Arts & International Affairs: Vol. 3, No. 2, Summer/Autumn 2018 | Page 45

ARTS & INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
to reduce the often complex individual trajectories to mere national representatives of
their respective countries of origin, nor is their repertoire linked to any form of (perceived)
national music. In this perspective, participants in the WEDO projects are rather
informal ambassadors of mutual understanding through the means of music and music
education.
Beyond that, we decided to focus on issues that extend the main debates that have been
shaping the field of cultural diplomacy. By exploring two dimensions (a person and a
structure), this paper aims at carrying on two specific concepts in diplomacy studies.
First of all, does Daniel Barenboim practice “celebrity diplomacy”? This question refers
to the role of the musician within the political international sphere. As introduced by Cooper
(2008), “celebrity diplomacy” includes three features: firstly, the use of means of mass
communication to disseminate a cause (also called “megaphone diplomacy”); secondly,
the desire to interact with heads of state and governments as an equivalent partner
in negotiations; thirdly, actual recognition by these heads of state and governments. 3
Besides, does the Divan cultivate a form of “multi-track diplomacy”? This type of diplomacy
tends to change the official diplomacy by transforming mentalities and influencing
political negotiators in conflictual figurations. It exceeds the classic distinction between
track 1 (official and political negotiations) and track 2 (informal interaction initiated
by nongovernmental actors). Multi-track diplomacy includes all forms of mediation
from the private sector to official state representatives (Diamond and MacDonald 1991;
Notter and Diamond 1996). It develops new means of communication beyond the
meetings between political leaders and changes the enemy’s image thanks to an individualization
of the otherness, thus influencing the official negotiations by solving the root
causes of the conflict (Rouhana 1999).
The paper is divided into two sections. A first part will illustrate how and why Barenboim
evolves in the public debate in order to explain his own position in the Israeli–Palestinian
conflict. Unlike other artists who intended to penetrate the international political
arena by defining themselves as fully fledged negotiators, Barenboim sticks to his autonomy
from politics. This is the main reason why the category of celebrity diplomacy seems
not quite relevant when applied to the Barenboim case (I). Secondly, we will clarify the
main purpose developed by the orchestra, i.e. to promote a new symbol for peaceful coexistence
and intercultural understanding through joint concert performances. Taking
up this idea, our paper will also discuss how the WEDO is implicitly contributing to a
multi-track diplomacy, but entailing several particularities in view of the level of intervention
which Barenboim advocates (II). Additionally, both sections will address the
underlying ambiguities that are resulting from this double feature (autonomization in
part I and symbolization in part II).
3 Here, we refrain from interpreting Daniel Barenboim’s position as fully representative for “celebrity
diplomacy.” Other authors, however, adapt this approach (for instance, Mahiet, Ferrugato, and
Ahrendt 2014:9).
42