The Role of Culture in Foreign Affairs: Towards a European Soft Power

http://www.eurunion.org/eu/images/stories/rivasseau-culture-sais-6-15-11.doc
The Role of Culture in Foreign Affairs:

Towards a European Soft Power

Speech by

François Rivasseau

Minister-Counselor, Deputy Head of Delegation

European Union Delegation to the United States

at the

Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies,

Johns Hopkins University,

EU Center of Excellence

Washington D.C.

June 9, 2011

Check Against Delivery

THE ROLE OF CULTURE IN FOREIGN AFFAIRS: TOWARDS A EUROPEAN SOFT POWER

Culture has always been an essential element of national diplomacy--it is the strongest symbol of national identity. Diplomacies of countries enjoying a strong cultural identity have always, directly or indirectly, through public or private means, used this identity as a way of presenting themselves abroad for rallying support and friendship, attracting interest and raising profiles. Numerous studies conducted over many years strongly suggest that the promotion of cultural values and achievements is the most cost efficient way of being recognized and acquiring influence in international relations. Obviously, culture is not a concept that can be used in isolation from other elements of a foreign relations network. But everybody knows how much the US image and international prestige owes to Hollywood, everybody knows that the French investment in cultural diplomacy is one of the reasons that allows France to "box above its weight in the international area" as suggested by the US some years ago.

With the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty and the new impetus given to European integration, with the affirmation of a more coherent external representation of the European Union abroad and in Brussels, it is logical that observers and diplomats ask themselves: what is the cultural dimension of the present and future European diplomacy?

1. CULTURE HAS ALWAYS BEEN AT THE HEART OF EUROPEAN UNION ACTION.

1.1. European cultural diplomacy takes many forms:

1.1.1. As a party to the UNESCO Convention on the Protection and the Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expression, the European Union includes a cultural dimension in our relations with non – EU countries and regions. The European Agenda for Culture serves as a common framework for cultural policy, and is designed to foster intercultural dialogue, to promote culture as a catalyst for creativity in the framework of growth and jobs, to develop a new and more active cultural role for Europe in international relations, and to integrate the cultural dimension as a vital element in our dealings with partner countries and regions.

1.1.2. In the developing world, we support a great variety of cultural programs. Some projects, such as one in Elmina and Old Accra, Ghana, encourage the preservation and restoration of heritage sites: the European Commission provided nearly €2 million to support that project. Others, like the Festival on the Niger in Mali, develop sustainable cultural tourism. In the Middle East, the EU has invested nearly €150,000 in partnerships with music schools to support young musicians, provide artistic education, and promote culture among the local population. In Colombia, EU support of €2.6 million helped create a technical school which promotes the artistic, social, economic, technical, and ethical dimensions of arts and crafts.

1.2. This cultural diplomacy approach is a key element of EU political soft power:

1.2.1. A good example of this could be found in the EU focus on the cultural dimension of human rights, including the protection and promotion of cultural rights, the rights of indigenous peoples, and the rights of minorities and those who are socially marginalized. For example, in Brazil, the EU sponsored the Jamac Digital Cinema program, which organized scriptwriting workshops, conferences and debates, and other activities focusing on issues relating to violence, human rights violations and citizenship.

1.2.2. The European Union itself is continuing to evolve in ways that foster such "soft power" opportunities. The Treaty of Lisbon, which entered into force on December 1, 2009, provided for the creation of the European External Action Service, an integrated EU diplomatic corps that brings together diplomatic instruments – public diplomacy programs, economic and political actions, and development and crisis management tools – to support a single strategy of effective diplomacy. With its emphasis on increased transparency and democracy within the EU, as well as its legal guarantee of citizens' fundamental rights, the Lisbon Treaty also further strengthened the foundation of the EU's core values – and thus our soft power potential.

1.2.3. But in the present situation of economic crisis, will the EU's soft power survive the strong budget reductions that impact EU Member States (MS) as well as the EU and its Delegations? A recent CSIS study (http://csis.org/files/publication/110427_Flanagan_FinancialCrisis_web.pdf) strongly suggests this to be the case. Much of Europe's soft power leadership flows from its official development assistance (ODA) as the European Union and its Member States together constitute the world's largest international aid donor. The 15 EU countries that are members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Development Assistance Committee (DAC) netted $67.1 billion in ODA, or 56 percent of the DAC's total ODA in 2009. The EU members' ODA total dipped slightly in 2009, representing 0.44 percent of gross national income (GNI). EU DAC members will fall short of their 2010 goal of 0.56 percent of GNI, and will be hard-pressed to reach the Millennium Development Goal of 0.7 percent by 2015. The effects of the financial crisis and its aftershocks have accentuated constraints impacting pre-existing European development assistance.

1.2.4. But on a purely personal basis, I believe that the level of EU ODA spending will be better protected than could be expected in the US because it directly serves the interests of the EU MS and their populations. The following three reasons explain why:

• Beneficiary countries perceive a certain part of this ODA as an element of a more global deal with EU partners, and the rest as economics, good governance, and security cooperation.

• In many parts of Europe, there is a real identification with the values linked to ODA: generosity, cooperation, etc...

• In this period where European public opinion is more sensitive than ever to the evolution of immigration trends, ODA is a key element in ensuring the result sought commonly by both southern and northern countries, which is to provide to people from the south, jobs and a proper life in their own country.

2. A COMMON EUROPEAN CULTURE IS STILL BEING BUILT.

2.1. Does European culture exist in addition to the cultures of the European Union's 27 Member States?

As an old friend of mine, Joe Fitchett, recently reminded me, the legend was that once upon a time, at the end of his life, Jean Monnet, as he was considering the results of his efforts and his successes and shortcomings, shouted as a kind of "cri du coeur": "If I had to do it again, I would start not by the economy but by the culture…"

It is true that in a typically Hegelian vision, the EU construction began with the building up of shared economic interests which were supposed, once the time came, to produce political solidarity, and finally cultural identity. We have clearly not reached that phase. For the best or the worst, a European cultural identity remains a distant vision, something that in the US we could call the last European frontier… and it is obviously a serious challenge for any European diplomacy to be obliged to base its identity and its practices on such a diverse reality.

On one hand, maybe it could be a good thing in a number of circumstances: Amin Maaloof did remind us that there are identities that can be dangerous. But on the other hand, how do we deal with non-European cultures if we are unable to define what is European culture?

2.2. The European cultural dimension

I would not dare to define what European culture is: in the view of many Europeans, it would be inappropriate. But I think we should recognize that there is a cultural dimension to the European identity. And if we want to search for this European cultural dimension, we follow four paths, seen from this Delegation's operational point-of-view, i.e. from the perspective of someone who must explain the EU to tough American interlocutors both inside and outside the beltway:

1) There is a common European culture of values: democracy, human rights, condemnation of the death penalty, social solidarity, protection of the environment, which are all the elements best known here. But I would say that the whole vision of democracy of the entire EU is relatively specific and has been developed as such. We have some specific ethnicities shared outside of Europe but which have also become part of any European identity.

2) A second path would take us, as in any company or institution, to analyze the institutional culture of the EU: a culture based on the specific way the EU has been built, which respects small countries and their sovereignty; a very specific way of solving problems together and reaching unity while respecting diversity; and, also good doses of bureaucracy and technocracy, two concepts which often carry with them not only a negative image but also, we should not forget, an aspiration for independence, rigor, and a sense of the public interest.

3) On a diplomatic level, we have seen a growing trend toward the conclusion of cultural cooperation agreements with our major partners, which are not concluded in a spirit of one-way assistance and cooperation but in a spirit of two-way partnership. We now share cultural diplomacy programs with our major international partners. In October last year, the EU and China launched our first-ever joint High-Level Cultural Forum to strengthen people-to-people exchanges and to foster mutual understanding between Europeans and Chinese. And through the EU's support of the Anna Lindh Foundation, a network of civil society organizations in Europe and throughout the Mediterranean, the European Commission helps bring people from 43 countries together to promote intercultural dialogue and improve mutual understanding.

4) Here in Washington, we look at the European cultural activities with a keen interest.

On one hand, cultural events are organized by EU embassies or the EU Delegation, including the EU Open House Day (more than 80,000 visits: the single biggest one-day celebration of EU in the world), the EuroKids Festival, the Euro night at the Maison Française, and the AFI European Film Showcase, a selection of top films from EU Member States. We engage in cooperative programs with American think tanks as well as Centers of Excellence; in New York and in Washington a new association of EU cultural associations, EUNIC, will help develop new possibilities.

On the other hand, significant European cultural events are organized on a purely private and community basis throughout the United States: Euro Film Festivals, Gastronomic encounters, European restaurants here, a European dancing festival there … It means that the consciousness of the elements common to our European countries and their diverse cultures begin to be perceived more clearly in this time of globalization than previously. It also means that these cultural commonalities are perhaps more easily seen by those from different continents, who tend to have a more unified vision of Europe as a whole.

Conclusion:

Of course, if I may conclude on that, European cultural diplomacy will never be simply a function of a European institution; it will be the sum of all of our cultures, languages, and heritages, of all the cultural diplomacy programs that 27 Member States have creatively developed. And this sum will include a common layer that we look to progressively strengthen. This common cultural layer should be the basis that a collaborative entity like the European Union and the EU Member States use to better convey important messages about Europe and our experience of building bridges amongst different nations.

As you know, the bridge has been chosen as a cultural symbol to define one of the key elements of our identity: the euro. It is a strong symbol: from the Allenby bridge on the Jordan River, to the Mostar bridge in Bosnia, from the Strasbourg-Kehl bridge on the Rhine to this bridge on the Potomac here in Washington which unites the two – once separated parts – of the United States. It is a universal symbol, as is the European culture.