Soft Power

             In the late 1980s, Joseph Nye introduced the concept of “soft power” –the ability of  “a country to obtain the outcomes it wants in world politics because other countries want to follow it, admiring its values, emulating its example, aspiring to its level of prosperity and openness.” Although the use of hard power dates back to the inception of government, it is no longer the sole method for a State to exert its global dominance. The traditional victory of war that hard power entails is rather elusive in this day and age. In a world that grows smaller as a result of globalization, the immediate but short-lived effect of hard power is not the principal choice anymore. In terms of international relations, States should be more reliant on soft power to gain admiration to their ideals as well as policies because this method has a more enduring effect and its execution requires fewer resources. 

            The effect of soft power has a more durable impact than that of hard power. As a result of globalization, Western culture has permeated most of the “developing world.” Social activist Naomi Klein states, “Despite different cultures, middle class youth all over the world seem to live their lives as if in a parallel universe. They get up in the morning, put on their Levi’s and Nikes, grab their caps and backpacks, and Sony personal CD players and head for school.” Klein’s assertion is still relevant in that it supports this long-term evolutionary trend and depicts the extent to which Western influence has spread worldwide. It may not be CD players now, but iPhones and iPods are the must have item among teens all over the world. Thus, the cultural customs and popular merchandise adopted by other States as a result of the influence of Western culture, depicts soft power, though in a subtle sense. Soft power gives States an alternative to the traditional “by all means necessary” approach of hard power. States can use soft power to their advantage to not only sell popular market items, but to also sell their ideals and foreign policies with the prospects of long-term retention. Furthermore, exerting soft power not only has a long-term effect but also reduces the possibility of detrimental consequences.  

Finally, if States are able to have other States admire their ideals, then there is a reduction in the amount spent on the sticks and carrots approach in order to protect the States interest. Unlike hard power, soft power requires fewer resources and is subsequently less costly. Joseph Nye explains, “ the soft power of a country rest on primarily three resources: its culture (in places where it is attractive to others), its political values (when it lives up to them at home and abroad); and its foreign polices (when they are seen as legitimate and having moral authority).” Thus, relying on soft power rather than hard power, will not only yield desired results but it will also be less costly. In other words, the State will not have to exhaust resources such as weaponry and military presences to achieve desired goals. Moreover, in addition to the reduction of monetary cost, soft power may substantially diminish the cost of lost lives. When engaging in war or launching attacks on other States to get a desired result, there is an inevitable a cost of life that does not occur when soft power is utilized.

Many individuals argue that the modern political philosopher Niccolò Machiavelli was correct in his assertion that a “prince should be feared rather than loved.” In other words, States should primarily use coercion over admiration in order to get what they want. However, the reality is that the era in which we live now differs from politics to technological advances in comparison to Machiavelli’s time. Indeed, hard power should not be completely eliminated; but states can make use of other types of influence apart from military strength and economic governance. War is no longer the only option for a States to make advances internationally. The exclusive use of fear and coercion can result in States gaining undesired adversaries. Where as through the exercise of soft power, there is a greater possibility for alliances or simply healthier relationships among States.

Soft power can promote a system that benefits all States globally and improve the prospects for diplomatic contact, commerce, and trade amongst States. In consequence, States that depend more on the appropriate execution of soft power in the international sphere can contribute to improving the world.