Dishonesty Foils Cultural Diplomacy
Interview with Mohammad Kazem Musavi Bojnourdi, head of the Center for Islamic Great Encyclopedia on cultural diplomacy.
Cultural diplomacy has been one of our weak spots within the past few years. How should we define this powerful diplomatic tool? And how could Iran implement it?
The function of cultural diplomacy is undeniable. We can utilize it to introduce our country, our culture to the world. That is what all the major countries have adopted. Allocation of scholarships to foreign students is one example. Cultural diplomacy maintains and reinforces our prestige.
How can we maintain our prestige?
Well the first requisite is that our politicians and diplomats avoid lying. Saying nothing is better than making false claims. As an example, we at the Center for Great Islamic Encyclopedia are at contact with foreign organizations. We have academic and cultural relations and we avoid any exaggeration and just show the realities, since we believe that our deeds reveal the truth and our cultural credit. Magnifying only tarnishes our reputations and backfires. Some make this mistake however and think of exaggeration as a type of propaganda. Cultural diplomacy should be based on honesty.
What are the means of practicing cultural diplomacy? Is it limited to state-run apparatus?
It is implemented by governmental organizations but NGOs can contribute and run cultural dialogues. Wherever they are, Iranians’ patriotic sentiments impel them to introduce their country and depict a positive image.
What if there is divergence between the cultural diplomacy implemented by the government and the cultural dialogue promoted by non-governmental organizations? I mean what if the image constructed by our diplomats and our non-official representatives are contradictory? What would happen then?
That would definitely dent our face. As I said, cultural diplomacy must be based on the realities and honesty. Honesty per se brings prestige. But irresponsibility and bluffing will be easily understood by the other side and would lead to undesirable results.
Maybe it’s better to address our cultural attachés. What line should they follow? Sometimes it seems that their activities aren’t in accord with the target culture, like preaching Shiism in a Sunni country.
That’s because some thinks of themselves as preachers for Islam. Well that’s not true. And their mere representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Preaching Islam is an honor but it is the responsibility of clerics and religious scholars. Cultural attachés must at first understand the culture of the country they are sent to, and transfer findings to their own country to provide knowledge.
They should also stay in touch with academic institutes, universities, libraries and research centers of the country, facilitate cultural interaction between universities and other academic organizations of both countries and deliver a correct report about cultural aspects of the target culture. They are not creators but only a medium to transfer information.
To what extent have we made use of our domestic and international capacity and helped the world to know us? Embassies inside Iran mostly have a clear understanding of our culture, society and elite but it seems that we haven’t trained any forces for that goal.
I think responsibilities haven’t been defined clearly. Our cultural attachés think they have to promote Islam but if you look at their French counterparts for example, you don’t seem them promoting Christianity. They try to understand our culture, introduce their culture, establish academic contacts, hold joint conferences etc. they clearly know their duty but our attaches publish religious books just like missionaries.
I mean the structures should be founded before anything else so that our cultural attachés move in the correct direction. Major changes in our embassies’ behavior are also another problem. With every new government a new picture of Iran is represented, unlike foreign countries in Iran.
We lack a rigid structure and definition of their mission. That’s when with every wind of change, a different image of our culture and behavior is sent for others. I give you an example, in his negotiations with the Great Islamic Encyclopedia, France’s cultural attaché made the preparation for a conference on ’kinship in Iran and its neighbors". See, they are really interested to know about family relations in our country, our customs and traditions etc. They know how important these are for knowing a country. So we see how meticulous they act. Their cultural attaché doesn’t want to convert us to Christianity. That is not their priority, but priests’.
With a regime known as Islamic, wouldn’t that be an essential for cultural attaches?
Even ideological regimes separate propaganda from cultural interaction. We want to organize cultural exchanges between countries. That differs from propaganda.
The function of cultural diplomacy is undeniable. We can utilize it to introduce our country, our culture to the world. That is what all the major countries have adopted. Allocation of scholarships to foreign students is one example. Cultural diplomacy maintains and reinforces our prestige.
How can we maintain our prestige?
Well the first requisite is that our politicians and diplomats avoid lying. Saying nothing is better than making false claims. As an example, we at the Center for Great Islamic Encyclopedia are at contact with foreign organizations. We have academic and cultural relations and we avoid any exaggeration and just show the realities, since we believe that our deeds reveal the truth and our cultural credit. Magnifying only tarnishes our reputations and backfires. Some make this mistake however and think of exaggeration as a type of propaganda. Cultural diplomacy should be based on honesty.
What are the means of practicing cultural diplomacy? Is it limited to state-run apparatus?
It is implemented by governmental organizations but NGOs can contribute and run cultural dialogues. Wherever they are, Iranians’ patriotic sentiments impel them to introduce their country and depict a positive image.
What if there is divergence between the cultural diplomacy implemented by the government and the cultural dialogue promoted by non-governmental organizations? I mean what if the image constructed by our diplomats and our non-official representatives are contradictory? What would happen then?
That would definitely dent our face. As I said, cultural diplomacy must be based on the realities and honesty. Honesty per se brings prestige. But irresponsibility and bluffing will be easily understood by the other side and would lead to undesirable results.
Maybe it’s better to address our cultural attachés. What line should they follow? Sometimes it seems that their activities aren’t in accord with the target culture, like preaching Shiism in a Sunni country.
That’s because some thinks of themselves as preachers for Islam. Well that’s not true. And their mere representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Preaching Islam is an honor but it is the responsibility of clerics and religious scholars. Cultural attachés must at first understand the culture of the country they are sent to, and transfer findings to their own country to provide knowledge.
They should also stay in touch with academic institutes, universities, libraries and research centers of the country, facilitate cultural interaction between universities and other academic organizations of both countries and deliver a correct report about cultural aspects of the target culture. They are not creators but only a medium to transfer information.
To what extent have we made use of our domestic and international capacity and helped the world to know us? Embassies inside Iran mostly have a clear understanding of our culture, society and elite but it seems that we haven’t trained any forces for that goal.
I think responsibilities haven’t been defined clearly. Our cultural attachés think they have to promote Islam but if you look at their French counterparts for example, you don’t seem them promoting Christianity. They try to understand our culture, introduce their culture, establish academic contacts, hold joint conferences etc. they clearly know their duty but our attaches publish religious books just like missionaries.
I mean the structures should be founded before anything else so that our cultural attachés move in the correct direction. Major changes in our embassies’ behavior are also another problem. With every new government a new picture of Iran is represented, unlike foreign countries in Iran.
We lack a rigid structure and definition of their mission. That’s when with every wind of change, a different image of our culture and behavior is sent for others. I give you an example, in his negotiations with the Great Islamic Encyclopedia, France’s cultural attaché made the preparation for a conference on ’kinship in Iran and its neighbors". See, they are really interested to know about family relations in our country, our customs and traditions etc. They know how important these are for knowing a country. So we see how meticulous they act. Their cultural attaché doesn’t want to convert us to Christianity. That is not their priority, but priests’.
With a regime known as Islamic, wouldn’t that be an essential for cultural attaches?
Even ideological regimes separate propaganda from cultural interaction. We want to organize cultural exchanges between countries. That differs from propaganda.