Periodic Reporting for period 1 - CuDiCy (Power through Attraction: British, Greek and Turkish Cultural Diplomacy in Cyprus, 1945-1974)
Periodo di rendicontazione: 2019-09-02 al 2021-09-01
CuDiCy had set out to explore the cultural diplomacy (CD) of three states: the UK, Greece and Turkey, as this was practiced in Cyprus between 1945 and 1974. The project introduces Cyprus as a space accommodating multiple and diverse cultural diplomacies, most prominently during the period in question Greek and British cultural diplomacy, and provides an apt example for the study of CD. Timely and relevant, CuDiCy aspired to set a new paradigm in the growing field of CD, by becoming the study model for an innovative approach towards the exploration of external cultural influence in countries which accommodate ethnically diverse populations. It aimed in contributing to the discussion about the conceptualisation of power, politics, authority and governance and, on the formation and transformation of identity. CuDiCy achieved this by reaching a set of objectives: 1) to investigate, analyse and explain the diverse and complicated functions of what was CD during the period, what was its aim and how and if it accomplished its tasks; 2) to examine the significance of CD in Cyprus and examine what the UK, Greece and Turkey tried to achieve by promoting their culture in Cyprus, their motivations, their methods for organising their CD; their methods of influence and attraction, and the impact these diverse CDs had in Cyprus; 3) to investigate the setup of CD in Cyprus and the organisational circumstances that defined the agents’ intentions and actions, also by paying attention to specific aspects, for example the gender dimension; 4) to establish the project’s current relevance by answering a set of questions rooted in present tense, in current CD and IR debates, for example how do the national powers project themselves today, also in relation to their past practices in CD, or how do key themes investigated during CuDiCy, such as ‘cultural influence’ and ‘nation branding’, correspond with (or differ from) key themes in the current debate such as ‘soft power’. In addition to the archival evidence gathered for answering these questions, original evidence was to be collected via empirical research during secondments and research visits. 5) Finally, to define the impact of CD’s role in Cyprus by exploring how its success or failure could be measured.
Work performed during this fellowship was ascribed to four specific work packages: 1) Literature Review & Research Visits; 2) Archival Research; 3) Analysis; 4) Secondments. As the first four months of the project were dedicated to conducting a literature review in Cyprus the researcher did not perform any of the future trips that she had planned in her application. Hence, when the pandemic hit the research was still at an early stage and the planning of archival research had to change. The researcher reconfigured her research plan, and by the end of the fellowship she took corrective actions in order to produce best results. By the fellowship’s end, the researcher estimates that she has achieved this and in some aspects has in fact exceeded expectations. Τhe researcher gave particular emphasis to online training during the pandemic, and this soon proved to be a blessing in disguise. Online training allowed her to train and develop as a researcher, specifically as a cultural diplomacy expert, but also as a versatile researcher working inter-disciplinarily and across sectors. As organisations turned to offering online training, the researcher enhanced her skills; progressed her research; and experimented with unknown research fields. Research seminars, guest lectures, podcasts and information sessions covered for other activities such as the Research & Policy Group that was originally to be set at the University of Nicosia, to pick up on some of the shared interests of staff and practitioners in this field, to reach back into the 20th century and to reach beyond early post-colonial Cyprus. The researcher participated in more international conferences than originally planned, all conducted online. Archival visits and research trips in the UK and Greece were cancelled due to pandemic restrictions, and the researcher finally managed to collect her material in Cyprus. This archival material, due to the unavoidable delay in its collection, is still being translated into publications. Material on current cultural and public diplomacy practices has been gathered during the researcher’s participation in specialised training programmes. She co-organised a two-day international academic conference where more than 75 academics and researchers presented papers. She worked toward the creation of an edited volume titled Colonial Cyprus: A Cultural History (I.B. Tauris, 2022). She took up teaching; joined committees related to national cultural policy and diplomacy and think-tanks; acted as consultant; set up a magazine and has been acting as an Assistant Editor since; became reviewer for international peer-reviewed journals; took up editorial roles and acted as a project reviewer for a ‘Research by Students Competition’ thus promoting research in secondary education etc.
Comparative and transnational in its approach, CuDiCy has conducted novel historical research with present-day implications. It is original and innovative in the field, as it is the only research project that has so far attempted retracing a historical network of cultural agents (British, Greek and Turkish) and their actions toward a specific target people (Cypriots), using a specific tool (cultural diplomacy). A distinct aspect of CuDiCy is that no less than three major national cultural forces coexisted on an island of half a million people. What also makes Cyprus an original case is that CD was not exclusively employed by foreign nations on foreign people (e.g. British targeting Cypriots) but more interestingly, CD was also conducted by Greece and Turkey, the accepted ‘mother-countries’ of the Greek and Turkish Cypriots, to reinforce the existing cultural bonds between ‘mother’ and ‘child’. CuDiCy’s findings, communicated and will continue to bear results via conferences, workshops, publications and other actions, reshape the discussion around what constitutes CD and who performs it (e.g. ‘mother countries’). The project furthers the knowledge frontier in the growing field of global CD research by adding Greece and Turkey to the discussion, and expands the pool of knowledge on developed areas of focus such as the UK’s CD during empire. Furthermore, CuDiCy adds to the literature on the conduct of CD by competing ex-colonial European powers, such as the British and the French in the Middle/Near East regions at a time of competitive and overlapping national interests. It provides a starting point for future projects, namely a project on conflict-prevention through CD and cultural mediation. CuDiCy has present-day implications, as its dissemination results inform how the above ideas continue to this day to be part of national foreign policies. CuDiCy’s findings have been travelling and will continue to travel through diverse and varied routes. In this way, CuDiCy becomes an apt example about the ways European investment in research and inter-disciplinary innovation in the SSH contributes to the shaping of Europe’s global policy agenda on ‘soft-power’ and related issues such as conflict prevention and reconciliation through CD. CuDiCy synthesises national scientific agendas and creates a unified research area by proposing cross-border cooperation.