Blog

Introduction
This paper attempts, from the Greek perspective, as a crucial Balkan subset, to define on a cultural basis a framework for a strategic diplomatic approach exclusively to the remaining Balkan countries, which together with Greece constitute a largely homogeneous cultural entity, which is covered by the term “Balkans” as a geo-cultural entity with a distinct identity. This cultural diplomacy can be achieved by the methodical exploitation of Greece’s cultural assets (nation branding) in the exercise of Greek foreign policy with its Balkan neighbors as recipients.

In other words, Greek cultural diplomacy in the Balkans, in addition to the classical tools related to the glamour that the sacred rock of the Acropolis radiates, along with other prominent monuments, as the crown of ancient Greek civilization, the development of which is Western civilization, is facilitated to use as complementary tools the Byzantine monasteries scattered throughout the Balkans (including those of Mount Athos) and Byzantine iconography, stone bridges, the peculiarities of Balkan cuisine, folk music, as well as every small or large find that testifies to the touch of ancient Greek civilization outside the territory of present-day Greece, in southern and central Albania, North Macedonia and in areas around the Black Sea, in Bulgaria, Romania and beyond. It is precisely the largely homogeneous cultural ensemble that facilitates the achievement of the goal of Greek cultural diplomacy, which is to increase trust and enhance cooperation between the Balkan peoples, whose relations with each other have been burdened over the centuries by historical events that have negatively affected the region and maintain distrust and stereotypes. At the same time, it is a reality that Balkan Greece has a strong comparative advantage over other Balkan countries due to the global influence of Greek culture, which spread philosophy, theater, democracy, arts and sciences, sports and other institutions and actions, giving Greece, the cradle of Western civilization, the cultural scepters of which it is particularly proud. This is a Greek balance that is highly surplus, both in relation to other Balkan countries and at a global level.

The heterogeneity of recipients
The "soft power" exercise of Greek foreign policy in the Balkans through cultural diplomacy must be addressed primarily to the Balkan peoples and through them to their institutional leaders. However, each Balkan country appears different in terms of its historical relations with Greece and therefore the approach to each of them through cultural diplomacy must take into account the particularities and be methodically differentiated at the respective bilateral level. It should not escape the attention of the scholar that the Balkans constitute the region with the strongest historical memory in the world and in every attempt to bring the Balkan peoples closer together, they are caught in traps set by History, both very old and modern.
The fact is, however, that Greece's cultural comparative advantage, the heavy "brand name" it possesses, is not sufficiently exploited despite the fact that its value as "the heavy industry" of Greece is recognized; even more so, with regard to the Balkans, where Greece does not need to carry out any cultural "penetration", but mainly to highlight the local elements of Greek culture in its neighboring countries or the coexistence of the Balkan populations, on the one hand in the Byzantine commonwealth with its refined morals in relation to the West, on the other hand under the Turkish yoke in combination with the Orthodox religious fabric that characterizes almost the entire Balkans, also exploiting the history of the region, when it looks at us favorably, helped at the same time by the developed commercial and economic relations with them, and to process them for the common Balkan benefit.
Albania and Bulgaria are classic cases of countries that were sealed by Greek culture for long periods of time, offering fertile ground to modern Greece for the exercise of cultural diplomacy with very positive prospects.
As for Albania, apart from the fact that Greeks constitute the largest minority in the country, the kinship is obvious given that the Arvanites, a not insignificant percentage of the population of southern Greece, including some islands, originate from areas of present-day Albania. The migratory choice of these populations was not accidental. Those who migrated to Greece were descendants of those who had made their choice about where they belonged in 1054 with the religious schism between Orthodox and Catholics in an Albania that was 100% Christian and which was then divided into an Orthodox South and a Catholic North. They therefore belonged to a cultural area (present-day southern and central Albania), the main characteristic of which was the Greek Orthodox faith, as evidenced by their baptismal names (Anastasios, Konstantinos, Panagiotis, Evangelos, Demetrios, Stylianos, Sotirios, etc.). The single cultural unity with Greece is additionally documented by the frequent baptismal names of Albanians that come from Greek history (Socrates, Demosthenes, Plato, Odysseus, Aristotle, Leonidas, Athena, Aphrodite, etc.). Given that the language of the church was Greek and the Albanian language was only spoken, it is clear that even educated Albanians used only the Greek language in writing, which they naturally also spoke. Also, trade used the Greek language for centuries and thus a large percentage of the inhabitants were essentially bilingual, that is, they spoke Greek and Albanian. Therefore, the Greek language, as the most important connecting link of the Greeks and at the same time a "trademark" of Greek culture, forged the consciousness, but also the kinship relations, in the specific border areas of northern Hellenism. Much has been written about what the limits of Hellenism were in today's Albania and it would be unrealistic for someone to try to draw precise borders defining in black and white the Greekness or not of the corresponding area. It is considered certain that there were islands of Hellenism in northern parts with a majority of non-Greeks, as well as islands of non-Greeks in southern parts, where the Greek element prevailed. In general, one can accept the archaeologically based Jireček Line as the dividing line in the ancient Balkans, up to the 4th century AD, between the influence of the Greek language to the south and the influence of the Latin language to the north. After that, the entire area of ​​present-day Albania was sealed by Byzantine influence.
It is widely accepted and documented by archaeological findings that the area south of the Skoumbis (Genousos) river was inhabited by Greek mainland tribes and thus this area had a Greek character since ancient times, especially given the number of colonies of the ancient Greeks. As Georgios Tsevas writes in his excellent work entitled "History of Thebes and Boeotia", due to the many colonies, essentially "southern Albania is a colony of the ancient Greeks. From this point of view, therefore, the settlement of the Albanians in Greece can be considered their return to the homeland of their ancestors". Therefore, it is logical that a large number of heroes of the Greek Revolution of 1821 were originally from present-day southern Albania. It is known that the Kountourians, the Botsaraians, the Miaoulians, the Tombazidians, the Kriezians, the Zaimidians, Georgios Sachtouris, Laskarina Bouboulina and so many others did not act as mercenaries, they led the way, fighting for the Christian faith and the Greek homeland.
It was precisely on this peculiarity that the attempt to create a common state was based when, in the winter of 1877-1878, relevant contacts were made in Constantinople between a Greek delegation under the banker and later prime minister Stefanos Skouloudis and Albanian dignitaries. The line of the government of Admiral Konstantinos Kanaris with Foreign Minister Charilaos Trikoupis (1832-1896) was the formation of a dual monarchy under King George, according to the models of Austria-Hungary. However, developments in the Balkans did not favor a positive outcome of these efforts, resulting in Albania taking its own "national" path, which led to the declaration of its independence on November 28, 1912.
For Bulgaria, it is noted that it evolved through the centuries always having the support of Hellenism which had taken root in the region also since pre-Christian times. Sozopol was founded in 600 BC on the Black Sea coast by colonists from Miletus and was called Apollonia. Apollonia produced the Olympic champion Meneptolemus in 500 BC.
Further north are Anchialos, Mesimvria and Varna (ancient Odessa), closer to the current border with Romania.
In the mid-19th century, 4.000 Greeks lived in Anchialos. Mesimvria was inhabited exclusively by Greeks until 1906. It was the seat of a bishop and had important schools.
During the Byzantine period, the population of Varna was Greek. This was also the case during the Ottoman period until Ottomans and Armenians settled in the city. In 1860, Varna had 20.000 inhabitants, half of whom were Ottomans and one-third Greek, while from 1835 to 1913 Greek schools operated in the city.
Also, Plovdiv was for centuries a thriving commercial center with a Greek character. In the first half of the 19th century, the Greeks of Plovdiv founded many associations and clubs and published Greek newspapers. The economic prosperity, as a result of successful commercial activity, was reflected in the beautiful Greek architectural mansions that adorned the city. In 1853, Greek Consulates were established in Plovdiv, Varna and Pyrgos, which facilitated the commercial activity of the Greeks. An important merchant in Plovdiv who was also distinguished for his benevolence was Georgios Zarifis, who founded (1874-1875) the famous "Zarifia Educational Institutions", which operated until 1906. Among the Orthodox, the Greek language prevailed, which was also the main language of commerce until the 1860s. It is characteristic that the Bulgarian historian Konstantin Fotinov reported that until 1860 in the cemeteries of Plovdiv only four graves had names engraved in the Bulgarian language. Historic Greek churches in Plovdiv remind us of the presence of Hellenism, which flourished until the first decades of the twentieth century.
Greece currently maintains a strong presence in Bulgaria in terms of trade and investment, where it is among the top three countries of origin of foreign investment. In today's Bulgaria, mainly due to the developed trade and other economic relations, but also due to the intense tourist traffic between the two countries (summer tourism in Greece, winter in Bulgaria), many Greek language learning institutes operate, mainly in Sofia, Plovdiv and Varna.
It is clear that in both Albania and Bulgaria, there is an excellent infrastructure with a wealth of usable material, so that a methodical Greek cultural diplomacy can operate successfully.
Cultural diplomacy does not produce immediate results, but as a complement to the country's broader diplomatic action, it aims to create a friendly mood and to shape a philosophy of neighborliness, which will ensure on a long-term basis the conditions for an upgraded cooperation for mutual benefit. A strategic goal must be the recognition of Greece's position as a leading cultural value throughout time in the world and especially in the Balkans, the cultural hinterland of Greece, in order to serve its national interests in the best possible way through this recognized value.

The tools and their use

Unfortunately, some modern scholars, wanting to record the course of cultural diplomacy historically, sometimes confuse it with policies of appeasement, especially when referring to difficult moments of the Byzantine Empire. Providing money and splendid gifts to barbarian rulers was a common practice for the Byzantines that discouraged military confrontation. However, providing money, as taxes, to barbarian rulers so that they would not attack the empire was clearly a policy of appeasement, regardless of whether it was given in the form of an imperial “gift” as a reward, supposedly, for offering services to the empire. A similar tactic was followed, for example, by and the emperors of Austria against the Ottoman Empire during the Thirty Years' War (with Austria's main opponent being France) maintaining peace in their country's rear. However, with the end of the war, the gifts were stopped, since the Habsburg Empire felt itself sufficiently strong. Appeasement policies, still used today, are of a defensive nature and aim to maintain a status quo in order to avoid a possible defeat by a dangerous opponent. On the contrary, cultural diplomacy has an "aggressive" nature in the sense that it aims to penetrate the country in which it is interested and with "soft power" and "cultural tools", which highlight the prestige of the country practicing this particular diplomacy, to become convincing and to secure trust and friendship with the aim of the mutual benefit that can be ensured by a long-term peace. In this direction, Byzantine titles were awarded to independent rulers, and Byzantine princesses were utilized, who married foreign rulers and not infrequently contributed to the civilization of their respective new environments, as was characteristically the case with the niece of Emperor Manuel I, Theodora Komnenos (1134-1184), wife of Duke Henry II of the House of Babenberg who ruled Austria from 976 to 1246, and with the niece of Nikephoros Phocas, Princess Theophano, who married in 972 the then heir and later German emperor Otto II.
Cultural diplomacy, addressed to the people and through them to their leaderships, has quite a few tools for actions that directly target citizens, including the mass media and with priority to the young, who in a few years will be making decisions in their country. The refined educational/cultural diplomacy, which the major European countries have been following for decades through their established educational institutions (British Council, French Institute, Goethe Institute, Italian School, Cervantes Institute), can serve as a model for a corresponding methodical dissemination of the Greek language and the promotion of ancient Greek literature as well as modern Greek literature and poetry in the Balkan environment of similar mentality to Greece. Already, the impressively increased trade and economic relations between Greece and the Balkan countries after 1990 have led to the operation of a significant number of Greek language departments in private foreign language institutes, and hundreds of thousands of Balkan immigrants speak the Greek language, which the problems of everyday life help them learn quickly and in depth.
We present indicative examples of actions for the dissemination of the Greek language in our geographical surroundings and the closer acquaintance of Balkan citizens with Greece, which unfortunately few of them are carried out, but it is hoped that in the near (?) future Greece will be able to move to another level and make greater use of existing possibilities:
– promotion of the World Day of the Greek Language, which is February 9th by joint ministerial decision from April 24, 2017, by establishing awards for texts in the Greek language and writing competitions in the Balkan countries in the native language on Greek topics and issues of common interest. In this context, e.g. the Embassy of Greece in Bulgaria in collaboration with the Department of Modern Greek Language of the Department of Classical and Modern Philology of the Sofia University “Agios Klimis Ohridos”, celebrated, on February 9, 2018, for the first time, the World Day of the Greek Language, with an event that aimed to bring the two neighboring peoples closer together through the Greek language. A similar event for World Greek Language Day was held in February 2019 at the University of Gjirokaster.
– funding translations of Greek authors (literature, poets, historians, etc.) into Balkan languages. For example, a very important contribution in this direction is the two-volume bilingual work by the Bulgarian Stefan Getchev with poems and their translations into Bulgarian by Cavafy, Seferis, Diktaios, Elytis, Ritsos, Sikelianos, Livaditis and dozens of other contemporary Greek poets under the title Contemporary Greek Poetry, published in Sofia in 1998 in collaboration with the Embassy of Greece. As Georgi Danailov rightly points out in the preface to the work, "the Bulgarian reader will experience the joy of communicating with such famous representatives of a people, with whom we will live as neighbors for centuries and sooner or later we will have to make a grand and at the same time simple discovery, that what we have in common is much more than what separates us."
– creation of model Greek high schools in the Balkan countries with a particularly careful curriculum and teaching ancient Greek and modern Greek as a foreign language. It is noted that in Plovdiv (Philippine), Bulgaria, a high school has been operating for decades, in which Greek is taught as a foreign language, while in the same context, modern Greek schools were created in Albania.
– direct or indirect subsidization of Greek language learning centers, to which companies with Greek interests in the Balkans can send their native employees.
– preparation of hosting programs for Balkan students in Greece for on-site learning of the Greek language during the summer holidays.
– creation of new chairs in Balkan universities for ancient Greek and Hellenic Studies.
– establishment of Greek universities in the Balkan countries and special postgraduate departments in Greece for Balkan students (in the future when political and economic conditions in Greece allow).
– organization of student educational trips to Greece with visits to archaeological and other historical sites and monuments. For example, historical battle sites of the Greek revolution of 1821 are also of interest to other Balkan peoples who lived under the Turkish yoke and create feelings of friendship and solidarity. Similar visits to Greece should also be organized for journalists from the Balkan countries, so that they can act as multipliers.
– granting a significant number of scholarships for higher studies in Greece in Philology, Archaeology, History, Byzantinology, Theology.
– twinning of historic cities and frequent joint events in them.
– exploitation of any local interest in the Balkan countries for ancient Greece, Byzantium, the Ottoman Empire and for current issues of politics and international relations.
– organization on a systematic basis by the Greek embassies, in collaboration with institutions and think tanks of the respective countries, of lectures by high-profile Greek personalities on issues of international relations and geopolitics and other issues of mutual interest.
– utilization of the local "yeast", nuclei of the existing appropriate Hellenism in each Balkan country, by offering voluntary work but also by funding specialized knowledge and skills for cultural action programs.
– awarding personalities from the Balkans for their contribution to cooperation between their countries and Greece.
– search for cultural sponsors among the economic actors of each Balkan country, with priority given to those collaborating with Greece.
– organizing subsidized seminars in Greece, in the English language, for selected groups, e.g. students of a specific field (history, political science, sociology, etc.), journalists, etc.
– organization on a permanent basis of specialized Balkan Conferences in Greece (with funding from the European Union as long as it exists), e.g. for doctors in Kos, for mathematicians in Samos, philosophy in Halkidiki, legal sciences in Athens, etc. As an example, the successful course of the European Society for Modern Hellenic Studies is mentioned, which is going to organize in Komotini, in November 2019, the 4th Congress of Modern Hellenists of the Balkan countries, which aims to promote the strengthening of ties and scientific cooperation between Hellenists in the Balkan countries.
In addition to language, Greece must systematically ensure the preservation of its cultural glory by utilizing the important tools offered by its glorious history, e.g. at the Marathon races, at the Olympic Games, with cultural activities within the framework of international conferences, meetings, seminars, at Delphi, at Epidaurus, at Dodona, at Kos, the homeland of Hippocrates, at Corinth, at Dion, at Samos, the homeland of Pythagoras, at Knossos, in the particular homelands of the ancient Greek philosophers and elsewhere.
However, more recent Greek history also has useful connecting links, such as Rigas Velestinlis, who closely connects the Greeks with the peoples of the Balkans, who lived a common life during the Ottoman rule, through the vision of the freedom of the Balkans and the coexistence of the Balkan peoples. At the bilateral Greek-Albanian level, the same role can be played as a connecting link by Georgios Kastriotis (Skenderbeg).
Also, the historical parameter on a long-term basis particularly facilitates the Greek-Serbian rapprochement, while the results of the successful allied coalition of the First Balkan War (1912-1913) can inspire the creation of Balkan institutions that will ensure progress and development through peaceful creative collective cooperation in the Balkans.
Another important aspect of cultural diplomacy is religious diplomacy. In the Orthodox Balkans, the Greek presence is entitled to highlight its contribution to the Christianization and broader cultural development of the Slavs (Cyril and Methodius, 9th century) with the baptism of the Bulgarian ruler, Boris, under Emperor Michael III, in 870 and the Christianization of the Serbs, but also in the wider Balkan region with the Christianization of the Moravians (9th century) and the Kievan Rus' (10th century).

The methodology

As international scholar Vasilios Paipais states in the conclusions of his very valuable study entitled Byzantine Diplomacy as a Model of Cultural Diplomacy, “the practice of cultural diplomacy is intertwined with tangible cultural goals without generating reactions”. In order to be successful in the practice of specialized cultural diplomacy aimed at the Balkan countries, strategic government planning is required with coordination of the steps of approach, with avoidance of overlaps of involved bodies, avoidance of bureaucratic procedures, with continuity and consistency and evaluation of each activity. It is considered advisable to have a competent coordinating state body under the supervision of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in order to avoid personal “flares” of dubious results (and often high costs) by amateurs and inappropriate bodies.
It is also considered essential to avoid "hating" by non-Greek centers (European Union, NATO, NGOs, etc.) of successful Greek activities in the Balkan countries, while, on the one hand, the exploitation of the possibilities that UNESCO can offer, on the other hand, the methodical effort of financial support from sponsors of the maritime, industrial and export sector of Greece and the cooperation with local Authorities, Universities, Museums, etc. without losing control, are considered appropriate.
It is necessary to define priorities and group goals, excluding dysfunctional and/or dangerous tools that could potentially have negative impacts on Greece's bilateral relations.
Also, opportunistic activities should be avoided (with rare exceptions), the impact of which quickly fades when there is no corresponding continuity.

Conclusions

The wealth that Greek cultural diplomacy has at its disposal in the Balkans is included in the group of untapped assets along with Greece's mineral wealth. As in other sectors, diplomacy lacks strategy. Unfortunately, we are always looking for ad hoc solutions, but developments are sweeping at their speed.
The "substantially" competent Greek concept of foreign policy seems not to have abandoned the framework of the 19th century and the stagnation of the relevant philosophy is showing more and more negative results, since rusty perceptions generally function as a brake on efforts at social and economic progress. There is a preference for weighty titles in the distribution of relevant responsibilities, but the corresponding contents are particularly poor, as are the results of any individual actions undertaken.
The extent to which cultural diplomacy can be effective will of course always be judged by how its diplomatic tools are used and not only by what they are. Finally, it must be made clear that cultural diplomacy is not a panacea and its capabilities, everywhere but particularly in the Balkans, reach a certain point and cannot replace classical diplomacy but only complement it substantially because in diplomacy the aim is to crack hard nuts and cultural diplomacy, as soft power, cannot do this.

Selected bibliography and articles
Vasiliadis N. – Boutsiouki S.: Cultural diplomacy – Greek and international dimensions (Athens, 2015).
Georgiou Ar.: Greek cultural diplomacy (Athens, 16.10.2014).
Giannaras Chr.: Cultural Diplomacy (Ikaros Publications, Athens, 2003).
Hellenic Institute for Strategic Studies: Proceedings of a conference on the topic: Cultural geopolitics (Athens, 11.5.2018).
Iakovidis I.: Cultural diplomacy as a soft form of power (Athens, 27.3.2015).
Kosmidou Z.: Cultural diplomacy (Athens, 24.11.2008).
Kostoula El.: Cultural diplomacy: The case of Greece (Athens, 2010).
Paipais V.: Byzantine diplomacy as a model of cultural diplomacy (13.12.2013). http://vizantinaistorika.blogspot.com/2013/12/blog-post_13.html
Tzoumaka El.: Cultural Diplomacy (I. Sideris Publications, Athens 2005).
Tsapalos Om.: Cultural diplomacy: A tool in abundance in a sleeping country (Athens, 25.10.2011).

*George E. Doudoumis
Former Economic Ambassador, Author