Mona A. Khali[1]

Egyptian Council for Foreign Affairs, Cairo, Egypt 

mona_khalil@mail.ru                   https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5080-6702  

Abstract. In this contribution we argue that cross-cultural competence (CCC or 3C) is being an indispensable proficiency in professional work of diplomats worldwide despite any  changes that happened in professional interaction due to the recent COVID-19 pandemic.  It is also suggested that deglobalizing processes significantly strengthened by COVID-19  have made the necessity for specialists professionally involved in international relations to  acquire cross-cultural competence even greater than before. The current global situation  shows that deglobalization — slowing down of globalization in all spheres of life — is  a new reality and it is important to adjust to it as soon as possible. Cross-cultural competence is defined here as a complex of theoretical knowledge and key practical skills enabling to  efficiently and successfully communicate with the representatives of different cultures and religious  traditions as well as to feel psychologically comfortable in a foreign environment. A reduced number  of personal business interactions lead to the urge for their higher efficiency that is supposed to be  reflected in a better understanding of the interlocutor’s motivations, stands and reactions. At the same time cultural specifics remains the main factor shaping human communication whether it is conducted offline or online. Today as the tendency to conduct online conferences and meetings increases, we witness an increased need to learn to understand the attitudes of our virtual interlocutors, who are coming from various national cultures and traditions. In the course of online meetings, the necessity to correctly decipher their body language, for example, has decreased — one can hardly see a full figure on the PC screen. And consequently, verbal communication started to prevail over non-verbal one increasing the demand for proper interpretation of words, phrases, tone, mimics and gestures that are still very widely used during virtual communication. The next step would be using the most relevant arguments and approaches to deliver one’s own position and/or opinion.  To successfully apply both mechanisms — of receiving messages and replying to them — during  communication of people from different national cultures it would require the knowledge of cultural  specifics that is provided by cross-cultural competence courses, training, seminars, or any other educational programmes. Programmes in cross-cultural competence are supposed to include at least

Three following components: 1) regional studies, 2) axiological orientations, 3) models and norms of  behavior, while axiological orientations are seen as the most important one. Finally, the conclusion  is made about a serious need to include cross-cultural competence programmes into the training  of diplomats-to-be at the early stages of their professional education. At the same time, it is highly  recommended for professional upgrade of the already serving diplomats worldwide. The methodological approach used in the present research combines content analysis of the post-COVIDpubli cations by the leading international experts in the diplomatic field as well as acting diplomats with  the Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS) elaborated by the prominent American  sociologist Milton Bennet. The latter is a six-level sсheme, according to which it is possible to figure  the level of person’s skillfulness in cross-cultural communication.

Keywords: cross-cultural competence, globalization, deglobalization, consumerism, diplomacy,  COVID-19, pandemic, communication

For citation: Khalil, M. A. (2021) ‘Cross-cultural Competence as a Foundation for Professional Diplomacy in the New Post-COVID-19 Reality’, Concept: Philosophy, Religion, Culture, 5(4), pp. 18–29. doi:  https://doi.org/10.24833/2541-8831-2021-4-20-18-29

Исследовательская статья

МЕЖКУЛЬТУРНЫЕ КОМПЕТЕНЦИИ КАК ОСНОВА  ДИПЛОМАТИИ В ПОСТКОВИДНОЙ РЕАЛЬНОСТИ 

Мона Абдель Малик Халиль 

Египетский совет по международным делам, Каир, Египет

mona_khalil@mail.ru https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5080-6702

Аннотация. Межкультурные компетенции являются незаменимым навыком в работе дипло матов во всем мире, несмотря на любые изменения, произошедшие в профессиональном  взаимодействии в связи с пандемией COVID-19. Выдвинута гипотеза, что процессы деглоба лизации, значительно усиленные COVID-19, требуют повышения межкультурных компетенций  специалистов-международников. Актуальная ситуация в мире показывает, что деглобализа ция — замедление глобализации во всех сферах жизни — это новая реальность, и важно как  можно скорее приспособиться к ней. Методологический подход, используемый в настоящем  исследовании, сочетает контент-анализ тематических «пандемийных» публикаций ведущих  международных экспертов в дипломатической сфере, а также действующих дипломатов, с  Моделью развития межкультурной чувствительности (DMIS), разработанной выдающимся  американским социологом Милтоном Беннетом. Межкультурные компетенции трактуются  автором как комплекс теоретических знаний и ключевых практических навыков, позволяю щих эффективно и успешно общаться с представителями различных культур и религиозных  традиций, а также чувствовать себя психологически комфортно в чужой среде. Сокращение  числа личных деловых контактов приводит к стремлению к повышению их эффективности, что  должно отражаться в лучшем понимании мотиваций, позиций и реакций собеседника. В то же  время культурная специфика остаётся главным фактором, формирующим человеческое обще ние, независимо от того, ведётся ли оно офлайн или онлайн. Сегодня, когда усиливается тен денция к проведению онлайн-конференций и встреч, мы становимся свидетелями растущей  потребности научиться понимать отношение наших виртуальных собеседников, выходцев из  различных национальных культур и традиций. В ходе онлайн-встреч, например, уменьшилась  необходимость правильно расшифровывать язык их тела — на экране ПК едва ли можно уви деть фигуру собеседника целиком. И, следовательно, вербальная коммуникация начала пре обладать над невербальной, увеличивая потребность в правильной интерпретации слов, фраз,  тона, мимики и жестов, которые всё ещё очень широко используются во время виртуального  общения. Следующим шагом будет использование наиболее релевантных аргументов и под ходов для изложения собственной позиции и/или мнения. Для успешного применения комму никационных навыков с обратной связью между людьми из разных национальных культур по требуется знание культурных особенностей, которое обеспечивается курсами межкультурных  компетенций, тренингами, семинарами или любыми другими образовательными программа ми. Предполагается, что программы по межкультурным компетенциям должны включать, по  крайней мере, три следующих компонента: 1) региональные исследования, 2) аксиологиче ские ориентации, 3) модели и нормы поведения, при этом «аксиологические ориентации»  рассматриваются как первостепенные. Наконец, делается вывод о серьёзной необходимости  включения программ по межкультурным компетенциям в подготовку будущих дипломатов на  ранних этапах их профессионального образования. В то же время, это настоятельно рекомен дуется для повышения квалификации уже работающих дипломатов по всему миру.

Ключевые слова: межкультурные компетенции, глобализация, деглобализация, консьюме ризм, дипломатия, COVID-19, пандемия, коммуникация

Для цитирования: Khalil M.A. Cross-cultural Competence as a Foundation for Professional Diplo macy in the New Post-COVID-19 Reality // Concept: Philosophy, Religion, Culture. — 2021. — Vol. 5,  No 4. — Pp. 18–29. https://doi.org/10.24833/2541-8831-2021-4-20-18-29

The events of the least several years have clearly demonstrated that once popular assumption of globalization proudly  marching around the globe and swiping cultural differences is no longer relevant. Since  2015 a new tendency of deglobalization, which  is defined as the slow-down or reverse globalization

[2], could have been spotted in all major  spheres of life — from economy to politics to  culture. The overview of such aspects of globalization as economic, cultural, and political  is necessary for shedding light on the current  global situation, in which diplomatic professionals are serving today.

Economic globalization processes that had  been speedily unrolling around the world at  the end of the 20th — beginning of the 21st  centuries and seemed unstoppable started  seeing a gradual decline that made experts introduce a new term instead — slowbalization,  which referred to the obvious slowing down of  global economy[3]. At the same time another notion appeared — regionalization — aiming to  describe withdrawal from the global economic  network and shifting one’s economic interests  to nearby regions by intensifying economic  activity inside the existing and newly formed  regional alliances.

Pandemic of COVID-19 has dramatically  deepened deglobalization tendencies as once  increasing interdependence of world economies was minimized. The pandemic resulted in  an unprecedented disintegration of the world  economy making both business and consumers alike think and spend more locally[4].

Another significant aspect of globalization  is a cultural one, explained by Encyclopedia  Britannica as a phenomenon by which the experience of everyday life, as influenced by the  diffusion of commodities and ideas, reflects the standardization of cultural expressions  around the world. Propelled by the efficiency  or appeal of wireless communications, electronic commerce, popular culture, and international travel, globalization was seen as a  trend toward homogeneity that will eventually  make human experience everywhere essentially the same. This appears, however, to be  an overstatement of the phenomenon[5].  Being one of the most debatable issues  in the intellectual sphere the development of  cultural globalization seems to continue due  to Internet connection, which implies virtual  transmission of ideas, attitudes, meanings, and  cultural products across borders that has be come both quick and irreversible. At the same  time, the termination of a wide-scale tourism  flows and encouragement of local tourism in  many countries instead seems to bring certain  balance into the cultural globalization processes.

In fact, at the heart of cultural globalization  lies westernization that is manifested in globalization of food, entertainment, fashion, cinema, music, sports, literature, media, lifestyle,  and others, and is promoted by the highly efficient mechanism of consumerism. The latter  was named by Niall Ferguson among the six  main killer apps of the Western Civilization  that made the West dominate the rest for at  least five centuries [Ferguson, 2011: 196].

The consumerist lifestyle for many years  has been offering various nations around the  globe identical sets of western-designed products, services, and information. Almost all  communities worldwide have made consumption one of their major occupations; precisely  what Jean Baudrillard described as a kind of  fantastic conspicuousness of consumption and  abundance constituted by the multiplication of  objects, services, and material goods; a system  that needed people as workers, as savers, but  above all needed them as consumers [Baudril lard, 1998: 25, 83].

Despite 2020 self-isolation brought by  COVID-19, people around the world contin ued to be intensely influenced by advertising,  both direct and indirect, as well as all sorts of  psychological manipulation aimed at making  them choose consumption as a preferable behavior strategy.

Global consumerism in the past decades  reached its climax: millions of humans developed a severe psychological dependence on  consumption — monomania or compulsive buy ing disorder (CBD) described by psychiatrists  Emil Kraepelin and Eugen Bleuler as early as  at the beginning of the 21st century. Later this  phenomenon acquired the name of buying shopping disorder (BSD) that is considered  a behavioral addiction that is characterized  by poorly controlled spending of money for  consumer goods in unnecessary quantities,  beyond budget and without necessarily utiliz ing them for their intended purposes [Muller,  Claes, Kyrios, 2021]. But the increase of inter est in these symptoms in 1990s coincides with  consumerism going global: clinical studies  of three different groups of patients showed  that similar consumption-related disorders  were observed across cultures — in the USA,  Canada, the UK, Germany, France, and Brazil  [Black, 2007: 14-18]. Interestingly, COVID-19  pandemic did not stop consumption cycles,  but its various aspects were reshaped through  different contexts and needs[6].

Indeed, in countries located on differ ent continents thousands of miles away from  each other same strategies are being realized  to stimulate endless consumption of the same  goods: restaurants belonging to the same net works operate in almost all world countries;  cars, clothes, food, cosmetics, and household  products of the same brands are sold across  the globe. Enough to mention that only ten  western corporations manufacture and/or  control the vast majority of consumer products in the world[7]. The same hypermarket chains function globally (where goods are dis played in a very similar way). People from different cultures watch the same commercials  predominantly of the western origin, eat the  same popcorn in identical cinemas, listen to  the same music, and share the same news on  a limited number of social media platforms —  mainly Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter  and Tik-Tok[8]. The latest US presidential elections became world’s top news issue making  people from very different countries passionately follow up the voting as well as further  calculation and race results.

By the end of the 20th century such state of  affairs has created an illusion that in the near  future humanity would become homogeneous  and Marx’ famous social being determines consciousness would acquire yet another proof.  Scholars were alarmed by the perspective of  the unification of local cultures and their leveling off, because the expanding world market  required unification.

Yet stimulated by globalization and later  with pandemic lockdown a reverse trend has  emerged — local cultures switched on self preservation mechanisms: self-identification  programs based on ethnic, religious, and cultural characteristics were activated. The matter of either group or individual identity has  become more important than some fifty years  ago. For a more precise description of the pre pandemic situation in the world another term  would have been more suitable — glocalization, which implies the simultaneous existence  of two opposite trends: globalization and localization. Indeed, the paradox of globalization  had to do with the concept of universality and  particularization: on the one hand, globalization was driving the world community to move  towards a one-world system; on the other  hand, the unique culture of people and nations  has led to exclusivism [Manshur, Husni, 2020].

COVID-19 pandemic has increased these tendencies globally. This situation allows to assert  that in the near future neither cultural unification nor standardization would be taking  place, while communication between representatives of various cultures (both offline and  online) with their unique culturally shaped characteristics would remain intense. Another aspect of globalization — political globalization — experienced a significant  blow from the COVID-19 pandemic and is at tempting to adjust to the new isolation trends.  The unprecedented challenges resulting from  the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic put the  mechanisms of contemporary international  system to real test; a situation in which the  principle of cooperation and solidarity must  be entrenched to meet such challenges[9]. Today  it is becoming obvious that coronavirus has  presided over global geopolitical deterioration accelerating the ongoing, negative trend  toward a more polarized and fragmented  world[10] making skepticism of global engagement grow[11]. Enough to mention the symbol of  successful and solid modern integration — the  European Union (once seen as a unified socio political body), which demonstrated unprecedented levels of defragmentation as almost  all its member states (with the exception of  Sweden) chose to close borders and introduce  lockdown even in regard to their European  neighbours. In less than a month self-preservation strategy won over the European unification that took decades to build.

Moreover, interaction of world leaders,  politicians, and representatives of govern mental institutions witnessed a shift from  traditional meetings in person to online conference calls. Important bilateral and multilateral engagements went virtual including such  significant events as the annual World Bank  Spring Meetings, the G-7, and G-20 summits  as well as the 75th session of the UN General  Assembly. Naturally, working conditions of  professional diplomats all over the world also  had to change drastically: after the lockdown  had been introduced embassies moved swiftly  toward virtual operations, forcing them to  conduct diplomatic interactions with host governments, their counterparts, and the public  via digital platforms[12]. As the usual way of con

ducting negotiations ceased to exist, diplomats  had to get accustomed to online communication. But using online platforms is not always  helpful, sometimes even dangerous: according  to ambassador Xavier Sticker, diplomats must  be careful about discussing sensitive topics  over the phone or videoconference. Besides,  the pace of certain negotiations slowed down  due to digital way of interaction: ambassador  Alessandro Azzoni said the reason for the slow  pace was that diplomats were pushed into taking a more official stance in videoconferences,  where the room for maneuver that existed  during informal face-to-face meetings was  simply not there[13].

Meanwhile the role and influence of embassies, consulates and other state representations in foreign countries have greatly in creased: while state officials could no longer  travel all over the world to carry out meetings  with their foreign counterparts, the task of  collecting and analyzing information, reaching  agreements and handling negotiations largely  shifted now to the diplomatic missions. The  representative role of the resident ambassador changed to less of an envoy who acts on  behalf of the executive to one who predominantly stands in for the executive (demonstrating the power, prestige, and influence of  the sending state)[14].

Some experts see benefits in digitalization of international diplomacy, which include  cut of travel costs, cut of hosting events cost,  availability of much more time for different  tasks (that were previously spent on travels), a lesser reliance on paper traffic and management issues that could free diplomats for more  important tasks.

But not everyone shares optimism regard ing the new technological shift in diplomatic  work: permanent representative of the US to  NATO Ambassador Kay Bailey is sure that one  simply could not do complex diplomacy over  the phone or Zoom; Saudi Ambassador to the  USA Reema bin Bandar al-Saud believed such  great dependence on the Internet might lead  to the emergence of a new definition of poverty — if you were tech poor and disconnected  that would hold your nation back today[15].  Still the majority of practicing diplomats  agree that personal communication is being an  indispensable part of their profession. However, even if the restrictions caused by the pandemic remained, the diplomatic work would  acquire at least a hybrid form with online and  offline practices combined.

Clearly, the work of diplomats implies  permanent and direct interaction with the  representatives of other cultures. Apart from  regular contacts with their counterparts, diplomatic service refers to the public opinion  of the countries, which are the subjects of the  political will of their home-state [Глаголев,  2011: 120].

At the same time, diplomatic success de pends on efficient communication, because  the main tools of diplomacy are meetings, negotiations and consultations, no matter if they  are held online or offline. Diplomacy deals  with culturally diverse groups by means of in teractions and negotiations. The negotiation  style of each participant is formed by one’s  own cultural program [Bolewski, 2008: 146].

This context makes one wonder whether  there existed one common diplomatic culture characteristic of all members of the dip lomatic engagement. According to Professor  of International Law Ambassador Wilfried  Bolewski, it was possible to witness a number  of similarities in diplomatic profession. Such  similarities in their turn created a common  corporate spirit because diplomats acquired  similar professional education and training,  they had identical social rules, which included  certain restrictions, politeness, tolerance, patience, empathy, and mutual trust. Besides,  they have a similar professional experience.  Moreover, they were going through analogous  procedures, followed the same regulations  and demonstrated similar behavior. All these  factors presuppose the existence of a unified  diplomatic culture.

Such a culture can be defined as accumulated communicative and representative norms,  rules and institutions elaborated in order to  improve relations and avoid wars between  political bodies, who recognize each other  and carry out mutual interaction. Yet, despite  all these similarities, there exists a solid layer  of cultural differences, which hardly make it  possible to speak about a unified diplomatic  culture. After all, diplomats are individuals  shaped by their national or local cultures — a  factor defined by the prominent Dutch social  psychologist Geert Hofstede as mind programing [Bolewski, 2008: 150]. By national or local  culture we mean behavioral norms, ideas, expectations, and values shared by the people of  one nation or local community (usually limited to one country), and these parameters tend to seriously vary from one culture to another.  In this new (post-) pandemic reality, reduced numbers of offline personal business  interactions inevitably lead to the requirement  to increase its efficiency ensuring a better understanding of the interlocutor’s motivations  and reactions.

Moreover, as the trend to carry out online  meetings increases, the ability to decipher the  approaches of partners and colleagues from  different cultures becomes more imperative.  During online conferences, the role of body  language inevitably diminishes as we can not always see it, but consequently the need  to correctly understand and interpret words,  tone and mimics of the speaker increases. At the same time, the most relevant arguments  and approaches need to be used in order to  deliver one’s own position and/or opinion in  a right way. To apply both mechanisms successfully — receiving messages and replying  to them — during online communication participants from different national cultures need  the knowledge of cultural specifics that is provided by cross-cultural competence courses,  training, seminars, or any other education  programmes.

Naturally, COVID-19 pandemic made some  people question the relevance of cross-cultural competence in diplomatic practices as long  as most meetings moved online and virtual  communication substituted good old offline  eye-to-eye contacts. But today after surviving  a year with constant online-meetings empirical observations show that cultural specifics  remain the main factor shaping human communication whether it is conducted offline or  online.

By cross-cultural competence (CCC or 3C)  we understand a set of theoretical knowledge  and practical skills necessary for successful  and efficient communication with the representatives of different world cultures and  religious traditions. It is also highly recommended for psychological comfort while staying in a foreign environment. Relevant definitions of the term imply: the ability to quickly  understand and efficiently act in a culture that  is different from our own [Culhane, Reid, Cre peau, Mcdonald, 2012: 30]; the ability to establish a particular perceptual condition that  enables communication competence to be  exercised[16].

Being a multidisciplinary field, cross cultural competence is based on the research  from various human sciences, including ethnology, anthropology, philosophy, cultural, political, and religious studies, sociology, geography, history, philology, psychology, cognitive  science and neuroscience [Ardila, 2020]. Here  are just a few examples: the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis in linguistics, according to which na tive languages influence or even shape a person’s mind (linguistic relativism and linguistic  determinism theories) that is seen today as  highly relevant [Deutscher, 2011]; cognitive  experiments and research conducted by Rich ard Nisbett showing that people from different  cultures perceive reality differently [Nisbett,  2003]; philosophical hypothesis of different  types of logic proposed by the director of the  Institute of Philosophy at the Russian Academy of Sciences Dr. Andrey Smirnov, accord ing to which people in different cultures use  different types of logical thinking [Смирнов, 2019; Смирнов, Солондаев, 2019].  The primary tool to evaluate one’s proficiency in cross-cultural communication could  be the Developmental Model of Intercultural  Sensitivity (DMIS) elaborated by the prominent American scholar Milton Bennet. It consists of the following six stages or levels of  cross-cultural sensitivity and helps define the  level of one’s cross-cultural competence [Ben net, 2013]:

1. Denial

Denial of cultural differences. At this stage,  a person believes that people of all cultures  are similar. He usually lacks interest or has a  hostile attitude towards cross-cultural communication. Such attitude can result in dehumanizing the other: it is believed that a behavior different from one’s own is a sign of low  intellect or personality defect.

2. Defense

A person tries to defend oneself from another culture seeing it as a threat. Stereotypical way of thinking. Dividing people into  us and them, where the former are always  good and right and the latter — are bad and  wrong.

Other cultures are held responsible for the  problems of one’s own society.

3. Minimization

Guidelines and worldview of one’s own  culture are considered universal. It is believed  that main principles and convictions have no  borders and are equally shared by all cultures.

4. Acceptance

One’s culture is perceived as one of many  different, but equal worldviews. Acceptance  does not imply full consent. A person has respect and curiosity towards another culture,  but still cannot adapt one’s own behavior to  different cultural norms.

5. Adaptation

Developing a correct alternative behavior  in a foreign environment. Adaptation includes  cross-cultural empathy, ability to get into the  other’s shoes, to see the world through different cultural lens. It is a high level of cross-cultural competence.

6. Integration

Ability to switch between cultures easily  and naturally. This ability helps build cross cultural bridges and interactions.

Being an important skill in today’s different spheres of social life Integration level is  especially important for specialists involved  in international communication. Diplomats in  their turn should be preferably reaching the  Acceptance level.

In many countries, the following illusory  approach to diplomatic service still exists:  it is believed that the main idea behind professional diplomatic performance must be  concentration on commonality of different  national cultures and reliance on universal human strategies. According to this questionable  assumption, this strategy is assumed to be the  only way to reach common decisions and com promises. However, at present the impressive  field of cross-cultural research clearly demonstrates that the priority should be granted to  acknowledging cultural differences, elaborating one’s own cultural awareness, learning  about specifics of other cultures, and developing mechanisms to deeply understand representatives of different cultures and religions  traditions. Facing the challenges of an increasingly complex world, the question of interdependency between diplomatic processes and  cultural variations becomes relevant [Bolewski, 2008: 145].

Thus, the utmost importance and relevance of early inclusion of cross-cultural  competence programmes into professional  training of diplomats-to-be as well as into professional development training for diplomats  already serving at the ministries of foreign affairs worldwide must be emphasized.

Programmes in cross-cultural competence are supposed to include at least three  components: 1) regional studies, 2) models  and norms of behavior, 3) axiological orientations; the latter is seen as the most important  one.

In this context regional studies imply studying not merely a geographical discipline (as it  used to be initially understood), but as a combined study of particular countries, their nature, geography, economy, social arrangement,  history and other spheres, i.e., that includes  fundamental background knowledge about a  country or a region.

Learning about models and norms of behavior in other cultures includes knowledge of  etiquette, protocol, traditions, rituals, norms  as well as socially acceptable and tabooed behavioral patterns. Non-verbal communication  means such as tone, body language, mimics  and gesticulation are being a part of it. With out knowledge of these features one would  fall into the illusion of understanding certain  behavior of representatives of other cultures,  but in reality, the meaning of non-verbal messages would remain hidden. The significance  of this communicative component can be  hardly overestimated as many cultures use  non-verbal language no less than verbal one. A  decade ago, the question of including non-verbal communication means into the foreign language learning programmes had been under  consideration in the USA [Gergersen, 2007].  For example, a gesture with pinched fingers  up has a different meaning in three countries:  Wait! in Egypt, Wonderful! in Greece and What  do you mean? in Italy. Not knowing non-verbal  language might reduce the communication  quality at best and lead to wrong conclusions  at worst. However, for a profoundly successful  cross-cultural communication it would not be  enough to learn a set of behavioral practices  accepted in a foreign culture; as it would be  one of the first and the simplest steps in cross cultural competence. Further on studying of  axiological orientations must follow.

The third component of cross-cultural  competence, axiological orientations, has to do  with the fundamentals of any national culture  consisting of values, beliefs, convictions, prejudices, fears, dreams, stereotypes, feelings, and  generalizations that are prevalent in a society.  Without learning axiological foundations of a  culture, communication with its representatives would remain poor or even inadequate.  Consequently, learning about axiological specifics, which include the deepest concepts,  doctrines and guidelines shaped by the value system of each particular culture should be  viewed as a crucial aspect of cross-cultural  competence.

When considering the present situation  with cross-cultural competence among Russian diplomats one would notice that they gain  solid knowledge in the field of countries and  regional studies — disciplines that have a long  and rich teaching tradition in Russia. As for  such aspect as models and norms of behavior  accepted in a particular cultural environment  Russian diplomats possess a certain idea of it  though in most cases this idea derives from  empirical experience acquired during their  service abroad. In other words, this aspect is  learnt rather accidently by trial and error. As  for axiological orientations in various national  cultures, this aspect still remains beyond professional education of the Russian foreign ministry staff.

The results of research in cross-cultural  field should become an indispensable part  of professional qualification for specialists in  international relations. According to US diplomat, sociologist and anthropologist Glen  Fischer, today new skills were necessary for  diplomats, because learning foreign languages  and facts about other countries were no longer  enough. He expressed regret that this profession ignored and continued to remain ignorant  of what he called a psycho-cultural dimension  of international affairs. People working in  global projects must possess cross-cultural  competence, they should be able to communicate, sympathize and understand mentality  as well as psycho-cultural dimensions of their  foreign colleagues [Kealey, MacDonald, Vulpe,  2004: 439].

Enough to mention the example of democracy as it is seen in different cultural environments. A widely shared view suggests that  people who express support for democracy in  nondemocratic regimes understand democracy perfectly well as a liberal alternative to their  authoritarian home regimes. This concept implies that basic democratic freedoms constitute a universal value across all cultures. How ever, the new research based on the data from the World Value Survey shows that such an approach totally ignores the results of a decades long study of cultural values across nations.  No doubt, people around the world value free-

Mona A. Khalil PHILOSOPHY doms, but only to some extent and the priority  they give to liberal advantages might strongly  differ depending on the existential conditions  under which their culture evolved [Kruse, Ravlik, Welzel, 2019].

It is high time we realize that individuals  are socialized into their cultural system, i.e.  they learn appropriate cultural norms, beliefs  and attitudes from their parents and elders so  culture is passed on from generation to generation [Fischer, 2018: 17].

In present-day Russia, interest toward  cross-cultural competence and its practical in troduction is just beginning, while educational  programmes developed specially for future  diplomats are currently at the implementation  stage.

Proceeding from our analysis, it is possi ble to conclude that COVID-19 pandemic has  increased the necessity to introduce cross cultural competence into the educational pro grammes of the future diplomats and into the  courses aiming to increase professional profi ciency among acting diplomats both in Russia  and abroad. This approach would help con ducting successful and efficient meetings and  negotiations, reach compromises and achieve  understanding, establish trustworthy busi ness and personal relations with the repre sentatives of various world cultures.

Список литературы: 

Глаголев В.С. Дипломатическая служба: научно-теоретические, правовые и практические основы  искусства дипломатии (размышления в связи с подготовкой нового издания учебно-методического  комплекса «Дипломатическая служба» // Право и управление. XXI век. — 2011. — № 3. — С. 119-121.

Смирнов А.В. Всечеловеческое vs. общечеловеческое. — Москва: Общество с ограниченной  ответственностью «Садра», 2019. — 216 с.

Смирнов А.В., Солондаев В.К. Процессуальная логика. — Москва: Общество с ограниченной  ответственностью «Садра», 2019. — 160 с.

Ardila A. Cross-Cultural Neuropsychology: History and Prospects // RUDN Journal of Psychology and  Pedagogics. — 2020. — Vol. 17, № 1. — P. 64–78. https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-1683-2020-17-1-64-78  Baudrillard J. The Consumer Society: Myths and Structures. — London: Sage Publications, 1998. — 221 p. Bennett M.J. Basic concepts of intercultural communication: paradigms, principles, & practice: selected  readings. — Boston: Nicholas Brealey Publishing, 2013. — 352 p.

Black D.W. A review of compulsive buying disorder // World psychiatry : official journal of the World  Psychiatric Association (WPA). — 2007. — Vol. 6, № 1. — P. 14–18.

Bolewski W. Diplomatic Processes and Cultural Variations: The Relevance of Culture in Diplomacy // The  Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations. — 2008. — № Winter/Spring. — P. 145–160. Culhane E. et al. Beyond Frontiers: The Critical Role of Cross-Cultural Competence in the Military // The  Industrial-Organizational Psychologist. — 2012. — Vol. 50, № 1. — P. 30–38.

Deutscher G. Through the language glass : Why the world looks different in other languages. — London:  Arrow Books Ltd, 2011. — 320 p.

Ferguson N. Civilization : the West and the rest. — New York: Penguin Press, 2011. — xxx, 402 p. Fischer R. Personality, values, culture an evolutionary approach. — Cambridge: Cambridge University  Press, 2018. — x, 270 p.

Gregersen T.S. Language learning beyond words: Incorporating body language into classroom activities  // Reflections on English Language Teaching. — 2007. — Vol. 6, № 1. — P. 51–64.

Kealey D.J., MacDonald D., Vulpe T. Intercultural competence and its relevance for international  diplomacy // Intercultural Communication and Diplomacy. — Msida, Malta; Geneva: DiploFoundation, 2004.  — P. 431–444.

Kruse S., Ravlik M., Welzel C. Democracy Confused: When People Mistake the Absence of Democracy  for Its Presence // Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. — 2019. —Vol. 50, № 3. — P. 315–335. https://doi. org/10.1177/0022022118821437
Manshur F.M., Husni H. Covid-19 and Anti-Globalization Issues: A Cultural Perspective // Journal of  critical reviews. — 2020. — Vol. 7, № 14. — P. 209–213. https://doi.org/10.31838/jcr.07.14.36  Müller A., Claes L., Kyrios M. Object attachment in buying-shopping disorder // Current Opinion in  Psychology. — 2021. — Vol. 39. — P. 115–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.08.019  Nisbett R.E. The geography of thought: how Asians and Westerners think differently and why. — New  York: Free Press, 2003. — xxiii, 263 p.

References: 

Ardila, A. (2020) ‘Cross-Cultural Neuropsychology: History and Prospects’, RUDN Journal of Psychology  and Pedagogics, 17(1), pp. 64–78. https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-1683-2020-17-1-64-78  Baudrillard, J. (1998) The Consumer Society: Myths and Structures. London: Sage Publications Bennett, M. J. (2013) Basic concepts of intercultural communication : paradigms, principles, & practice :  selected readings. Boston: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.

Black, D. W. (2007) ‘A review of compulsive buying disorder’, World psychiatry : official journal of the  World Psychiatric Association (WPA), 6(1), pp. 14–18.

Bolewski, W. (2008) ‘Diplomatic Processes and Cultural Variations: The Relevance of Culture in  Diplomacy’, The Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, (Winter/Spring), pp. 145–160. Culhane, E. et al. (2012) ‘Beyond Frontiers: The Critical Role of Cross-Cultural Competence in the  Military’, The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 50(1), pp. 30–38.

Deutscher, G. (2011) Through the language glass : Why the world looks different in other languages. London: Arrow Books Ltd.

Ferguson, N. (2011) Civilization: the West and the rest. New York: Penguin Press.

Fischer, R. (2018) Personality, values, culture an evolutionary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University  Press.

Glagolev, V. S. (2011) ‘Diplomatic Service: Scientific, Legal and Practical Foundations of the Art of  Diplomacy’, Journal of Law and Administration, (3), pp. 119–121. (In Russian).

Gregersen, T. S. (2007) ‘Language learning beyond words: Incorporating body language into classroom  activities’, Reflections on English Language Teaching, 6(1), pp. 51–64.

Kealey, D. J., MacDonald, D. and Vulpe, T. (2004) ‘Intercultural competence and its relevance  for international diplomacy’, in Intercultural Communication and Diplomacy. Msida, Malta; Geneva:  DiploFoundation, pp. 431–444.

Kruse, S., Ravlik, M. and Welzel, C. (2019) ‘Democracy Confused: When People Mistake the Absence  of Democracy for Its Presence’, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 50(3), pp. 315–335. https://doi. org/10.1177/0022022118821437

Manshur, F. M. and Husni, H. (2020) ‘Covid-19 and Anti-Globalization Issues: A Cultural Perspective’,  Journal of critical reviews, 7(14), pp. 209–213. https://doi.org/10.31838/jcr.07.14.36  Müller, A., Claes, L. and Kyrios, M. (2021) ‘Object attachment in buying-shopping disorder’, Current  Opinion in Psychology, 39, pp. 115–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.08.019  Nisbett, R. E. (2003) The geography of thought: how Asians and Westerners think differently and why. New  York: Free Press.

Smirnov, A. V. (2019) Vsechelovecheskoye vs. Obschechelovecheskoye [Everything human vs. universal]. Moscow: Sadra Publ. (In Russian).

Smirnov, A. V. and Solondaev, V. K. (2019) Protsessualnaya Logika [Procedural logic]. Moscow: Sadra  Publ. (In Russian).

Information about the author 

Mona Abdel Malik Khalil — PhD (Philosophy), Member of the Egyptian Council for Foreign Affairs,  Executive director at The Russian – Egyptian Business Council at the Chamber of Trade and Industry of the  Russian Federation. Fakher Tower 2 / Othman Towers, Corniche AlNile / Maadi, Cairo, Egypt. (Egypt)

[1] https://doi.org/10.24833/2541-8831-2021-4-20-18-29

[2]  Deglobalization // Oxford Reference. — URL: https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199599868.001. 0001/acref-9780199599868-e-365

[3] Slowbalisation. The steam has gone out of globalization // The Economist. — 2019. — 24 jan. — URL: https://www.econo mist.com/leaders/2019/01/24/the-steam-has-gone-out-of-globalisation

[4]  Deglobalization after covid-19 // Enterprise. — 2020. — 28 dec. — URL: https://enterprise.press/stories/2020/12/28/ deglobalization-after-covid-19-28278/

[5] Watson. J.L. Cultural globalization // Britannica. — URL: https://www.britannica.com/science/cultural-globalization

[6] Roy R. The Role of Culture in a Global Crisis // Ipsos Views. — 2020. — July. — URL: https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/ files/ct/publication/documents/2020-07/role-of-culture-in-global-crisis-2020-ipsos.pdf

[7] Taylor K. These 10 Companies Control Everything You Buy // Independent. — 2017. — 31 May. — URL: https://www.inde pendent.co.uk/extras/these-10-companies-control-everything-you-buy-a7765461.html

[8]  The 7 Top Social Media Sites You Need to Care About in 2020 // Adobe Spark. — URL: https://spark.adobe.com/make/ learn/top-social-media-sites/

[9] Shoukry S. Assessing the Repercussions of COVID-19 Pandemic on World Order // Coronavirus Pandemic Crisis (COV ID-19). The Domestic, Regional and International Repercussions. The Egyptian Council of Foreign Affairs, Cairo, 2020.

[10] Vimont P. Diplomacy During the Quarantine: An Opportunity for More Agile Craftsmanship // Carnegie Europe. — 2020.  — 2 sep. — URL: https://carnegieeurope.eu/2020/09/02/diplomacy-during-quarantine-opportunity-for-more-agile craftsmanship-pub-82559

[11] Labott E. Redefining Diplomacy in the Wake of the COVID-19 Pandemic // The Meridian Center for Diplomatic Engage ment. — 2020. — URL: https://www.meridian.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Redefining-Diplomacy-Report-v3.pdf

[12] IBID

[13]  Leichtenstein S. How COVID-19 Has Transformed Multilateral Diplomacy // World Politics Review. — 2020. — 1 jun. —  URL: https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/28801/how-covid-19-has-transformed-multilateral-diplomacy

[14]  Robertson J. Diplomacy after COVID: No Looking Back // The Interpreter. — 2020. — 21 Oct. — URL: https://www.lowyin stitute.org/the-interpreter/diplomacy-after-covid-no-looking-back

[15] Labott E. Redefining Diplomacy in the Wake of the COVID-19 Pandemic // The Meridian Center for Diplomatic Engage ment, 2020.

[16] Bennet M.J. Constructivist approach to intercultural communication // International Encyclopedia of Intercultural Communication. — Wiley, 2017.URL:https://www.idrinstitute.org/resources/constructivist-approach-intercultural-communication/