Introduction/background

My views on EU central ideology and the future of the EU are quite apart from EU mainstream policy. This post stems from my conviction that policies, and especially international policies, should not be dealt with by narrow diplomacy.

Branding is the background of my conviction. I had the privilege to lead a group of experts that developed the I feel Slovenia brand back in 2007/2008. The brand still works well for Slovenian tourism. The dark side of the story is that other sectors did not seize the opportunity to engage in the straightforward task of supporting Slovenian identity on all levels governed by state institutions. However, that dark side does not diminish the point I’m about to make.

A brand as an engine

A brand is an engine that powers/runs the business model of a product or service. I  can be attached to a product like a phone, a service like a restaurant, a public hospital, or a community like a City, a State, or a single person. In each case, particular brands are different, but all of them run on the same principles. Values of such identities should be identified, along with key performance indicators that add value to each identity trait and capital.

In the case of Slovenia, we have developed the following identity formula:

This formula is a condensed representation of the most crucial Slovenian identity traits, meaning that these traits are most common and widely represented among Slovenians, Slovenian communities, and other civil structures like commercial entities, non-governmental entities, and governmental institutions.

Symbolisation of Slovenia (sensemaking)

Some of the elements of Slovenia’s brand identity are similar to the characteristics of other nations and countries, while others are unique to Slovenia. What makes Slovenia special is a combination of the above elements. The combination of elements creates innumerable, harmonized stories and builds a Slovenian experience. A part of the Slovenian story can already be experienced, while other parts reflect our shared desires for how Slovenia should develop.

In Slovenia, green is more than just a colour; it is “Slovenian green,” expressing the balance between the calm of nature and the tenacity of Slovenians. It speaks of unspoilt nature and our focus on maintaining it that way. It symbolises a balance of lifestyle that joins the pleasant excitement with which we pursue personal desires with the common vision to move forward with nature. S ovenian green also describes our focus on the elemental, on what we feel under our hands. Finally, Slovenian green talks about the balance of all senses with which we experience Slovenia. We never remember Slovenia only through images. A memory of Slovenia combines the smell of a forest, a babbling brook, a surprising taste of water, and the softness of woods. We feel Slovenia.

Slovenians are tenacious about the things we enjoy doing. We focus all our energy on those activities and achieve what could not be achieved by individuals who perform their work routinely and without élan. We are active, always in motion, and always focused on things that are dear to us.

This activity is often manifested as diligence and orientation towards productivity; we would like to return to the activities that are dear to us or achieve a set goal as soon as possible. Slovenians do not hide our <desire for recognition and like to receive praise for our work. However, in our desire to receive praise, we will not forget our principles.

In addition to family and health, responsibility is one of our main values. Responsibility manifests itself in our attitude towards others, the environment, and ourselves. We are attached to our local environment despite being individualists. We travel, but we do not move away. We are like fire: hot close to the flame, yet cold a short distance from it. Slovenians feel enthusiasm towards everything we enjoy. And we are the best in what excites us, in what we feel close to.

Borders as a constituent part of any brand

The branding experience clearly shows that by defining a brand’s values, we also define what its values are not. What a brand is not about plays a crucial role in the feelings of brand owners. S nce owners of I Feel Slovenia national brand are all Slovenians, we are talking about what we feel we are not. The State institutions should support us in that.

1. Each brand has an identity that differentiates it from all other brands. I entities change over time, but if changes happen too fast, then such a brand loses its value, disintegrates, or even dies. It means that each brand should preserve its identity to keep internal value(s) as high as possible. Only brands with substantial internal value(s) can exchange values with other brands. Slovenia can exchange values with Croatia and other countries precisely because it is different. N  brand is better than another, but at the same time, no brand is similar to another. Thinking that better cooperation between brands/countries comes from a higher level of similarity is utterly wrong. Internal values have to be homogenised to improve external relations with dissimilar identities.
2. Borders are necessary conditions for any brand, both literally and metaphorically. Brands have to safeguard their borders. W se brands, though, allow extrinsic elements to enter, but only to the extent that they can be integrated. Excessive flow (border crossing) of identity elements that contradict the internal brand story necessarily destroys a brand that allows such crossings.
3. As separated, brands respect other brands and other identities. They have to respect other brands, and should they exchange values with them. Brands have to exchange values with other brands like cells in the body exchange values, but stay separate at the same time. The brand must respect the identity of another brand, depending on how distant that brand is. The more remote the brand is, the more respect it deserves, and the less influence it has on the brand’s identity traits becomes apparent.
4. Brands do form higher-level brands. Individuals enter companies as brands. The company brand attempts to manage a larger number of individual personal brand identities. Cities and regions as brands do co-form a national brand. A d national brands, such as those from EU countries, could, in principle, unite under the EU brand. But here we enter the domain of physics. L rger bodies do stick together if they are homogenous. Any heterogeneous body must exert significant effort to introduce forces that keep it together. In the case of the EU as a business model for member states, it would mean that the EU should have employed a well-thought-out and heavily supported internal (and external) branding mechanism to keep member states united under one flag.

Conclusion about EU diplomacy

I know that the conclusions presented above from branding theory and practice contradict the present EU policy. O en borders for immigration are beneficial only if immigrants assimilate. In that case, they are not immigrants anymore, but citizens sharing the identity of the community to which they belong. Immigrants who do not assimilate stay immigrants. If they are a minority that does not interfere with the identity of the body they inhabit, then such a cohabitation is possible and often even beneficial. However, if immigrants become too numerous or if they are aggressive against the body that hosts them, then the body loses its ability to protect its borders, and with that, it is doomed to die.

International diplomacy devoid of branding theory and practice is thus like flesh without a skeleton for a body; like a zombie that knows everything but feels nothing; it is autistic and thus destructive. Internal and external diplomacy lacks not only a sense of its borders (as a land and as a brand), but also the ambition to symbolize and make sense of its values. That is why EU diplomacy is predestined to fail.