This week’s post continues the comparison between the fields of Intercultural Learning and International Relations by exploring perhaps one of the most important differences between intercultural learning and international studies. It is also the most basic difference. Although both are international in scope, the main focus of each is not the same.

Culture is, of course, the main subject matter of intercultural learning. People within the field learn about the characteristics of a culture, the meaning behind cultural beliefs and the context of cultural customs. They study the social norms that make up cultures. Critically, they try to understand cultural difference in order to better understand themselves and the peoples of the world. The ‘state’ often plays a decisive role in the development of a culture, but within the field of intercultural learning, the ‘state’ is one piece of the larger puzzle in understanding culture. It is one piece along with other important pieces such as geography and religion.

The focus on cultural understanding is what sets the field of intercultural learning apart from other subjects that have an international focus, like international relations.

States are legal entities, Cultures are not.

But what is a ‘state’ anyway? Among the international relations community, a state is generally acknowledged to be an internationally recognized legal and political entity with full and independent sovereignty, or control, over a defined geographic area. In this way Japan is different from California, USA, although both are popularly referred to as states. Japan is a state with independence and full sovereignty, or control, over its internationally recognized territory. The same cannot be said of California, which is fully subordinate to the government of the United States in many areas. So California is not a state in the international sense of the word. It is also important to remember:

• The word ‘state’ is different from the word ‘nation’ because the term ‘nation’ primary describes a grouping of a large amount of people with, among other characteristics, a common language, history, culture or ethnicity. All states do not have these common national traits, although many do.
• States can contain multiple cultures and subcultures that are completely different from each other.
• Other other hand, a culture that is physically located within a state can actually be far larger or smaller than the state. Members of a culture can out-number citizens of a state. The opposite can also happen; citizens of a state can out-number members of a culture.
• Furthermore, while states are popularly referred to as ‘countries,’ the names are not interchangeable, since the word country is more related to geography. The word ‘state’ is more of an official term; ‘country’ more often refers to general location.

It is this entity known by the international relations community as a ‘state’ that is the main focus of international relations. This field analyzes the behavior, goals, and shortcomings of a state internationally. The cultures and sub-cultures that make up a state play a supplementary role in understanding the state as a whole. Culture is only one piece of the puzzle of the overall goal to understand a state along with other pieces such as population, natural resources, location and politics. So unlike in intercultural learning, culture is not the primary focus.

This is a key difference between the two fields. If a person primarily studies culture at the expense of focusing solely on the state, then this person would be closer to intercultural learning rather than international relations. Very few subjects solely focus on culture with the goal of understanding differences. This focus is what makes ICL unique as an educational subject. Since culture plays such a hugely important role in state activities, the field that primarily focuses on understanding culture, ICL, is also hugely important. Indeed this importance is increasingly demonstrable since culture powerfully affects all aspects of international exchange, not only exchanges among states, but also exchanges among people. As a result, ICL at AFS plays a key role in facilitating the international exchange among people within the Network.

Paul Edinger is a strategic operations intern for the Intercultural Learning department at AFS International, where he works to facilitate the implementation of ICL strategy throughout the AFS Network. His time at AFS began in April of 2011 with the Development and Branding department and he continues in 2012 as an intern for ICL. Prior to joining AFS he taught English, Spanish and computer literacy courses to Guatemalan and Salvadoran immigrants to the United States while obtaining his B.A. in International Studies with a concentration in Latin America. He completed minors in Anthropology, Political Science, Latino Studies, and Spanish Language Studies.