Early last Thursday morning I joined other students of cultural policy and international relations to hear a panel discussion on the topic of cultural diplomacy. The panel, entitled “Culture as a tool: Diplomacy and International Exchange in the 21st Century” was co-presented by NYU’s John Brademas Center for the Study of Congress and the Wagner School’s Student Network Exploring Arts and Culture (SNEAC). Moderated by Frank Hodsoll, CEO of the Resource Center for Cultural Engagement and former chairmen of the NEA, the panel brought together representatives from UNESCO, The Asia Society, and the Instituto Cervantes in New York. The result was a series of interesting presentations that addressed some of the ways in which culture is being understood and engaged as a vehicle for larger objectives: fighting terrorism worldwide, promoting the foreign policy agendas, building grassroots understanding and dialogue among different cultures; and strengthening cultural identities and social cohesion.
I learned a great deal about how culture is being framed and funded in service of diplomacy or cultural understanding in different settings. Hodsell reminded us of America’s dismal record of supporting cultural on any front. In terms of “cultural engagement” (this seems to be the new catchphrase for cultural diplomacy) in foreign policy, he said, the Department of State is doing very little and what it is doing relies mostly on projecting the American image outward. Interestingly (and frighteningly for some) the Department of Defense has invested heavily in public diplomacy and is using culture as a way to build a better understanding of “other” cultures’ views. Towards the end of his talk, Hodsell alluded to the important ways in which culture leads to social change, citing Hugh Masekela’s music in Apartheid South Africa. In my experience, however, government support when culture workers use creativity to challenge injustice, is insufficient.
