Cultural diplomacy: dimension of cooperation in building the “New world order”

Introduction. This article addresses the problem of the transformation of the global order and orients the reader toward a “conservative turn” in the system of international relations. In the article, the author notes the growing crisis of the American-centric model of globalization, which is spurring opponents of the unipolar world order toward cooperation built on the principles of polycentrism. This alternative model of global dialogue is based on the principles and values of conservatism articulated by the leaders of the BRICS+ countries. Conservative values, including patriotism, spirituality, historical memory, cultural heritage, and others, become the glue that binds national ideological systems and serves as the foundation for international conservative discourse, shaped by the tools of cultural diplomacy. In this context, the purpose of this work is to present a conceptual framework for a new world order, primarily within the framework of the ideological principles of conservatism, and to outline the role of cultural diplomacy as a comprehensive tool for strengthening ties between proponents of change in the global political model. 
Theoretical framework. The theoretical framework of the study is presented using a deconstructivist approach, which allows for a more comprehensive reflection of the competing views of proponents of a unipolar and multipolar world order, as well as the dialogue within the “conservative camp,” characterized by a constant search for adapted solutions and a rethinking of ideological principles. The study of cultural diplomacy practices is linked to the application of an instrumentalist and, to some extent, an institutional approach, as culture is presented as an instrument of ideological influence through diplomatic practices. The combination of these approaches aims to reflect the process of transforming cooperation between proponents of a new world order, occurring simultaneously in the ideological and institutional dimensions. 
Results. Among the results of the study, it is worth highlighting the author’s identified trend toward the rise of conservatism in various countries and its transformation into an ideological one, which in turn leads to the formation of a unified international space of conservative discourse. This discourse is represented by various types of cooperation, gradually integrating into a single system, which is most clearly reflected in the cooperation practices of the BRICS+ countries. Moreover, the system of dialogue between the parties is characterized by an “essential orientation” or focus on taking into account national specificities, which paves the way for national pluralism without the absolute  dominance of a single hegemonic state. This communicative-institutional model is based on the practices of cultural diplomacy, which is focused on the popularization of national cultures and leads to the creation of new “branches of partnership dialogue” across a wide range of humanitarian issues. 
Conclusions. Despite the intensive development of cultural diplomacy practices between the BRICS+ countries and a number of countries outside the group, cooperation has not yet acquired a systemic character and is represented primarily by forms of bilateral relations developing in parallel with the organization’s core projects. This allows the author to conclude that the institutional integration of BRICS+ cooperation is inductive in nature, taking place within a system of ideological guidelines. 

1. Arapov AV. The Idea of a “New World Order” in the Political Life of the 20th and 21st Centuries. Bulletin of the Voronezh Branch of the All-Russian Correspondence Financial and Economic Institute. 2012; (8):126–129. (In Russ.). EDN: TRLXHH.

2. Martel WC. Grand strategy in theory and practice: the need for an effective American foreign policy. New York: Military policy Publisher, Cambridge University Press Collection; 2015. 535 p. ISBN 13: 9781107082069. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139976848.

3. Konkova D.A. Transformation of the Ideology of the Republican Party under the Influence of D. Trump. USA and Canada: Economy, Politics, Culture. 2025;2(662):81-95. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.7868/S3034604525020064.

4. Vedeneyev IN. Neoconservative Turn in the Modern World (USA, Russia, Turkey). In: Political Horizons of the Past and Present: Global and Regional Dimensions. Proceedings of the All-Russian Conference. Tver. 2025:33-36. (In Russ.). ISBN: 978-5-7609-1952-6.

5. Bobrov AN. Multipolarity and Technological Patterns: New Architecture of the World Order by 2040. International Affairs. 2026;(1):112–117. (In Russ.). EDN: NSWXGK.

6. Derrida J. On Grammatology. Translated from French and introduced by N. Avtonomova. Moscow: Ad Marginem; 2000. 512 p. (In Russ.). ISBN: 5-93321-011-0.

7. Derrida J. Globalization. World. Cosmopolitanism. Transl. from French by D. Olshansky. Cosmopolis. 2004;2(8):125–140. (In Russ.).

8. Grinin AL. The Struggle for a New World Order: The Technological Dimension. Article One. Technological Rivalry and Hybrid Wars. The Age of Globalization. 2024;1(49):72–94. (In Russ.). EDN: RZCOLT. https://doi.org/ 10.30884/vglob/2024.01.06.

9. Korotaev AV., Grinin LE., Grinin AL. Contours of the New World Order and BRICS+. Contours of Global Transformations: Politics, Economics, Law. 2024;17(5):61-81. (In Russ.). EDN: DQFUJQ. https://doi.org/10.31249/kgt/2024.05.04.

10. Mayorova MA. Dichotomy of Regional and Global Leadership in Modern International Relations: The Case of Russia and Turkey. Contours of Global Transformations: Politics, Economics, Law. 2022;15(3):69–83. (In Russ.). EDN: WKPFLU. https://doi.org/10.31249/kgt/2022.03.04.

11. Sushentsov A. Russia and the West’s wtructural confrontation over the future world order. Horizons: Journal of International Relations and Sustainable Development. 2025;(29):36-45.

12. Nye JSJr. What New World Order? Foreign Affairs. 1992;71(2):83–96. https://doi.org/10.2307/20045126.

13. Overholt WH. China and America: A New Game in a New Era. PRISM. 2021;9(2):34–45.

14. Zarif MJ, Karimi S. Beyond Polarity: Power, Agency, and Order in the Contemporary Global System. Horizons: Journal of International Relations and Sustainable Development. 2026;(33):50–57.

15. Zwiers MA. Strongman Republic: Trumpism and the Cold War History of Race and Authoritarianism in U.S. Foreign Policy. Atlantisch Perspectief. 2024;48(3):10–14.

16. Babaev KV. (ed.). Modern Ideology of the PRC. Xi Jinping’s Ideas as the Basis of China’s Policy . Moscow: IKSA RAN; 2025. 324 p. (In Russ.). EDN: IXUVPW. https://doi.org/10.48647/ICCA.2025.12.10.002.

17. Mokrinskikh AS., Shmakova NN. Ideology of Iran after the Islamic Revolution of 1978 – 1979. New Science: Theoretical and Practical View. 2016; 1-2: 96-99. (In Russ.). EDN: WYGCAZ.

18. Karpovich O.G. Russia’s Role in Upholding Traditional Spiritual and Moral Values in the Context of Modern Global Development. Russia and the World: Scientific Dialogue. 2024;2(12):39–51. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.53658/RW2024-4-2(12)-39-51.

19. Abramova I.O. Population of Africa in the Context of the Transformation of World Order. Asia and Africa Today. 2022;(12):5–15. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.31857/S032150750023555-2.

20. Gruzdev A.A., Konukhova A.V., Pod’yapol’skiy S.A. Sociocultural Images of India’s “Soft Power”. Sociodynamics. 2015;(3):27–49. (In Russ.). EDN: TKAGCR. https://doi.org/10.7256/2409-7144.2015.3.14547.

21. Mutalemwa G. The Me-First Syndrome and the New World (Dis)Order: The Metaphysics of Good Global Governance. Soziale Arbeit und die sozial-ökologische Transformation: Dimensionen, Perspektiven und Antworten. Leverkusen: Verlag Barbara Budrich. 2025. 121-134. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.30152845.17.

22. Gutorov VA., Shirinyants AA. Liberal Way of Life as a Political and Philosophical Problem: Reflections on the Book: Lefebvre a Liberalism as a Way of Life. Princeton; Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2024. 285 p. Bulletin of Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia. Series: Political Science. 2024; 26(4):871–883. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-1438-2024-26-4-871-883.

23. Sukhorukova OA. Conservatism or the Question of National Tradition. Bulletin of Slavic Cultures. 2023;(68):68-80. (In Russ.). EDN: CFHTPI. https://doi.org/10.37816/2073-9567-2023-68-68-80.

24. Akishin MO. Democratic Regime, Export and Transit of Democracy. Leningrad Law Journal. 2019;1(55):10–27. (In Russ.). EDN: DLNOHX.

25. Smirnov AN. Axiology of European Conservatism: Between Tradition and Progress. Polity: Analysis. Chronicle. Forecast (Journal of Political Philosophy and Sociology of Politics). 2014;4(75):129-144. (In Russ.). EDN: VBUZHP.

26. Simonenko OA. The Concept of a “Single Destiny of Humanity” in the Period of Deglobalization. Humanitarian, Socio-Economic and Social Sciences. Series: Historical Sciences. Cultural Studies. Political Sciences. 2024;(2):142–147. (In Russ.). EDN: RYGDJQ.

27. Medushevsky NA. The Doctrine of “Spiritual Bonds” as the Basis for the Integration of Russian Society. Bulletin of the Russian State University for the Humanities. Series: Political Science. History. International Relations. Foreign Regional Studies. Oriental Studies. 2017;2(8):123–131. (In Russ.). EDN: ZFHSQD.

28. Vasilenko EV. Cultural Diplomacy as an Instrument of State “Soft Power”. Prospects. Electronic Journal. 2016;1(5):68–80. (In Russ.). EDN: VQYHTR.

29. Barghoorn F.C. The Soviet cultural offensive the role of cultural diplomacy in Soviet foreign policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1960. 362 p.

30. Medushevsky NA. Reflections on the Politics of Memory. Ridero Publishing Solutions; 2019. 146 p. (In Russ.). ISBN: 978-5-4496-6726-7.

31. Gribovod EG., Goloskokov VA. Cultural Diplomacy of the BRICS Countries in the Era of the Emergence of a Multipolar World: Theoretical Framework and Practical Aspects. Discours-Pi. 2025;22(4):86-100. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17506/18179568_2025_22_4_86.

32. Le Goff J. History and Memory. Moscow: ROSSPEN; 2013. 303 p. (In Russ.). ISBN: 978-5-8243-1774-9.