El gobierno de Alfonsín: de la ilusión al desencanto

European patterns of cultural relations with other countries have been developed over several decades – in some cases centuries – to meet different sorts of goals. In third countries, the patterns of international cultural relations that have emerged are equally diverse. Almost everywhere, policy makers and cultural activists alike use the notion of ‘cultural diplomacy’ as the defining notion, so much so that it has become a new buzzword. An often-cited definition sees cultural diplomacy as ‘the exchange of ideas, information, art and other aspects of culture among nations and

their peoples in order to foster mutual understanding.’36 _{Often cultural}

relations are indeed practiced primarily in this idealistic spirit. However, more commonly, instrumental goals prevail, witness the statement of Marius Fransman, a South African politician, for whom cultural diplomacy

36 Cummings, M. (2003) Cultural Diplomacy and the United States Government: a Survey. Washington, D.C.: Center for Arts and Culture. Online. Available at: http://www.culturalpolicy. org/issuepages/culturaldiplomacy.cfm

‘is about a country projecting its power in the domain of ideas – to influence the ideas and the outlook of states, international organisations and non-state actors in order to pursue its national interests and enhance its geopolitical standing.’37 _{For countries that are major exporters of}

goods and services as well as investments, their national interest requires expanding these domains, together with positioning the country in the international culture and tourism market. Yet other cultural actors, both official and non-official, are not primarily or not at all concerned with such ‘national’ or utilitarian goals, but seek rather the opportunity to interact with others for the sake of cultural and/or social enrichment and mutual benefit.

Governments themselves are increasingly keen to build alliances with non-state actors, notably artists and cultural operators, in order to engage in deeper relations, using (old and new) media that enable them to reach out to much broader audiences. Yet here too the consultation has shown that most artists and cultural practitioners themselves do not believe in the virtues of cultural relations for the same reasons that official bodies do. Instead of national projection or promotion, they seek in working internationally to attain mutual learning, the pooling of resources or co- financing, shared reflection, debate, research and experimentation and ‘in its most complex forms, cooperation in the creative processes, the creation of new artistic works’.38

This is precisely the logic in which Europe’s many cultural networks have been operating over the last several decades. These networks have played a dynamic role in international cultural relations, facilitating contacts between professionals in many domains. In fact, some of the networks actually merged from a desire to find international partners with whom to share ideas and experience. Although often under- resourced, some networks have taken advantage of the EU’s cultural programmes and other funding sources to develop trans-national collaborative projects and build lasting relations with counterparts in many third countries. Many fulfil an important role as information sources for international cultural engagement. On the Move, the network for the promotion of artists’ mobility, for example, has produced a Guide to Funding Opportunities for the International Mobility of Artists and Cultural Professionals in Europe. Its links to information sources in other parts of the world, such as the Asia-Europe Foundation’s portal on cultural exchange with Asia (culture360.org), the Korea Arts Management

37 Cultural diplomacy and sports as tools for nation-building and development’, http:// www.dirco.gov.za/docs/2012/ubuntu_magazine_issue01.pdf

38 Klaic, D. (2007). Mobility of Imagination. Budapest: Center for Arts and Culture, Central European University.

Service (gokams.or.kr/kams_eng) and the Arab Education Forum (www. almoultaqa.com/defaulten.aspx) has enabled it to also disseminate information on funding opportunities for cultural exchange and mobility in Asia and in thirteen Arabic speaking countries.39 _{Networks clearly}

have a wealth of accumulated experience and goodwill that is of direct relevance to any future EU-wide strategy for culture in external relations. In the eyes of many artists, cultural activists and commentators, crudely instrumental or interest-driven motives are threats to artistic and cultural integrity. Many officials and diplomats on the contrary have little faith in cultural value for its own sake. The consultation has shown, however, that the two positions do not constitute an ‘either-or’ alternative. Instead cultural relations can embrace both. There is ample space – and need – for policy and market driven ambitions, just as there is for intrinsically cultural or humanist ones. This being the case, whatever their differing ultimate goals may be, it is essential that the EU and its Member States explore common challenges and promote shared strategies so that cultural relations themselves become a form of global public good. 3.1.2 Different national and/or regional positions

In third countries, different historical trajectories and cultural conditions have created different expectations, stakes and potential with regard to international cultural relations with Europe.

Cultural actors in many European Neighbourhood countries depend – partly or even completely – on funding from European Member States or the EC to carry out international cultural relations. Yet in common with their counterparts in Strategic Partnership countries, many feel uneasy with the dependency implied in the existing donor-recipient relationship. They would prefer to see a spirit of partnership based on mutual learning and exchange and an equality of position. Stakeholders, both governmental and non-governmental, in countries formerly colonised by European powers, recognise only a fine line between cooperation and what is sometimes perceived as neo-colonialism in EU-funded partnership projects. Many of the eastern neighbours feel the same way. Strategic Partners such as the BRICs countries, no longer focus exclusively or mainly upon Europe in their international cultural relations; their recently acquired economic and geopolitical salience has made them attractive to many countries across the world. This is the case

in a range of domains including the cultural. China, for example, has developed its own strategy, defined squarely within the ‘soft power’ paradigm and the country is investing significant resources with a view to enhancing its international image. Russia, on the other hand, is focusing its energies on improving its relations with the countries who make up the Commonwealth of Independent States and establishing a Customs Union, rather than working with the EU. South Africa’s geographical focus is firmly on Africa and the other BRICs countries, particularly Russia and China. The geographical focus of Japan is on the Asian region in general and emerging cities in particular, rather than on Europe. In this emerging multi-polarity, therefore, it can no longer be a question of Europe on the one hand and a homogenised ‘Rest’ on the other, just as the diversity of Europe itself should prevent it from being ever seen as a monolithic cultural entity. Europeans need to deploy an inventive palette of attractive cultural relations options accordingly.

In several third countries, major political and social transformations have occurred in recent years and are still unfolding. Thus opportunities exist to bring cultural actors in these countries face-to-face with counterparts in EU Member States who lived through comparable moments of transition in the decade of the 1990s. For example, in the framework of the More Europe initiative, recent encounters between cultural operators from Central and Eastern Europe as well as South Eastern Europe with colleagues from the southern rim of the Mediterranean have yielded very positive results.