Cultural Diplomacy and Conflict Resolution Introduction In his poem, The Second Coming (1919), William Butler Yeats captured the moment we are now experiencing: Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity. As we see the deterioration of the institutions created and fostered after the Second World War to create a climate in which peace and prosperity could flourish in Europe and beyond, it is important to understand the role played by diplomacy in securing the stability and strengthening the shared values of freedom and democracy that have marked this era for the nations of the world. It is most instructive to read the Inaugural Address of President John F. Kennedy, in which he encouraged Americans not only to do good things for their own country, but to do good things in the world. The creation of the Peace Corps is an example of the kind of spirit that put young American volunteers into some of the poorest nations in an effort to improve the standard of living for people around the globe. We knew we were leaders; we knew that we had many political and economic and social advantages. There was an impetus to share this wealth. Generosity, not greed, was the motivation of that generation. Of course, this did not begin with Kennedy. It was preceded by the Marshall Plan, one of the only times in history that the conqueror decided to rebuild the country of the vanquished foe. Despite the atrocities committed by the Nazi régime, it was understood that the wiser course would be the reconstruction of a defeated Germany with the intention of creating a vibrant democracy. This is indeed one of the greatest success stories of the United States. In strongly supporting the creation of the European Union and participating in the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance, the United States has demonstrated its ability to lead both during the Cold War and in the decades to follow. Military might, hard power, was a significant factor, but the soft power of diplomacy was an essential element in spreading a belief in the rule of law as set forth in our Constitution. As a country bound by these laws, we were well positioned to inspire imitation. 1 American diplomats are tasked with reporting on the political climate and the economic prospects of the countries in which they serve. They do the groundwork for the negotiation of treaties, and prepare the papers on trade that will influence relations with our allies. Much of this is accomplished by highly skilled professionals working with their foreign counterparts behind closed doors. These functions are essentially well understood if not always sufficiently appreciated. The role of public and cultural diplomacy, our outreach to ordinary citizens, as well as influential élites, is less well understood. Public diplomacy includes the work of press officers who communicate current policy to audiences abroad. Good press officers also help to shape policy by providing Washington with insights into the local media culture and information about what issues are at the forefront. The other branch of public diplomacy, cultural diplomacy, is perhaps more amorphous. The cultural officer at an embassy or consulate should be in touch with a wide range of academics, journalists, leaders of non-governmental organizations and artists, as well as his or her counterparts in the ministries. Cultural officers oversee our most important exchange programs such as Fulbright, but they also organize artistic presentations intended to have an impact beyond language. Painting and photography exhibitions, music and dance performances touch hearts as well as minds, often in a way that is subliminal. In a world in which Yeats wrote that “the center cannot hold” and “the worst/Are full of passionate intensity,” we are witnessing the deterioration of diplomacy. North Korea is demonstrating its nuclear potential; Russia has defied international law in the acquisition of Crimea and its intrusion into Ukraine. The United States is experiencing the erosion of its power in the South China Sea; NATO has been weakened; the European Union is about to lose the U.K. There has been a global increase of populist, nationalist sentiment; the United States has turned inward and forfeited its leadership role. Increasingly, the political debate is not based on conservative vs. socialist values, but on internationalism vs. isolationism. At a time when multi- lateral institutions should be strengthened, they are in danger of collapse. Catalonia wishes to leave Spain; Lombardy and Venice demand greater autonomy in Italy; significant numbers of people in the wealthy blue state of California want to declare independence. Indeed, we are “Turning and turning in the widening gyre,” as things spin out of control. There are powerful forces in favor of anarchy, the destruction of the very fabric of our society. This fragmentation, if not reversed, is a harbinger of the decline of the West. At the same time, those who witnessed the Chinese Congress saw an ancient civilization rising out of isolation in a display of pomp and circumstance worthy of the British Empire at its peak. It is characterized by unity of purpose, if not intellectual freedom. During the Cold War, we witnessed a world divided between two super powers, reflective of the yin and yang, the negative and positive forces 2 evident in science and nature. In this age of globalization, it is impossible to so divide the world neatly into spheres of influence. Nostalgia for a mythic past is nothing more than a retreat from the current reality. Countries are no longer homogeneous and self-sufficient. Global integration is essential for the future peace and stability of the world. When Mustafa Kemal founded modern Turkey, transforming the defeated Ottoman Empire into a modern state, he famously wished for “peace at home, peace abroad.” Cataclysmic events abroad do impact on Europe and North America. Wars, starvation and epidemics sparked by ethnic specificity and scarcity of resources resulting from rapid population growth and climate change, have prompted a dramatic increase in refugees and asylum seekers wishing to escape indescribably dismal conditions. Only investment in these troubled regions, helping these populations to be self-sufficient, will stem the tide and enable these people to make their own societies places in which they wish to remain. Good diplomats are people who have spent years acquiring the languages and cultural knowledge essential to functioning effectively around the world. Their reporting can provide Washington not only with an accurate picture of conditions on the ground, but also an understanding of the root causes for local conflicts. Public and cultural diplomats are often at the forefront of the effort to communicate with local audiences. Because their mandate is to get messages across, they often have unique understanding of the ways in which such messages will be received. It is they who work most closely with the local academics who instruct future leaders and the journalists who shape opinion. This expertise cannot be acquired overnight, nor can it be replicated by those lacking on the ground experience. There is a general perception that diplomacy is all “cocktails and laughter.” In the popular imagination, diplomats are drinking champagne at lavish receptions, not riding in jeeps on dirt roads, or living in trailers. While there are elements of the former among those serving in the wealthiest countries, the latter experience, or something akin, is far more common. Aside from networking at receptions, our diplomats working amongst our most powerful allies are holding the transatlantic and transpacific partnerships together by finding points of agreement on global policy and making necessary compromises. Those at the other end of the spectrum, diplomats serving in remote and underdeveloped places, experience considerable hardship in terms of security threats, devastating pollution, and horrific epidemics. During the Cold War, there was considerable political consensus in the United States on foreign policy issues. The importance of diplomacy, reinforced by a powerful military, was unquestioned. Funding for press, academic and cultural programs was readily endorsed by Congress. There was 3 a general agreement that the justification given by Senator Fulbright for the exchange program he initiated, the effort to seek “mutual understanding,” was worthy of support. When our scholars and students have the opportunity to live among others in a foreign land, they are unlikely to demonize the foreigner. By the same token, when their counterparts have a chance to spend a year or two in the United States, they are likely to make lasting friendships, establish professional networks, and generally be disinclined to promote anti-American sentiment upon their return to their home countries. One of the chief goals of all diplomacy is prevention of violent conflict and the promotion of world peace and stability. Foreign service officers working in the political sphere may do so by negotiating treaties that define disputed land or sea boundaries. The ongoing discussions about a final settlement between Israelis and Palestinians, or the disagreements between Greece and Turkey about their respective rights to the Aegean Sea, for example. In the economic sphere, foreign service officers are charged not only with working on mutually beneficial investment and trade agreements, but also coping with global environmental challenges and epidemics. They are dealing mainly with their counterparts in the foreign and economic ministries. Foreign service officers working the field of public diplomacy support these efforts through their direct contact with those who form opinion, as well as the general public. While press officers may be confined to communicating official government policy, they have an extraordinary ability to reach entire populations via television, radio and social media.