One aspect of Cold War diplomacy which is often forgotten about is that of the Soviet Union. Similarly to the United States, the Soviet Union realised the importance of influencing public opinion during this turbulent period and so public and cultural diplomacy became of more and more importance. This blog is going to look at the evolution of Soviet cultural diplomacy, the measures implemented during the Cold War, and the reasons for this.
During the 1920’s, the Soviet Union implemented classic instruments of foreign policy – diplomatic and consular systems. In addition to this, they also founded an entire network of cultural organisations with the purpose of attracting members of intellectual professions and the progressive bourgeoisie from the West. In contrast to political propaganda, this cultural diplomacy was intended not to arouse radical vocations, but instead was aimed at the propagation of a positive and controlled image of Soviet life. This cultural diplomacy was known for its cultural initiatives and excellent protagonists through avant-garde artists, writers and scholars. It became one of the most effective instruments in the history of Soviet foreign policy.
Although the Stalinist period was characterised by state propaganda, in 1955, two years after Stalin’s death, the Soviet All-Union Society for Cultural Relations with Foreign Countries (VOKS) stated that the year had marked the revival of Soviet-American cultural exchanges. This year saw an increase in the number of Americans visiting the Soviet Union as well as several mutual exchanges of delegations. This revival process led to the realisation that traditional propaganda strategies were not working in the US, and ultimately led to the signing of a cultural agreement between the two states in 1958 (Gienhow-Hecht and Donfried, 2010. pp.33-49).
During this period of revival, Soviet delegations in the United States saw positive treatment and positive media coverage. VOKS representatives attributed this response to their increased interaction with the Americans, as well as to improvements to the informational materials about the Soviet Union available to American people. Delegations were met with warmth and hospitality and found great sympathy among ‘ordinary Americans’ towards both the Soviet country and people. As well as this, both Soviet and American media gave considerable coverage to the visits, and the rekindled energy of Soviet-American cultural relations could be seen in the tangible optimism on all levels. But this was not just about sightseeing for the Soviets, the delegations strove at all times to promote and explain the Soviet point of view (Gienhow-Hecht and Donfried, 2010. pp.50-69).
‘The perceived success of 1955 was considerable and slowly, some kind of rethinking the system of propaganda about American topics was taking place’ (Gienhow-Hecht and Donfried, 2010). During this time the obstacles presented by the US, i.e. McCarthyism, were becoming less of an issue and there appeared to be an increased interest in Soviet life. The Soviet authorities slowly realised that it was difficult for their delegates to balance their information gathering whilst simultaneously expecting them to criticise the US, and so eventually realised the need to update and modernise their cultural policies. What is important to note about this development is that although the distinction between propaganda and public and cultural diplomacy is, at times, a fine one, it is important that it is made. As well as this, it shows the importance of cultural diplomacy specifically as an effective instrument of a state’s foreign policy; One that should certainly not be forgotten.
Gienow_Hecht, J. C. E. and Donfried, M. C. (2010) Searching For A Cultural Diplomacy. United States: Berghahn Books. pp.33-74.
No comments:
Post a Comment