culturaldiplomacy weblog

Dear Visitors of culturaldiplomacy blog,
During historically significant meetings between Chinese and Taiwanese government officials, it was decided that the number of flights between mainland China and Taiwan would be increased. Flights between these two countries had previously been limited to the holiday season, and even then only a handful of mainland Chinese residents were allowed to visit the island of Taiwan. The meetings were held in Beijing, China, and present were Taiwan’s new president Ma Ying-jeou, and Mr. Hu of China.

The changes in tourism and flight plans between these two countries mean that approximately 3,000 Chinese mainlanders will be allowed to enter Taiwan each day, nearly three times the previous amount. Allowing distant family members and long time separated friends to be reunited at their convenience, instead of only during the holidays.  These meetings are so historically significant because it is the first formal meeting between China and Taiwan since 1949, when mainland China refused to recognize Taiwan as an independent state. They attempted to meet in 1999, but Beijing canceled the meeting when the then president of Taiwan, Lee Teng-hui, proposed that Taiwan and China treat each other as two separate states. Conversely, Taiwan’s new president, Ma Ying-jeou, has rejected Taiwan’s push for independence, and this is one of the most prominent reasons that these meetings have worked out. 

Mr Hu, of China, mentioned the potential for improved relations under Taiwan’s new leadership, he also thanked Taiwan for aid in the relief of the devastating earthquake in China’s Sichian province.  Mr. Wu made it clear that he did not want to see the two countries take up arms against each other again. He was quoted saying “We cannot guarantee there won’t be any natural disasters… but through our mutual efforts, we can ensure there is no war,” a sure sign that these two will do their best to try and work through their issues. However, this being said, there has been, as of yet, no mention of Taiwan as a separate state they have only addressed the issue of tourism and flights.

These meetings proved to have been very successful and will hopefully lead to more in the near future. Could this be the first stage of a new global understanding? Can the rest of the world take what they have learned from these two countries and put it to good use in their own. Will the results of these conferences stimulate others around the world?  Or will we drop the ball and forget it all ever happened?
To discuss this topic further, and to share your opinions please see the ICD forum.

The ICD Weblog will be a place to discover a more in-depth look behind current events and issues in cultural diplomacy, and to formulate a platform of debate to be instituted on our Forum. We hope that the Weblog will stimulate you to consider events with a more critical eye, as well as leading to thought provoking and constructive debate in the Forum.

For the first reissue of the Weblog, we will take a look at the recent political events in the United States and take a look what the impact of them is on cultural diplomacy (CD). Last week Hillary Clinton suspended her campaign towards the White House and has formally endorsed Barack Obama, making him the presumptive Democratic Party ticket nominee. The long race is now down to just two candidates, Obama and John McCain, his Republican counterpart. The two candidates have been very outspoken on hot ticket issues such as immigration reform, gay marriage and the Iraq conflict. However, they have not been as vocal (or perhaps more aptly put, the press has not reported as much on) cultural policy standpoints. The question for debate in this column is how, if at all, American CD will change or progress when McCain or Obama are elected president in November.

Before this can be pondered, let’s consider what the two rivals have said and done so far in regards to CD and how they could implement their policies once coming to power. First of all, the current administration handles CD issues through the Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs. At this time, the prime responsibility is to convert would-be foes of America into friends using “soft-power” as opposed to so-called “hard-power”, particularly in the Muslim world. Presumably, this would be the same office that the future president will also employ to accomplish the goals of using what the current Under Secretary, Jim Glassman, has termed the “arsenal of persuasion” (See: “New U.S. Public Diplomacy Head Cites ‘Arsenal of Persuasion’”). What that particular “arsenal” would stock, of course, differs between McCain and Obama.

McCain offers little on his official campaign website on CD and related issues. He has issued other documents where he advocates Native American rights, specifically upholding their languages and cultures, though there is no mention of bridging the cultural gap between peoples. Like Obama, he supports Chicago’s bid to host the Olympics in 2016, clearly the most international platform to foster multicultural dialogue, though he has come under fire for his criticism of what he considered as intemperate federal spending on 2002 Salt Lake City games.

Obama refers directly to CD on his official website under the all-inclusive “Additional Issues” section where he mentions his positions on the arts. There he endorses the promotion CD “since our resources for [it] are at their lowest level in a decade. Barack Obama will work to reverse this trend and improve and expand public-private partnerships to expand cultural and arts exchanges throughout the world.” Though the details are missing, at least a token acknowledgement for such a need is underlined, if only superficially.

It is tough to read for sure whether McCain or Obama take the need for CD seriously. Obama has mentioned that he would be warm to the idea of speaking with leaders that the US has traditionally ignored diplomatically. Presumably he would feel the same about using alternative forms of dialogue to form bonds with other cultures, though such a passing comment in a tucked away corner of his website is hardly inspiring. McCain presents a cloudier image of his thoughts on the matter, even if he has not out right said that he is against such measures. In any case, as the Economist sensibly pointed out that CD “can do plenty of good. When governments are behind them, though, such programmes are likely to raise suspicions.” Can the world really trust American presidents anymore, even when they say they are working towards peaceful ends?

The question now remains as to what extent the candidates will act upon their assertions that they are committed to certain issues. It is common knowledge that candidates often say one thing, and then do another as president. To what degree will alternative forms of diplomacy be used by the two candidates when one of them is elected? Whose policy seems more plausible for effective execution? Are alternative forms of diplomacy important for politicians, or is it purely public relations? Please go the Forum to get the ball rolling and hear your thoughts on the future these candidates present towards interculural dialogue.

Dear visitors of culturadiplomacy blog,

apart from disappointed voters there I also had a chance to talk to some groups of very engaged youth, involved in community and political awareness programs. Thanks to the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung I was able to get to know represantatives of the Ukrainian Student Association, the Center for Political Education and the Student Organization of Regions.

I got to know all of them as highly energetic people with high hopes and a realistic view on the countries present situation. In the following articles I would like to introduce some of these people and their programs to you as I think they represent some Ukrainian core issues and can give some outlook into the future of Ukraine.

Dear visitors of culturaldiplomacy blog,

in a young democracy such as the Ukraine not many people have a strong faith in represantative government. Especially after scandals, the last one leading up to this year`s election, people lose their faith. No wonder that the participation rate fell once more in this year`s election to around 56%. It is true that there are other countries with a very old and stable democracy, such as the US, which even have lower participation rates (around 50% for the US), nevertheless the decline from the last election in the Ukraine can be seen as disappointment over politics and especially disappointment after the Orange Revolution.

One ironic symbol of this disappointment can be the fountain in the lower part of Kiev. Once presented to the students by President Jushchenko to thank them for their support in the Orange Revolution, the fountain is only but a small sprinkler on low pressure.

The last coalition talks lasted for months, halting any legislative progress. Then the newly formed coaltion started to destabalize by representatives being bought off from their parties. No wonder that many voters think that politicians only work for their own benefits.

Dear visitors of culturaldiplomacy blog,

As of today 100% of the votes have been counted and transmitted electronically. The official results of the election commission: Party of Regions (PR) 34,37%, Block Julia Timoshenko (BJT) 30,71%, Our Ukraine 14,15%, Communists 5,39% and Litvin Block 3,96%. In the meantime it seems the BJT and Our Ukraine will form a coalition, putting the actual winner of the election, the PR under the leadership of Viktor Yanukowich, in the opposition.

However, it is not certain, if this will be a stable situation for the Ukraine. According to the represantative of the PR Inna Bogoslowskaja putting the represantatives of the PR into the opposition is as if putting half of the population into the minority. Indeed when looking at which party leads each of the different regions, it becomes clear that the country is devided in West/Central and East/South. West/Central being dominated by BJT, apart from the Transcarpathian region and East/South by the PR.

According to the Russian press agency RIA Novsti, some represantatives are ready to put down their mandates if a broad coalition is not formed. This kind of coalition was actually suggested by President Jushchenko in the early days after the election. However, now Jushchenko is quoted to have said that there was no other possibility than forming a government of pro-west forces.

http://elections.korrespondent.net/news/966870

http://de.rian.ru/world/20071006/82754301.html

Dear visitors of culturaldiplomacy blog,

even 5 days after the election, counting still continues. At the moment 99,98% of the votes have been counted. Over the course of the past days this number has been rising only slowly, especially in the last two days. It is not sure why this is so, since the number of votes are transferred electronically to the Ukrainian Election Committee.

What seems to be clear already, however, is that the Socialist Party has not reached the parlamentary quota and therefore will not be part of the Parliament. It is also certain that the Party of Regions (PR) will be the strongest party. This, however, does not mean that the PR will elect the Primeminister. The Block of Julia Timoshenko and the Party “Our Ukraine” could form a coalition and have a small lead. This coalition would on the other hand exclude many voters from the east, most of them voters of the PR. To strengthen the stability of the country the President of Ukraine Viktor Jushchenko therefore proposed a national coaltion of both BJT and PR and proposed that at least some ministers of the new cabinet could also come from the PR.

Dear visitors of culturaldiplomacy blog,

after a long night sitting in one of the polling stations near the Kiev main station, it seems that the Block of Julia Timoshenko (BJT)and the the Party of Regions (PR) are very close to each other. The counting continues and hour after hour either BJT or PR are ahead. This promises to be an exciting race, also depending on wether the Socialist Party will gain the parlamentary minimum quota of 3% to enter the Ukrainian Parlament.

Unlike the last elections I was somewhat suprised, especially because of the close race, that none of the parties accused each other of falsifications. This can be a good sign proving transparent, free and fair elections. Also the close election monitoring from other countries might have strengthened this kind of outcome.

Only on the Maidan you could see a small group of PR supporters, looking very tired into an uncertain future.

Dear visitors of culturaldiplomacy blog,

on early morning Election Day I visited a polling station near my appartment next to the Kiev main station. The polling station made a very solid and ordered appearance, election booths in national colors protected from curious eyes, many polling helpers sitting in a long row in order of street names and of course sealed ballot boxes made of transparent plastic.

Transparency was also the rule for most of the other polling stations we visited. Some problems occured with voter’s names to appearing on the lists of the polling station. All in all I can say, at least for the polling stations I saw in Kiew, that elections were free and fair.

Dear visitors of culturaldiplomacy blog,

the pictures of hundreds of flags and tents and thousands of people on the central square Maidan, the pictures that run around the world during the Orange Revolution and also the elections thereafter, are on many people’s mind when they think of the election in the Ukraine. So did I expect. However, to my surprise apart from a couple flags and a group of older men and women not much was hinting to the fact that elections were ahead the very next day.

Indeed the major of Kiev Leonid Chernovetskyi banned all tents and flags from the city because they would cause to much disorder in the city and too much litter. Ironically the major put tents up himself in front of the city administration building, showing banners proclaiming Kiev a politics free zone. He also put up a music stage, a small soccer and a small basketball court. For a small fee you could sleep in the provided tents and enjoy typical Maidan food. It seemed to me a somewhat rediculing action towards the past practice. In fact, many observers of the past elections stated that party activists and canvassers were paid to sleep in the tents.

Dear visitors of culuraldiplomacy blog,

on pre-election day I was invited to the press conference of the international civil organization of Ukrainians “The Fourth Wave”. Taking place in the building of the Ukrainian Press Association, the press conference introduced several international groups of election monitors to the public. Among them the head of an expatriat-ukrainian TV station from Chicago, an Italian Senator, representatives of a Russian, a Polish and an Ukrainian NGO.

For icd, being invited to the podium of the press conference, it was a good chance to help promote dialogue, understanding and trust. Especially in Ukraine, where democracy has not yet found a secure place in the nation’s groundwork, the trust that people put into politicians, parties and the government is at risk. Taking part as a election monitor, icd can help to strengthen this important trust by helping to make sure that elections are free and fair. And only if there can be a fair and free dialogue of ideas and opinions between parties and people, understanding and trust can be established. Icd is proud of being invited to take on a part of this responsibility.