Cultural strategies in a polarized world: lessons from Europe’s cultural diplomacy leaders

The 2025 edition of the Sibiu International Performing Arts Market (SIPAM), held under the umbrella of the Sibiu International Theatre Festival, gathered some of the most influential figures in European cultural diplomacy for a timely conversation for Cultural Diplomacy in Action: Government Institutions Leading Global Engagement panel. With political shifts, budget austerity, and ideological polarization looming large, the session offered a rare window into how government-backed institutions build partnerships, sustain artistic programming, and remain relevant in turbulent times.

Moderated by Cosmin Chivu, Associate Professor at the Sands College of Performing Arts in New York, the panel featured high-ranking directors from the Romanian Cultural Institute (RCI), Goethe-Institut, Institut Français, Polish Institute, and Romania’s Ministry of Culture.

The panel brought together key cultural leaders including Liviu Jicman (President of the Romanian Cultural Institute and EUNIC), Corina Panaitopol (Director of RCI Brussels), Dorian Branea (Director of RCI New York), Ioana Anghel (Director of RCI Budapest), Monica Drăgan (Deputy Director, Romanian Ministry of Culture), Joachim Umlauf (Director, Goethe-Institut Romania), Natalia Mosor (Director, Polish Institute in Romania), Ioana Alexandru (Project Manager, Institut Français Bucharest), and Tilla Rudel (Director, Institut Français in Timișoara).

The dialogue unfolded as both a practical guide and a philosophical reflection on how to sustain culture as diplomacy in a rapidly shifting world. Together, they outlined a shared commitment to creating vibrant international platforms, despite vastly different political, financial, and operational realities.

Building bridges, not echo chambers

“We don't do cultural export,” said Dorian Branea, Director of the Romanian Cultural Institute in New York. “We do mutuality. We co-create projects with our American and international partners.” For Branea, the ideal cultural collaboration isn’t a top-down showcase, but an organically developed dialogue. His team at ICR New York focuses not only on audience development, but on cultural resilience in a post-truth world dominated by manipulation and ideological noise.

Liviu Jicman, President of the Romanian Cultural Institute, echoed this approach. “Whether we’re talking about tradition or contemporary productions, the criteria for performance and representation remain the same: quality and connection,” he said. For him, partnerships are not just strategic, they are foundational.

Natalia Mosor, Director of the Polish Institute in Romania, agreed. “Culture is about connection. Without connection, you can’t transmit anything, regardless of the political agenda.” She emphasized how joint cultural seasons, such as the ongoing Polish-Romanian initiative, serve as vehicles for deeper understanding and long-term engagement.

Institutions like the Institut Français in Timișoara, under the leadership of Tilla Rudel, rely entirely on local partnerships for every event they produce. “I never proposed a project without a Romanian partner,” Rudel noted, stressing the importance of shared authorship and regional involvement.

Even in the context of political constraints, cultural leaders are finding creative ways to protect autonomy. Dr. Joachim Umlauf of the Goethe-Institut Romania candidly acknowledged that “you can’t separate cultural work from politics, even if you try.” In countries where populist narratives dominate, he argued, partnerships become a shield against manipulation: “It’s how we avoid being instrumentalized.”

The partnership playbook: dialogue, clarity, and persistence

The panelists offered practical insights for artists and institutions hoping to partner with government-backed entities.

Start with dialogue, not demand, advised Rudel. “Be open to refining your project. Unexpected collaborations often turn out to be the most rewarding.”

Umlauf was direct: “Please don’t send WhatsApp pitches. Send a well-structured email. And if we don’t answer, follow up. Twice.” Persistence, he emphasized, is not only tolerated, it’s often necessary.

Monica Drăgan, Deputy Director at Romania’s Ministry of Culture, emphasized the importance of doing your homework: “Don’t write vague emails like ‘what funds are available for contemporary art.’ Use the new portal we developed, www.fonduri-cultura.ro, and understand your options.”

For more complex international funding, mechanisms like the Cantemir Program (Romania), Creative Europe, EA Grants, and Franco-German initiatives offer pathways to support mobility, residencies, and cross-border programming.

But above all, project proposals must align with institutional values. “If your project is fascist, homophobic, anti-feminist, or militaristic—don’t bother,” Branea stated plainly. “We work under a cultural strategy that’s public and principled. That’s our baseline.”

Budget realities: creativity under constraint

Despite a strong spirit of collaboration, the discussion around budgets revealed a more sobering reality. Joachim Umlauf revealed that Goethe-Institut’s cultural budget in Bucharest had fallen back to 2017 levels, just €40,000 annually, despite eight years of inflation. “We make it work by leaning heavily on EU funds and German foundations,” he said, “but it’s a real catastrophe.”

France, as Rudel pointed out, has a more decentralized model. In 2021, France’s total culture budget stood at €21 billion, funded through various ministries and regions. “We are lucky to have access to sponsors and municipal support, especially post-European Capital of Culture.”

Natalia Mosor noted that Poland’s cultural budget had improved slightly due to the country’s recent EU presidency, but inflation and rising costs mean that the gains are largely symbolic. “Plane tickets alone are eating into our budgets,” she added.

Romania faces its own challenges. Jicman shared that the Romanian Cultural Institute’s annual operating budget is between €3–4 million, but in 2025 the institute is running a deficit of 1.7 million RON. The new RCI branch in Tokyo received no additional state funding upon opening, and a high-profile bilateral cultural season with Poland was left unfunded entirely.

Drăgan confirmed that Romania’s culture budget stands at just 0.7% of GDP, and is often the first target for cuts. “Even at the European level, culture tends to come last,” she said. “We’re fighting to change that narrative.”

Sibiu as a model

As the session drew to a close, Corina Panaitopol, Director of the Romanian Cultural Institute in Brussels, offered a valuable perspective: “Sibiu is seen in Brussels as a best-practice model, a seed that grew into a garden.”

It’s a symbol of what can happen when partnerships flourish and when cultural policy aligns with grassroots energy. SIPAM, through sessions like this one, continues to prove that diplomacy, when rooted in culture, can still be human, humble, and transformative.