The Italian model of cultural diplomacy, unlike the French and British models, is entirely non-governmental. The state funds culture, as in Ukraine, on a residual basis. Among the priorities of Italy’s cultural diplomacy, attracting investment and developing cultural tourism stand out. A common feature with the previous models is the promotion of Italian culture abroad and the popularization of the language.
A different approach can be seen in the Swedish model of cultural diplomacy. It is characterized by the presence of numerous organizations responsible for implementing foreign cultural policy, which report to the Ministry of Culture. Consequently, the Swedish Institute, founded in 1945, plays the most important role in promoting international cultural exchanges. It operates as part of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and collaborates with Swedish embassies and consulates. In general, the legislative regulation of Sweden’s cultural sector is not centralized. Each specific issue is regulated by relevant legislative acts issued by various agencies, which demonstrates a certain degree of flexibility and the ability to respond to cultural trends and changes.
The German model: The defining features of modern German cultural diplomacy began to take shape after World War II, when the governments of West and East Germany faced the task of dispelling negative associations and identifications of all things German with fascism, genocide, and intolerance toward “others.” That is why German cultural diplomacy was aimed at shaping an image of “normality” for the country.
In the late 1970s, the German government declared culture to be an important component of the state’s foreign policy strategy, one that “should contribute to the political integration of Europe in its cultural dimension,” and German cultural diplomacy to be a component of the state’s European integration policy. An important focus of its activities was the expansion of its cultural presence in “Third World” countries.
An important component of the foreign cultural policy implemented by the Goethe-Institut is the establishment of political and economic ties with countries in Asia and Africa through a policy of intercultural cooperation with the diaspora in Germany and the expansion of Germany’s cultural presence abroad in countries whose nationals make up the largest percentage of immigrants.
Other important institutions include the Deutsche Akademische Austauschdienst (DAAD), the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (AvH), Inter Nationes (IN), and the Institute for Foreign Cultural Relations (IfA), which are responsible for international research programs, student exchanges, intercultural dialogue with other countries, and international cultural and informational exchange—that is, for areas that play a significant role in Germany’s foreign cultural activities.
With the emergence of the diplomatic service in our country during the Ukrainian Revolution and the formation of the national state in 1917–1921, cultural and information diplomacy began to develop rapidly.
During the Ukrainian people’s struggle for national liberation, the early foundations of Ukrainian cultural diplomacy took shape as part of diplomatic and international public information activities. The model at that time consisted of special departments within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, an information and propaganda bureau, and specialized units attached to diplomatic missions abroad. The first nationwide or official legal documents were drafted, which defined the orientation toward international informational and cultural activities as well as the specific tasks of state institutions in these areas. Concert tours by artistic ensembles were organized, and the state sought to establish book publishing, exhibition activities, and film and photographic propaganda. Even under difficult financial and material conditions, information and cultural assistance was provided to the best of its ability to Ukrainians abroad or in ethnic territories occupied by foreign states. A positive track record was established in engaging Ukrainians abroad in spreading knowledge about Ukraine’s cultural and civilizational heritage. These efforts were defined as a focus on international informational and cultural activities and as specific tasks for state agencies in these spheres. Concert tours by artistic ensembles were organized, and the state sought to establish book publishing, exhibition activities, and film and photographic propaganda. Even under difficult financial and material conditions, all possible informational and cultural assistance was provided to Ukrainians abroad or in ethnic territories occupied by foreign states. A positive track record was established in engaging Ukrainians abroad in spreading knowledge about Ukraine’s cultural and civilizational heritage. These efforts were defined as a focus on international informational and cultural activities and as specific tasks for government agencies in these areas. Concert tours by artistic ensembles were organized, and the state sought to establish book publishing, exhibition activities, and film and photographic outreach. Even under difficult financial and material conditions, every possible effort was made to provide informational and cultural assistance to Ukrainians abroad or in ethnic territories occupied by foreign states. A positive track record was established in engaging Ukrainians abroad in spreading knowledge about Ukraine’s cultural and civilizational heritage. Concert tours by artistic groups were organized, and the state sought to establish book publishing, exhibitions, and film and photographic propaganda. Even under difficult financial and material conditions, information and cultural assistance was provided to the best of its ability to Ukrainians abroad or in ethnic territories occupied by foreign states. A positive track record was established in engaging Ukrainians abroad in spreading knowledge about Ukraine’s cultural and civilizational heritage. Concert tours by artistic ensembles were organized, and the state sought to establish book publishing, exhibitions, and film and photographic propaganda. Even under difficult financial and material conditions, informational and cultural assistance was provided to the best of its ability to Ukrainians abroad or in ethnic territories occupied by foreign states. A positive model was established for engaging Ukrainians abroad in spreading knowledge about Ukraine’s cultural and civilizational heritage.
It is also worth noting that research into the origins of cultural diplomacy is based on a forward-looking documentary and publishing project by the Ukrainian Center for Cultural Studies titled “Source Studies on the History of Cultural Diplomacy,” within the framework of which documents from the history of the world tour of O. Koshyts’ Ukrainian Republican Choir in 1919–1924 are being published and analyzed.
Overall, even under difficult financial and material conditions, every effort was made to provide informational and cultural assistance to Ukrainians in the diaspora or in ethnic territories occupied by foreign states. Positive experience was gained in engaging Ukrainians abroad in disseminating information about the cultural and civilizational achievements of the Ukrainian people.
The global Ukrainian community often acts as a key player in the field of public diplomacy without state support, achieving its goals through the activities of civil society organizations that advocate for the state’s interests, and—in the absence of the state or in cases of its inaction—for the interests of the ethnic group or nation (including during its formative stage). Therefore, an equally important issue in this context is the development of a historical model—or models—of public and cultural diplomacy, when the diaspora (primarily in the West) acted to familiarize the global public and the establishment of host countries with Ukraine during the Soviet era.
In this regard, Ukrainians are similar to other nations whose history of statehood has included periods when the use of public and cultural diplomacy tools lacked state support. During the Soviet period, state or diplomatic representatives generally did not seek to create an independent image of Ukraine—separate from that of the USSR—that differed from the general, denationalized Soviet image. The image created during the Soviet era by diplomats, dance troupes, and choral ensembles often had an ethnic, folkloric character, and it is entirely logical that, under such conditions, representatives of the global Ukrainian diaspora frequently took on the role of presenting Ukraine, its history, culture, and art. On the other hand, such activities were undoubtedly necessary to preserve the Ukrainian community’s own identity and prevent assimilation in a foreign-language and foreign-cultural environment.
Consequently, the activities of Ukrainians abroad during the Soviet era laid the groundwork, to a certain extent, for how Ukraine would be perceived upon gaining independence, although it is clear that without the state’s efforts and the significance of the events unfolding within it, such activities could not fully represent the Soviet republic of that time. With the emergence of independent Ukraine, Ukrainians abroad—particularly in the United States, Canada, and other countries—continued for a long time to serve as agents of public and cultural diplomacy, introducing Ukraine to the public in their host countries. In addition, leaders of major Ukrainian diaspora organizations abroad sought to help independent Ukraine gain international support in its struggle to defend its independence.
2. The Current State and Prospects of Cultural Diplomacy.
The modern concept of cultural diplomacy reflects certain national cultural characteristics of countries. For example, in France, this term is used as a synonym for the state’s foreign cultural policy; in the United States, cultural diplomacy is equated with the international exchange of cultural values and the achievements of contemporary American popular culture; in Japan, cultural diplomacy is used to denote the principles and norms of international agreements; in Austria, Sweden, and the Netherlands, the term “international cultural policy” is used to denote a targeted foreign policy doctrine. Furthermore, in Austria, Canada, Singapore, and England, the term “international cultural relations” symbolizes intercultural interaction.
It is worth noting that cultural diplomacy is currently viewed as an effective tool for creating a positive image of a country abroad. Some foreign researchers believe that culture is the fourth dimension of foreign policy and is on par with political, economic, and military dimensions.
It should be noted that, in the context of the crisis, Ukraine’s cultural diplomacy has taken on strategic importance, as the country is fighting against Russian aggression. Despite the inexhaustible cultural diversity and appeal of Ukraine, our country has found itself in the international spotlight primarily due to political and economic problems, war, or natural disasters.
Russia’s hybrid aggression, the war in eastern Ukraine, the economic crisis, the lack of funding for the cultural sector, and the absence of a coordinated state policy to promote Ukrainian culture abroad pose significant challenges for cultural managers.
Political scientist J. Nye noted that in order to achieve peace, one should apply just as much soft power as is needed in hard power to win a war. Ukrainian policymakers lack an understanding of the importance of cultural policy in the context of achieving both foreign policy interests and domestic stability. The government largely uses culture superficially, with the aim of achieving short-term political priorities, emphasizing Ukraine’s “sacrifice.” Domestic and foreign policies that ignore public demands and contemporary trends and are based on a narrow approach to national interests can undermine soft power.
In the context of Russian hybrid aggression, such neglect of culture leads to Ukraine being identified abroad primarily as a “victim” nation, one that can bring only a host of socioeconomic and political problems to Europe. At the same time, representatives of the non-governmental sector are emerging who are shaping facets of contemporary Ukrainian culture with a positive message and thereby gaining attention and popularity abroad. However, their efforts are more often based on their own enthusiasm rather than adequate state support
Cultural diplomacy in Ukraine is only at the beginning of the process of institutionalization and the search for effective models of cooperation between various state and civil society institutions, the business sector, and the creative industries. At the same time, cultural policy in EU countries, although identified as a priority, is currently undergoing modernization and the search for a new common strategy that would address contemporary global political challenges. Ukraine must be responsive to these transformations and actively participate in them, offering its own best practices and concepts. The intellectual role of expert communities in this strategic planning process is fundamental.
The cultural diplomacy initiative was launched by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine in 2015 and formalized in June–July 2016 as a new department. Within the structure of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, it reports to the Public Diplomacy Directorate, which is part of the Political Department.
The importance of developing cultural diplomacy lies in the fact that society plays a leading role alongside government agencies in fostering international cooperation and establishing communication networks among representatives of various cultural, educational, and artistic fields in different countries. Cultural diplomacy primarily helps shape public opinion regarding a particular country, lays the foundation for further cooperation, fosters a positive attitude toward other nations, and helps overcome negative stereotypes. The audience for public diplomacy is very broad, encompassing various segments of society. The main actors in Ukrainian cultural diplomacy are government institutions, nongovernmental organizations, civic activists, Ukrainian artists, journalists, scholars, students, and politicians.
Among the key tasks of modern cultural diplomacy, most researchers highlight the following: shaping the country’s image; developing foreign policy; and reforming, modernizing, and updating the country’s domestic cultural policy. These tasks also reflect the main objective of cultural diplomacy policy in modern Ukraine. It is important to ensure the systematic implementation of Ukrainian cultural initiatives abroad, to foster a positive image of Ukraine and its citizens, and to establish and develop new international cultural exchanges. Practice shows that for many modern states, cultural diplomacy is a top priority; in particular, it remains a particularly important area of foreign policy for modern European states such as France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and Poland. For example, Germany has developed a robust cultural diplomacy strategy to change perceptions of the state and its people; in particular, cultural diplomacy played a significant role in Polish-German reconciliation, as dialogue and shared values are essential for such reconciliation. The United Kingdom has succeeded in developing a model of public diplomacy that now serves as an example for other countries. Most modern, developed European countries have established networks of cultural institutions operating abroad that play a vital role in the development of international relations. In particular, organizations such as the British Council, the French Institute, the Polish Institute, and the Goethe-Institut in Ukraine are an important component of diplomatic activities. They are recognized as leaders in cultural diplomacy worldwide; in particular, they implement major international cultural projects, bring together large international communities, and serve as a platform for communication and the exchange of experiences at the international level. Their key tasks include advocating for the state’s foreign policy interests, facilitating intercultural communication, and promoting values in various sociocultural contexts. At the same time, the experience of successful European cultural diplomacy institutions shows that government support plays a crucial role in their functioning; their activities are often overseen by ministries of foreign affairs, they have a networked structure and are guided by state strategy, and the promotion of the national language, support for literary projects and book publishing, and support for contemporary culture and the arts also play an important role. Practice shows that European international cultural institutions actively combine both diplomatic activities (most of them are subordinate to ministries of foreign affairs and operate within diplomatic missions) and cultural activities.