Long Range Regional Cultural Strategy for Balkan

Reply-To: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
From: MINELRES moderator <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 18:40:34 +0300 (EET DST)
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
Subject: Long Range Regional Cultural Strategy for Balkan

From: MINELRES moderator <[email protected]>

Original sender: Greek Helsinki Monitor <[email protected]>

Long Range Regional Cultural Strategy for Balkan


Long Range Regional Cultural Strategy for Balkan
 
A discussion paper for the EFAH meting in Bonn, 12-14 June 1999
 
By Dragan Klaic
 
Even before the recent Finnish-Russian diplomatic initiative lead to
the agreement about the stopping of the NATO bombing in return for the
Yugoslav military withdrawal from Kosovo, the post-war future of the
region has been considered by several think tanks and government
agencies. Besides political stability and security measures, a major
economic recovery has been advocated by some, leading to the talk of a
new Marshall plan for the Balkan. There is a German government
document, already called the Schroeder Plan, which focuses on the
political issues of the region's stability. A comprehensive document
by the Center for European Policy Studies (EPS) in Brussels, "A System
for Post-War South East Europe", developed with the backing of the new
EU Commission Chairman Prodi, contains a comprehensive and radical
blueprint: a prospect of an associate EU membership for Croatia,
Bosnia & Herzegovina, Montenegro, Serbia, Macedonia and Albania in the
very near future in return for significant legislative and political
changes; a plan of speeded up monetary and fiscal reforms, opening
space for dynamic economic recovery and infrastructure modernization;
support for the civic society structures, independent media and
educational reform. Significantly, even this very broad minded and
inspiring document completely forgets to mention - culture.
 
It is important in my opinion to make sure culture is included in
various plans for Balkan's consolidation and development.
 
In all Balkan countries culture has been the dominant source of
nationalist ideology. The mass-disseminated spirit of intolerance,
hate and ethnic purity was developed from cultural traditions, icons
and images, and it has been sustained with steady cultural production
of nationalist inspiration.
 
Culture has been nurturing a self-centered idea of the past from which
nationalist extrapolations for the future were elaborated.
 
Despite this role in the making of ideology, culture is today a
neglected and impoverished sector: cultural budgets have been reduced
and diminished by inflation and irregular payments, making many
cultural institutions function only formally or with a minimum output.
In the whole region, cultural institutions tend to be large,
inflexible, rigid, anachronistically set up and run, incapable to
adjust and reform. At the other side, a wild market has emerged in
popular cultural items, a demand-driven cultural industry of cheep
reproduction and serialization, often of pirated origin.
 
There is little dynamic in the tiny independent and non-institutional
cultural scene, curtailed by state interference, excessive regulation
and arbitrary taxation. There is little mobility within the countries
and even regions for cultural creators and their products and
especially among the countries of the region and with the rest of
Europe.
 
There is a crying need for the development of the intercultural
competence, in the first instance among the professionals engaged in
the culture: this includes a sensibility, attitudes, skills and a
strategy of communication with other cultures without a sense of
endangerment and menace, with curiosity, respect and expectation to be
enriched by these contacts and collaborations.
 
Despite all nationalism-inspired litanies on the importance of the
cultural heritage, its objects have been systematically neglected and
destroyed in war operations and peace plunder. Besides physical
protection from further damage, there is a strategy needed how to
integrate cultural heritage in the contemporary cultural production
and in the economy.
 
Culture and education have drifted apart as two sectors, while their
synergy is more important than ever. Both culture and education need
to be liberated from their ideological layers in order to contribute
to the creation of the future European citizens.
 
In the first instance, the urgent needs are in the systematic and
structured flow of information, especially about the sources of
assistance, support, development, then on the inspiring positive
practice. Intensive short-term training, inclusive stages, internships
and on-job training are needed.
 
On a more macro level, a redefinition of cultural policy objectives
and mechanisms is due. Modernization of the essential cultural
infrastructure and appropriate regulation should rely on a strong
regional and local input and competence. Further measures would
include initiation of innovative, non-conventional pilot projects,
encouragement of smaller, flexible and dynamic organizations in place
of cultural giants, development of cultural industry and cultural
economy, providing jobs and sustaining non-for-profit activities.
 
There are in Europe outstanding resources to respond to these needs.
In the last ten years, ever since the end of the Cold War, a large
number of organizations and networks have developed contacts and
connections in South-Eastern Europe, have built up experience and
expertise how to operate in the region, have articulated a sense of
priorities or have lined up partners who can sort things out with
precision and astuteness.
 
These are, among others, the network of G. Soros' Open Society
Institutes in all the countries of the region and with several
clustered regional programs in particular fields; large and
professional cultural networks such as EFAH and IETM and others;
informal networks such as Gulliver and its Gulliver Clearing House
facilitating individual mobility; intensive know-how transfer
operations such as Amsterdam-Maastricht Summer University,
Ecume/Ecumest, M. Hicter European Diploma, the Transeuropeennes''
summer school of South-East Europe good neighborhood and spin offs;
some QUANGOs such as KulturKontakt; European Cultural Foundation and
other private foundation of international outreach; and a large number
of individual cultural organizations that have international work as
part of their daily practice.
 
Among them, all these players have all what is necessary to establish
alliances and partnerships in the region, collaborate in designing and
implementing a long range culture development strategy for the entire
Balkan. They have to work with the national, regional and municipal
governments in Europe, with the European Union and the Council of
Europe, with universities and their networks, with professional
associations and some UN agencies. Not too much coordination and not
too directive approach. Some extra money to be spent wisely. Firm
belief in the grass root projects. And in the synergy of initiatives
involved. By changing the functioning of culture in Balkan all the
players would in fact be working towards the enforcement of the notion
of European citizenship and its benefits that in the EU Europe tend to
be taken for granted. Now is the moment to plan how to share these
values, standards and practices with our colleagues on the Balkan.

Dr Dragan Klaic is Professor of University of Amsterdam and Director
of Theater Instituut Nederland.       
E mail: [email protected]. 
Fax 31 20 551 3303.

------------------
balkanhr mailing list
To unsubscribe please send mail to [email protected] with the
word "unsubscribe balkanhr" (without the ") in the subject.
Please report abuse at [email protected]

-- 
==============================================================
MINELRES - a forum for discussion on minorities in Central&Eastern
Europe

Submissions: [email protected]  
Subscription/inquiries: [email protected] 
List archive: http://www.riga.lv/minelres/archive.htm
==============================================================