Friday, March 29, 2013

Zimbabwe Poets for Human Rights




Our class discussion on cultural diplomacy reminds me of conference I attended last month where I was introduced to Zimbabwean slam poetry artist, Michael Mabwe.

One of the State Department’s cultural diplomacy initiatives is the International Visitors Leadership Program (IVLP), a program that facilitates professional exchanges between the U.S. and other countries. Through my internship, I had the pleasure of attending a conference in February honoring the work of past IVLP participants where I met Michael Mabwe. Having participated in the IVLP in 2008, he took the “best practices” he learned during the exchange to advance his cause back home in Zimbabwe in his organization, Zimbabwe Poets for Human Rights. As a human rights activist, Mabwe organizes community arts forums to promote tolerance and encourages discussion of controversial topics such as corruption, media freedom, democracy, and good governance. Among other things, Mabwe volunteers his time as the Director of the Zimbabwe-United States Alumni Association, where he works to dispel myths about the U.S. prevalent in Zimbabwe. The State Department invited him to return to the U.S. in February where he performed and spoke of his work at home.

Michael Mabwe presents and exceptional case where exchanges can advance bilateral goals of mutual understanding. The first minute of the video clip captures a beautifully crafted poem from his organization. Certainly, I encourage you to watch it in its entirety, but if you can only watch a little bit, watch the first few minutes to get a taste of the emotional appeal of cultural diplomacy.

2 comments:

  1. Hi Kristie! Great Post. This reminded me of something I saw over on DipNote, the US State Department's official blog, last month.

    In a post entitled Swazi Artists Bring Dr. King's Values Alive Through Music, Poetry, and Art, Makila James discusses an event at US Embassy Mbabane in Swaziland where artists, musicians, and poets gathered to create create works commemorating Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. They focused on arts to sustain and uplift efforts for peace and human rights, similar to how civil rights activists had during the Civil Rights Movement.

    Maytha Alhassen discussed arts and diplomacy as she compared current hip-hop out reach programs to jazz diplomacy during the cold war in her article "Remarkable Current: Music as Public Diplomacy." While I believe jazz was effective during the Cold War for reasons other than simply its musical medium, I think she's on to something when discussing how the collaborative effort undertaken while producing an artform fosters community.

    It is programs like the ILVP and this Swaziland event that cultivate relationships and emphasize the importance and possibilities for peace building by providing people with a community and aiding them in imagining an alternative future.

    ReplyDelete
  2. “We can agree to agree, disagree to disagree, agree to disagree to a degree, and remain free.”

    I love these words by Mr. Mabwe. To me, it captures the essence of what U.S. public diplomacy should be all about. The goal is to convey the core ideas of America (i.e. democracy, civic engagement, human rights, and mutual understanding) while also understanding the core ideas of our counterparts in the world. Cultural diplomacy is perhaps one of the most impactful and cost-efficient means of facilitating such communication.

    I mention the cost-efficient aspect of cultural diplomacy in light of a recent letter by Michael Kaiser, President of the Kennedy Center of the Performing Arts, to Secretary Kerry (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-kaiser/an-open-letter-to-secreta_b_2947790.html). In the letter, Kaiser seems to conclude that the exchange of information and ideas that occurs in programs like the IVLP is a waste of money. He proposes a new form of cultural diplomacy in which the U.S. sends art administrators abroad to teach fundraising skills to their counterparts at cultural institutions. Kaiser’s idea is meant to reflect the current fiscal climate in which the arts can no longer rely on government funding.

    This suggestion is problematic for multiple reasons. Holding international workshops sponsored by the U.S. Department of State on how to raise money not only commodifies culture, it also follows along the old public diplomacy paradigm that emphasizes one-way communication. Just as the United States has its particular means of supporting the arts, so do other countries. Saying that the American way of supporting the arts is the right way defeats another key goal of public diplomacy – listening. We may not always like what other countries have to say, but we should still “agree to disagree to a degree, and remain free.”

    ReplyDelete