Kültürel Değerlerin İlişki İnşa Etmedeki Rolü: Kültürel Diplomasi ve Ulus Markalama Bağlamında Mevlâna (Rumi)

Öz

Kültürel diplomasi ve ulus markalama stratejileri, ülkelerin uluslararası alanda algılanma biçimlerinde önemli bir yere sahiptir. Evrensel mesajlar ileten değerler, kültürlerarası etkileşimi teşvik ederek kültürel diplomasinin etkisini artırmaktadır. Bu bağlamda Mevlâna, sevgi temelli felsefesiyle Türkiye için güçlü bir yumuşak güç kaynağıdır. Araştırmada, Mevlâna’nın evrensel değerlerinin yabancı ziyaretçilerin Türkiye algıları üzerindeki etkisi incelenmiş ve bu değerlerin Türkiye’nin kültürel diplomasi ile ulus markalama çabalarındaki rolü analiz edilmiştir. Dünya genelinde Rumi olarak bilinen bu düşünür Türkiye’de Mevlâna adıyla anıldığından, çalışmada yerel kullanım tercih edilmiştir. Betimsel ve nicel yöntemin kullanıldığı araştırmada, veriler kültürel diplomasi ve ulus markalama algılarını ölçmeye yönelik bir anketle toplanmıştır. Bulgular, katılımcıların Mevlâna’nın evrensel değerlerine genel olarak olumlu yaklaştığını (%54,1) ve bu değerlerin Türkiye’nin kültürel diplomasi hedeflerine katkı sağladığını göstermektedir. Mevlâna’nın ortak anlam ve kimlik oluşturmadaki rolü olumlu değerlendirilse de etkinin bazı gruplarda sınırlı olduğu görülmüştür. Mevlâna, Türkiye’nin ulus marka imajına ve kültürel diplomasisine olumlu katkılar sağlamaktadır. Ancak, bu etkinin kalıcı bağlara dönüşmesi için stratejik planlama ve uzun vadeli programlar geliştirilmelidir. Kültürel bir değer olarak Mevlâna, Türk İslam kültürünü evrensel bir perspektifte yansıtarak, uluslararası alanda ortak anlam ve kimlik inşasında daha etkin bir şekilde değerlendirilmelidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kültürel Diplomasi
• Ulus Markalama
• Yumuşak Güç
• İlişki İnşa Etme
• Mevlâna (Rumi)

The Role of Cultural Values in Relationship Building: Mevlâna (Rumi) in the Context of Cultural Diplomacy and Nation Branding

Öz

Cultural diplomacy and nation branding strategies play “a crucial role in shaping a country’s international image. Values that convey universal messages play a pivotal role in enhancing the effectiveness of cultural diplomacy by fostering intercultural understanding and interaction. In this context, Mevlâna, through his philosophy of love, serves as an essential source of soft power for Türkiye. This study examines the influence of Mevlâna’s universal values on foreign visitors’ perceptions of Türkiye and explores their role in Türkiye’s cultural diplomacy and nation branding efforts. This thinker and Sufi mystic, better known worldwide as Rumi, is known in Türkiye as Mevlâna, so this study is based on local usage. In this study, a descriptive and quantitative approach was adopted, with data collected through a questionnaire developed to measure perceptions of cultural diplomacy and nation branding. The findings indicate that the majority of respondents (54.1%) perceive the universal values represented by Mevlâna positively and recognize their contribution to Türkiye’s cultural diplomacy objectives. While Mevlâna’s role in fostering shared meanings and identities within Turkish culture was positively evaluated, the impact was found to be limited among certain groups. Although Mevlâna makes a positive contribution to Türkiye’s national brand image and cultural diplomacy efforts, transforming this influence into sustainable international relationships requires strategic planning and long–term initiatives. As a cultural asset, Mevlâna embodies Turkish–Islamic heritage from a universal perspective and should be leveraged more effectively in the international arena to foster shared meanings and identities.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Cultural Diplomacy
• Nation Branding
• Soft Power
• Building Relationship
• Mevlâna (Rumi)

Kaynakça

1. Aksungur, A. G. (2008). Turizmde markalaşma ve tanıtma faaliyetlerinin önemi: İspanya ve Türkiye’nin karşılaştırmalı analizi [Dissertation]. T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Tanıtma Genel Müdürlüğü.
2. Ang, I., Isar, Y. R. & Mar, P. (2015). Cultural diplomacy: Beyond the national interest? International Journal of Cultural Policy, 21(4), 365–381. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286632.2015.1042474
3. Anholt, S. (2011). Beyond the nation brand: The role of image and identity in international relations. In A. Pike (Ed.), Brands and branding geographies (pp. 289–304). Edward Elgar Publishing.
4. Anholt, S. (2015). Public diplomacy and competitive identity: Where’s the link? In G. J. Golan, S.-U. Yang, & D. F. Kinsey (Eds.), International Public relations and public diplomacy: Communication and engagement (pp. 189–208). Peter Lang.
5. Anholt-Ipsos Nation Brands Index. (2023). Anholt-Ipsos nation brands index. https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2022-11/NBI%202022%20-%20Full%20Report.pdf
6. Arceneaux, P., & Bier, L. M. (2022). Cultural considerations and rigorous qualitative methods in public diplomacy research. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 18(3), 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-021-00232-4
7. Aronczyk, M. (2008). ‘Living the brand’: Nationality, globality, and the identity strategies of nation branding consultants. International Journal of Communication, 2, 41–65. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/218
8. Aslanbenzer, H. (2020, June 5). Rumi: Islamic scholar, poet and mystic. Daily Sabah. https://www.dailysabah.com/arts/portrait/rumi-islamic-scholar-poet-and-mystic

9. Ayhan, K. J. (2019). The Boundaries of public diplomacy and nonstate actors: A taxonomy of perspectives. International Studies Perspectives, 20(1), 63–83. https://doi.org/10.1093/isp/eky010
10. Batu, M. (2021). A discussion on digital society and popular culture from the perspective of social change. In Berfin Varışlı (Ed.), Popular culture and social change interdisciplinary studies (pp. 81–106). Çizgi Kitabevi.
11. Batu, M., Oz, M., Tos, O., & Kurban, V. (2024). Media coverage of nowruz rituals and reflections: Similarities and differences across the Turkic world. Türk Kültürü ve Hacı Bektaş Veli Araştırma Dergisi, 111, 263–284. https://doi.org/10.60163/tkhcbva.1470705
12. Bier, L. M., & White, C. L. (2021). Cultural diplomacy as corporate strategy: An analysis of Pasona Group’s “New Tohoku” program in Japan. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 17(2), 180–192. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-020-00165-4
13. Brown, R. (2021). A Historical Sociology of the new cultural diplomacy. International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, 34(4), 403–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10767-020-09386-0
14. Buhmann, A., & Ingenhoff, D. (2015). Advancing the country image construct from a public relations perspective: From model to measurement. Journal of Communication Management, 19(1), 62–80. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCOM-11-2013-0083
15. Clarke, D. (2014). Theorising the role of cultural products in cultural diplomacy from a Cultural Studies perspective. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 22(2), 147–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286632.2014.958481
16. Clarke, D. (2020). Cultural diplomacy: Oxford research encyclopedias. Oxford University Press.
17. Cull, N. J. (2009). Public diplomacy: Lessons from the past. Figueroa Press.
18. Cummings, M. C. (2003). Cultural diplomacy and the United States government: A survey. Center for Arts and Culture.
19. Dinnie, K., & Sevin, E. (2020). The changing nature of nation branding: Implications for public diplomacy. In N. Snow, & N. J. Cull. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of public diplomacy (pp. 137–144). Routledge.
20. Fan, Y. (2006). Branding the nation: What is being branded? Journal of Vacation Marketing, 12(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356766706056633
21. Fan, Y. (2010). Branding the nation: Towards a better understanding. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 6(2), 97–103. https://doi.org/10.1057/pb.2010.16
22. Gienow-Hecht, J. C. E., & Donfried, M. C. (Eds.). (2010). Searching for a cultural diplomacy. Berghahn Books.
23. Gilboa, E. (2023). Moving to a new phase in public diplomacy research. In E. Gilboa (Ed.), A research agenda for public diplomacy (pp. 1–23). Edward Elgar Publishing.
24. Goff, P. M. (2020). Cultural diplomacy. In N. Snow, & N. J. Cull (Eds.), Routledge handbook of public diplomacy (2nd edition) (pp. 30–37). Routledge.
25. Grincheva, N. (2023). The past and future of cultural diplomacy. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 30(2), 172–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286632.2023.2183949
26. Hao, A. W., Paul, J., Trott, S., Guo, C., & Wu, H.-H. (2021). Two decades of research on nation branding: A review and future research agenda. International Marketing Review, 38(1), 46–69. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-01-2019-0028 Isar, Y. R. (2012). Kültür diplomasisi: Şişirilmiş bir itiraf peşinde mi? In A. Özkan, & T. E. Öztürk (Eds), Kamu diplomasisi (pp. 111–126). TASAM Yayınları.
27. Kim, H. (2017). Bridging the theoretical gap between public diplomacy and cultural diplomacy. The Korean Journal of International Studies, 15(2), 293–326. http://doi.org/10.14731/kjis.2017.08.15.2.293
28. Köksoy, E. (2015). Kamu diplomasisi ve halkla ilişkiler ilişkisi: Kuramsal bir değerlendirme [A theoretical assessment of the relationship between public diplomacy and public relations]. Marmara Journal of Communication, 22, 211–231. https://doi.org/10.17829/midr.20152214175
29. Konya Provincial Directorate of Culture and Tourism (2023). Turizm istatistikleri. T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı. https://yigm.ktb.gov.tr/TR-201126/yillik-bultenler.html
30. Leonard, M., Stead, C., & Smewing, C. (2002). Public diplomacy. The Foreign Policy Centre.
31. Lien, D., & Tang, P. (2022). Let’s play tic-tac-toe: Confucius Institutes versus American cultural centres. Economic and Political Studies, 10(2), 129–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/20954816.2021.1920194
32. Mark, S. (2009). A greater role for cultural diplomacy (Vol. 1). Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael.
33. Mark, S. (2010). Rethinking cultural diplomacy: The cultural diplomacy of New Zealand, the Canadian Federation and Quebec. Political Science, 62(1), 62–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032318710370466
34. Melissen, J. (2005). The new public diplomacy: Between theory and practice. In J. Melissen (Ed.), The new public diplomacy (pp. 3–27). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230554931_1
35. Mevlana Kalkınma Ajansı. (n.d.). Dünya’da ve ülkemizde somut olmayan kültürel miras örnekleri [Examples of intangible cultural heritage around the world and in our country]. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Sanayi ve Teknoloji Bakanlığı, T.C. Mevlana Kalkınma Ajansı. https://www.mevka.org.tr/upload/files/archived/DsyVgGDNb121202121409PM.pdf
36. Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (n.d.). 2019-2023 stratejik plan. Retrieved 3 January 2024, from https://www.mfa.gov.tr/data/BAKANLIK/2019-2023-stratejik-plani.pdf
37. Nas, A. (2021). Ulus markalama: Dünyadan örneklerle kuram ve uygulama [Nation branding: Theory and practice]. Kriter Yayınevi.
38. Nisbett, M. (2013). New perspectives on instrumentalism: An empirical study of cultural diplomacy. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 19(5), 557–575. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286632.2012.704628
39. Nye, J. (2008). Public diplomacy and soft power. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 94–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716207311699
40. Nye, S. J. (2017). Yumuşak güç: Dünya siyasetinde başarının araçları [Soft Power: The means to success in world politics]. BB101 Yayınları.
41. Özer, N. P. (2023). Semiotics and communication. In A. M. Zengin, & F. Yazar (Eds.), Strategic approaches in communication (pp. 5–22). NEU Press.
42. Purtaş, F. (2013). Türk dış politikasının yükselen değeri: Kültürel diplomasi [Rising value of Turkish foreign policy: Cultural diplomacy]. Gazi Akademik Bakış, 7(13), 1–14.
43. Rivera, T. (2015). Distinguishing cultural relations from cultural diplomacy: The British council’s relationship with her majesty’s government. Figueroa Press.
44. Sevin, E., Metzgar, E. T., & Hayden, C. (2019). The scholarship of public diplomacy: Analysis of a growing field. International Journal of Communication, 13, 4814–4837.
45. Sheafer, T., & Gabay, I. (2009). Mediated public diplomacy: A strategic contest over international agenda building and frame building. Political Communication, 26(4), 447–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600903297240
46. T.C. Konya Valiliği. (2019). T.C. Konya Valiliği—zamanı aşan şehir Konya. http://www.konya.gov.tr/konya-tarihi
47. Türkiye Gazetesi. (2024, April 6). Yılın en çok ziyaret edilen müzeleri! İlk sırada Konya Mevlana Müzesi var. Türkiye Gazetesi. https://www.turkiyegazetesi.com.tr/kultur-sanat/yilin-en-cok-ziyaret-edilen-muzeleri-ilk-sirada-konya-mevlana-muzesi-var-1032948
48. Türkiye Kültür Portalı (n.d.). Mevlana Müzesi - Konya. T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı. Retrieved August 21, 2024, from http://www.kulturportali.gov.tr/turkiye/konya/gezilecekyer/mevlna-muzesi
49. UNESCO Türkiye National Commission. (n.d.). Anma ve kutlama yıl dönümleri. Unesco. Retrieved August 20, 2024, from https://unesco.org.tr/Pages/1911/1393/Anma-ve-Kutlama-Y%C4%B1l-D%C3%B6n%C3%BCmleri
50. Yağmurlu, A. (2023). Kamu diplomasisi ve müze. In E. Köksoy, & S. Kavoğlu (Eds.), Türkiye perspektifinden kamu diplomasisi (pp. 59–80). Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
51. Yarar, A. E. (2010). Şehir pazarlaması ve şehir varlıkları: Konya ve Mevlâna örneği [City marketing and city assets: Konya and Mevlana as a case] (Publication No. 279022) [Master dissertation, Selçuk Üniversitesi]. Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
52. Yazar, F. (2021). Kamu diplomasisi bağlamında Türkiye’nin ulus markalama faaliyetlerinin değerlendirilmesi [Evaluation of Turkey’s nation branding activities in the context of public diplomacy]. İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 10(1), 133–150. https://doi.org/10.15869/itobiad.811944
53. Yılmaz, A. N. (2018). Kültür ve sanatın ulusal tanınırlığının pozitifleştirilmesinde bir araç olarak kullanılması: Türkiye’nin kültürel yumuşak güç potansiyeli. In A. N. Yılmaz, & G. Kılıçoğlu (Eds.), Yumuşak güç ve kamu diplomasisi üzerine akademik analizler Türkiye ve dünyadan örnekler (pp. 11–40). Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
54. Zaharna, R. S. (1995). Understanding cultural preferences of Arab communication patterns. Public Relations Review, 21(3), 241–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/0363-8111(95)90024-1
55. Zaharna, R. S. (2012). The cultural awakening in public diplomacy (Vol. 4). Figueroa Press.
56. Zaharna, R. S. (2019). Culture, cultural diversity and humanity-centred diplomacies. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 14, 117–133. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191X-14101018
57. Zamorano, M. M. (2016). Reframing cultural diplomacy: The instrumentalization of culture under the soft power theory. Culture Unbound, 8(2), 165–186. https://doi.org/10.3384/cu.2000.1525.1608165