular models (manga comics, anime cartoons, kawaii clothing) in order to gradually bring the foreign audience to realization of the outstanding depth of Japanese culture.

Literary projects that stimulate book publishing and reading are widely spread among the cultural ones. Translation projects constitute a priority in supporting Institutions of cultural diplomacy, as translation itself is a kind of a “bridge” between cultures that allows their representatives to understand each other. In 2020 the Ukrainian Book Institute and the Ukrainian Institute established the Drahoman Prize to award foreign experts who translate from Ukrainian into other languages of the world. In the same year, the Ukrainian Institute launched “Translate Ukraine” - a program of support of translation for foreign publishers.

Nowadays the instruments and scope of activities of cultural diplomacy institutes are expanding. Thus, at the beginning of the XXI century the intercultural dialogue acquires topicality, especially on the basis of universal and regional international organizations. Cultural programs on national and multilateral levels are aimed at addressing such controversial questions as social cohesion, problems of inequality, discrimination of national minorities and immigrants, cultural dimension of interfaith issues. The appeal to the problems of environmental protection and hazards of climate change has become a new trend in cultural diplomacy. For example, the Goethe Institute, the British Council, and the Danish Cultural Institute have developed pertinent course of cultural diplomacy.

There is a tendency of rapid growth in the use of Internet resources in cultural activity, especially during the coronavirus pandemic. Such activities of Institutes of cultural diplomacy and embassies as online-events, interaction with mass media, TV and radio companies, and diplomacy through social platforms and networks are widely used. Therefore, the Internet is predominantly used as a tool to expand marketing functions or information activities.

The driving force and the key to implementation of cultural diplomacy are non-governmental actors, namely civil society, expatriate national groups, academic communities, businessmen, journalists, sportsmen. The public sector does not serve as a generator of ideas but as an establishment providing means for their implementation. Nowadays a growing interest to cultural diplomacy is demonstrated by individual cities and regions, particularly, if they position themselves as special administrative units of the state. For instance, Catalonia seeks to expand its own cultural diplomacy by outlining goals identical to those of some countries.

Strengthening of cooperation between cultural institutions is a new trend in cultural diplomacy. Thus, in 2006 the amalgamation of the European Union National Institutes for Culture was established. 36 European cultural institutes from 27 member-states comprise the network. In 2020 the topic “Cultural Relations and Covid-19” was the most relevant among the activities of the EUNIC. This network's project “House of Europe in Ukraine”, supported by the EU and headed by Goethe Institute, created 4 new grant patterns to finance Ukrainian culture during the pandemic, particularly, with the view to direct creativity to the digital sphere.

Conclusion

Thus, new areas of cultural diplomacy encompass more and more countries, regions, cities, and communities. At the same time, there is a transition to multilateral cooperation in cultural diplomacy; the content of programs is acquiring a more thematic nature and is supplemented with broader goals; the role of the Internet is growing which allows to communicate with public in a more interactive way, as well as to facilitate a greater public involvement while working in the realm of cultural diplomacy.

Nowadays cultural diplomacy is one of the effective and significant means of implementation of the foreign policy strategy of any state that claims to play a significant role in the system of modern international relations. In the case of diplomatic activity, it fosters the use of the instruments of cultural influence to achieve interstate understanding, peace and stability, as well as to promote its national interests on the international arena through overcoming cultural barriers.

References

1. Barghoorn F.C. The Soviet Cultural Offensive. The role of Cultural Diplomacy in Soviet Foreign Policy. Princeton, 1960.

2. Cummings M.C. Cultural Diplomacy and the United States Government: a Survey. Center for Arts and Culture, 2003. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: http://www.culturalpolicy.org.

3. Cull Nicholas J. Public Diplomacy: Lessons from the Past. FIGUEROA PRESS, LA, 2009 // [Electronic resource]. Access mode: http://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/publications/perspectives/CPDPerspectivesLessons.pdf

4. Nye Joseph S., Jr. Public Diplomacy and Soft Power. // The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 2008

5. Глібова С. О. Культурна дипломатія Італії [Glebova S. Cultural diplomacy of Italy] // Науковий вісник Дипломатичної академії України. Випуск 23. Зовнішня політика і дипломатія: традиції, тренди, досвід. Частина ІІ. Серія «Політичні науки» / За заг. ред. В. Г. Ціватого, Н. О. Татаренко. Київ, 2016. с. 88- 95.

6. Клименко В. Культурна дипломатія: елегантний тандем мистецтва і політики. [Klymenko V. Cultural diplomacy: an elegant tandem of art and politics] // [Electronic resource]. Access mode: https://www.culturepartnership.eu/ua/article/cultural-diplomacy

7. Культурна дипломатія: навч. посібник / за заг. ред. І.Б. Матяш, В.М. Матвієнка. [Cultural diplomacy: textbook manual / for general ed. I.B. Matyash, V.M. Matvienko]; Інститут міжнародних відносин КНУ імені Тараса Шевченка; Наукове товариство історії дипломатії та міжнародних відносин. Київ: ДП «ГДІП», 2021 - 252 с.

8. Міжнародний форум культурної дипломатії. [International Forum of Cultural Diplomacy] // [Electronic resource]. Access mode: https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?v=1256758961369765&ref=watch_permalink

9. Най Дж. Американская «мягкая сила» в эпоху Трампа. [Nai J. American «soft power» in the Trump era ]. [Electronic resource]. // Access mode: https://m.day.kyiv.ua/ru/article/mirovye- diskussii/amerikanskaya-myagkaya-sila-v-epohu-trampa

10. Онух Є.: «Культурна дипломатія -- це продаж іміджу країни засобами культури». [Onuch J.: «Cultural diplomacy is the sale of the country's image by means of culture»] // [Electronic resource]. Access mode: https://lb.ua/culture/2015/11/25/321735_iezhi_onuh_kulturna_diplomatiya_tse.html

11. Політика культурної дипломатії: стратегічні пріоритети для України: зб. наук. експерт. матеріалів / за заг. ред. О. П. Розумної,..Т. В. Черненко. [The policy of cultural diplomacy: strategic priorities for Ukraine: coll. scientific expert materials / for general. ed. O.P. Rozumna,. T. V. Chernenko] - К.: НІСД, 2016. 92 с. K.: NISD, 2016. 92 p.]. // [Electronic resource]. Access mode: https://niss.gov.ua/sites/default/files/2016-10/kult_dyp-cd7f1.pdf

12. Ржевська Н. Ф. Культурна дипломатія України: сучасний стан та перспективи / Н.Ф. Ржевська. [Rzhevska N.F. Cultural diplomacy of Ukraine: current state and prospects / N.F. Rzhevska]. // [Electronic resource]. Access mode: http://journals.iir.kiev.ua/index.php/pol_n/article/view/3377

13. Українська дипломатична енциклопедія: у п'яти томах. Т. 2 / Голова редкол. Д.В Табачник. [Ukrainian diplomatic encyclopedia: in five volumes. Vol. 2 / Editor-in-Chief. DV Tabachnyk]- Харків: ФОЛІО, 2013. 494 с.

14. Українська співачка стала першим секретарем посольства України. [ The Ukrainian singer became the first secretary of the Embassy of Ukraine] // Access mode: [Electronic resource]. https://lb.ua/culture/2015/10/14/318442_karpa_vozglavila_kulturniy_tsentr.html

15. Шейко В. Бюджетне обнулення: українська культурна дипломатія на порозі колапсу [Sheyko V. Budget zeroing: Ukrainian cultural diplomacy on the verge of collapse]. [Electronic resource]. // Access mode: https://lb.ua/culture/2020/03/31/454152_byudzhetne_obnulennya_ukrainska.html

16. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: https://houseofeurope.org.ua/en

17. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: https://ui.org.ua/drahoman-prize

18. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: https://ui.org.ua/mission/

Размещено на Allbest.ru