The second research summit of the SSHRC-supported research project “The Cultural Relations Approach to Diplomacy: Practice, Policy and Players,” held in fall 2021, addressed how the landscape of actors or players involved in cultural diplomacy has changed. It explored the premise that nation-states are no longer the only key players in cultural, or any other form of, diplomacy, but that they are increasingly joined by other actors like museums, cultural institutions, NGOs, artists, and the civil society: how is the diplomatic landscape diversifying to become a constellation that privileges network approaches to diplomacy? Enter diasporas and museums, two types of actors that we argue play a critical role in the reshaping of diplomacy, and that were explored in the panel we’re reporting on here.

This panel emphasized how diaspora communities and their members are central to addressing the question of the summit, because they sit at the intersection of source and host countries. At the same time, the session recognized the growing importance of museums, increasingly recognized as diplomatic actors in their own right rather than as entities that feed into the soft power agendas of nation-states (though the latter is still the case in many instances).

These were some of the key themes we explored together with our panellists: Dr. Ulrike Al-Khamis, Director and CEO of the Aga Khan Museum in Toronto, Ontario; Dr. Adán B. F. García, Academic Chair of the Memory and Tolerance Museum, Mexico City, Mexico; Dr. Palina Louangketh, Founder and Executive Director of the Idaho Museum of International Diaspora (IMID) in Boise, Idaho; and Dr. Grace Wong, Chair of the Board of the Canadian Chinese Museum in Vancouver, British Columbia.

Museums have historically been associated with notions of nationhood and national heritage, yet the diversity and multiplicity of diasporic experiences disrupt these nationalist narratives. According to cultural studies scholar Ien Ang (2011), “the diasporic perspective cracks open the nationalist narrative of seamless national unity, highlighting the fact that nations today inevitably harbour populations with multiple pasts, bringing memories and identities into circulation that often transcend or undercut the homogenising image of nationhood and national heritage” (83). For the Chinese Canadian Museum this means that “diversity, equity, and inclusion has real meaning in everything we do. And in particular, we want to include the perspective and the voice of Chinese Canadians, in a sense, telling their own history in this country.” For Palina Louangketh this is about “helping all players to increase [our their] level of cultural intelligence,” but also it is “for them [diasporas] to really lead the charge about sharing their stories and their histories.” In the case of Idaho, people from 123 countries of origin [and distinct peoples] who have settled in Idaho are represented in the IMID and Louangketh charges herself and her museum with including the expertise resting in those communities rather than claiming an authoritative stance for the museum. At the Museum of Tolerance, Adán García sees the need to engage directly with the people whose testimonies are foregrounded in the museum or by “speaking to organizations that already had made some work with memory.” The push to seek out authentic voices was shared across the panel. In a museum setting, doing so requires rethinking museological approaches: “We should look at appropriate museologies that take into account from within the collecting traditions and practices of different communities and making real active space also for the intangible dimensions of collecting thought,” said Ulrike Al-Khamis.

“ I often reflect on the definitions that we have to deal with in our work as museums. And of course, the term museum in itself is already problematic because it comes with all sorts of expectations, and preconceptions, and often misconceptions.”

Dr. Ulrike Al-Khamis, Aga Khan Museum

In the session, we also queried the appropriateness of museums as a setting for diversity, inclusion, and representation. Given both the limitations and potentials of the idea of “the museum,” we noted that museums around the world have increasingly been developing new initiatives to democratize and diversify their spaces and capture diverse voices and experiences, including those of diasporas – a practice well reflected and embodied in the museums represented on the panel. While museums are trying to move away from their traditional modernist and elitist values and become more democratic and inclusive spaces, there remain ideological and institutional limitations to achieving this goal. The idea of the “museum” comes with a lot of luggage, and the institution of the museum remains associated with colonialism, elitism, and exclusion. So, we wanted to know how the choice to capture the diasporic narrative/experience in the vehicle of the museum could apply certain constraints or benefits that would not be present in a different institutional setting. Ulrike Al-Khamis stated that she “often reflect(s) on the definitions that we have to deal with in our work as museums. And of course, the term museum in itself is already problematic because it comes with all sorts of expectations, and preconceptions, and often misconceptions.” The Aga Khan Museum, for example is in the position not to be “tainted with an imposed nationalistic narrative at all. It’s actually given to upturn the traditional nationalistic agendas and act as a hub of intercultural coming together and learning that strives to transcend differences and artificial barriers, while offering alternative narratives that not only allow visitors to learn with each other and from each other, but that help and then also imagining a better future where diverse voices are welcome and allowed to make an impactful contribution in Museums.

There seems to be hope for the concept of the museum as an institution if traditional approaches are dismantled.“When we look at museums and the notion of diaspora, what we should also always keep in mind is that we should look at appropriate museologies that take into account from within the collecting traditions of different communities and making real active space also for the intangible dimensions of thought,” said Ulrike Al-Khamis. Similarly, Grace Wong commented on the limitations of the idea of “the museum” in relation to national narratives. With national histories (and museums) in Canada having traditionally ignored or downplayed Indigenous people and immigrants, the Chinese Canadian Museum wishes to “reconsider this national narrative.” One of the major goals of the museum, according to Wong, is to overcome these limitations of other museums by “ start[ing] from the tradition of going forward without the blinders of past practices.”

This panel only scratched the surface of thematizing diasporic and other cultural museums in relation to diplomacy. Future events will address this topic head-on as museums are increasingly recognized as diplomatic players in their own right. Museums could be seen as increasingly shaping their global engagement activities through the lens of their own agendas, priorities, and principles, thereby playing a growing role in fostering local-global connections and building dialogues across peoples, cultures, and locations. Do the people working in the museums represented on the panel see themselves and their institutions as fulfilling diplomatic roles? And what roles and significance do the in-between status of diasporic communities in this context hold? The contributions of our panellists already clearly indicate the importance of relationships – relationships that engage people and communities on their own terms – and engagements that challenge traditional museological practices. With relationships at the heart of our discussion, one could jump to the conclusion that if diplomacy is about anything, it is about relationships. This presumption immediately implicates museums and calls on them to see themselves, and act, as diplomats. It is time to find out from them if they see their work in this way.