More Culture in Global Politics

Early Warning and Early Action

Cultural early warning is about putting conflict and violence on the stage before it erupts into reality. This can take many different forms. The concept of cultural rapid reaction intervention groups, suggested by Ferdinand Richard on the basis of his experience of working in Marseille with young hip-hop professionals, could inspire the creation of European cultural early warning and early response teams, on the model of existing CRTs (Crisis Response Teams). Deploying cultural professionals in conflict-prone areas to assess cultural prevention needs could be one way forward. This could initially be done via pilot projects in urban areas that studies have shown may be melting pots for social, political, environment and security-related tensions in the future.

Culture is not justice, but it voices it and spells out new possibilities for the future.

The work of detecting risks of violence and crisis is known as early warning. Which members of society are better placed to have a sense of when things are going wrong than artists and cultural workers? Who creates the link between cultural production and social emergencies? And who better to deal with the surrounding issues than those who are sensitive to multi-layered identities, to misperceptions, miscommunications and multicultural tensions? One recent example of the prevention of cultural conflict within Europe is the Art as LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Trans) Activism: from Britain to Belarus initiative which ran as part of the Transeuropa Festival 2011. It surveyed performance campaigns for lesbian and gay visibility across Europe and showed the burning issues of anti-gay violence in Belgrade, Zagreb and Minsk.

When things go well, the media don’t bother to report it. Nor do they acknowledge that some people are working to make things go well. Cultural relations and social relations are a garden that has to be cultivated, cared for and watered. Cultural relations provide the means to help us live together, despite all the economic hardships. Take them away, and relations soon start to fall apart. The destruction of symbols engenders hatred. The part played by a TV series depicting the peaceful co-existence of communities that was developed by the NGO Search for Common Ground in Macedonia and Sierra Leone is a good example of the preventive work that can be done using traditional media. There are many other examples around the globe, such as in Sri Lanka, where theatre has been used to address inter-community violence, (for more on this see Helmut Anheier and Yudhishtir Raj Isar, “Conflicts and Tensions”, pages 296-305. This same book also includes a chapter on radio stations in Colombia and Afro-Reggae in Brazil).

Which members of society are better placed to feel when things are going wrong than artists and cultural workers?

Culture is the hope that, like flowers and trees, grows from seeds planted in the ruins. Rainfall and oxygen are all that is needed to make human ecosystems fresh and fertile once again. Likewise, culture can restore hope to destroyed psyches and communities and help them move beyond nightmares, grievances and revenge. It is not justice, but it voices it and spells out new possibilities for the future.

Preventive Power or an Instrument of Hegemony?

The first of these is the relationship between cultural relations and the use of force: is the military justified in carrying out cultural work or even being associated with preventive cultural initiatives? Isn’t “the military” and “cultural prevention” a contradiction in terms? Or should we try to think of ways in which the role of the military is acceptable in the field of cultural relations?

The second issue that Europeans need to debate is the link between cultural relations and international political domination. In other words, under which conditions is European soft power a force for prevention rather than a tool for hegemony, neo-colonialism or neo-imperialism? Can hegemons claim that their cultural diplomacy is based on the principle of a partnership of equals?

The third challenge for Europe’s external cultural preventive action is to combine cultural relations and social class disparities. This dilemma is not a new one for cultural policies, but it still applies in the case of cultural diplomacy: are cultural relations the preserve of the elite? How should cultural relations deal with social inequalities and class warfare?

Finally, it is important to discuss the question of compliance with a set of values relating to the protection of human rights, and these values must be established before the launch of any new initiatives. Cultural relations cannot afford to be accused of breaches of human rights and compromises are not acceptable. But to what extent is this really possible in every context, when the boundaries between effectiveness, interests and values become blurred and when culture is used as a temporary and by-default mediation tool to promote (legitimate) change?

Culture can restore hope to destroyed psyches and communities and help them move beyond nightmares, grievances and revenge.

To cut a long story short: Europe needs to invest more in cultural relations worldwide in order to capitalise on its existing experience of peaceful coexistence, of artistic sources of inspiration for governance initiatives, of cultural and multilingual dialogue and the practice of confidence-building, of intellectual freedom as a multiplier of utopian projects. This is a recipe for tackling conflicts and, above all, preventing them. The European Parliament’s 2011 report on the cultural components of the EU’s external action has harnessed most of what needs to be done in terms of policy: it needs the kind of intelligent, assiduous and thorough attention to detail that our institutions are well placed to execute. It is time to act and to implement these recommendations, working closely with the cultural relations institutions and organisations around the world that are already representing Europe but still desperately lack support from those who have – democratic – power and money.

Europe should no longer be a goal per se, provided, as Javier Solana once said, that the “spirit” of the treaties is implemented whole-heartedly. In a way, our goal has already been reached with the latest treaties and the creation of the Union. It is now time for Europe to be more creative in the way it expresses itself. The temple has been built, now it just needs some performances and ceremonies It needs its own metaphor. It needs its own mythology, its own sacrifices, its own symbols.

Spreading these freely-accessible European temples of culture across the globe and in the process creating and supporting spaces for cultural relations (such as museums, theatres, houses of creativity where cultural relations can develop) will provide the basis for the establishment of spaces for the prevention of cultural conflict.