Nye's soft and hard power

-
This change in international relations, where the BoP and elements of national power to do with military preparedness were rendered unfashionable in the 21st Century, paved the way for the emergence of a new tool for analysis. Joseph Nye’s soft and hard power theory rose to prominence, especially soft power itself by far became the key catch phrase in this contemporary era of interdependence in globalization.[1] 

Nye talked about how hard power resources like military capability and economic strengthen no longer posses the ‘carrot’ and ‘stick’ like authority to influence a state.[2] In essence, Nye was giving his analysis of how the world was changing and simply admitting the fact that hard power resources were becoming unfashionable because of the evolution of power as a concept. The rise of nationalism, cost of going to war, development of weapons of mass destruction, interdependence and international trade are demonstrations of changes that have occurred in time resulting in an unfavourable liking towards hard power resources.

In literal sense, the usage of hard power resources is not achieving the similar outcomes it did in the past. Look at this hypothetical scenario, if it was back in the era where hard power resources moved mountains then the US would easily use its hard power resources in the form of military power to pressure China into increasing the value of the Renminbi to solve its domestic economic problems. Moreover, they could tighten economic sanctions by banning imported goods from China because of its continued cordial relations with rogue nations like Sudan, Zimbabwe and Iran.

However, with respect to advocates of neo liberalism, the degree of interdependence rules this hypothetical scenario null and void. How? China holds a great deal of US treasury bonds, China needs the American market for its goods, in summary, China’s economy depends greatly on the US and vice versa. Moreover, America can not come out with all guns blazing because of its military commitment in Iraq and Afghanistan. A heavy attack either economically or militarily could jeopardize the future of America as the powerful nation on earth. Also in an age where all great powers are capable of nuclear warfare both nations can not endanger the future of the world for their own gain. 

A more controversial issue is the use of military strength in Iraq. America used its strength with the intention of crushing the so called tyrannical regime of Sadaam Hussein and establishing democracy. They thought a democratic Iraq would be more peaceful and conducive for their own interest in energy resources. However, the opposite have occurred. The use of hard power resources has affected the reputation and image of the US by depicting herself as a bully.

In a 2007 BBC world service poll, over 26, 000 people surveyed in 25 countries had a negative view of America’s role in world affairs. Particularly, 73% in that poll disapproved the role played by the US government in dealing with the case of Iraq when asked specific questions about foreign policy areas.[3] 

On the other side of the equation, soft power is the obvious opposite of hard power in terms of resources. In the words of Nye he stated that “soft co-optive power is just as important as hard command power”.[4] It plays the same role in influencing State B to want what State A wants, but in a non-coercive manner. 

Soft power resources which are intangible are used extensively to analyze the way a nation gains influence in international relations. There are 3 resources that give the theory substance, the culture of a nation, its political values and its foreign policy. When a nation’s culture is attractive in some aspects other nations are drawn to it, also when a nation lives up to its political values at home and abroad it influences other nations in the international system, and its foreign policy is what gives it the legitimacy and moral authority it needs. 

However, Kurlanzick in his work acknowledged the seminal contributions of Nye but suggested that there are other resources like investments, aid and formal diplomacy. He expands the theory of soft power in the context of Asia today with the rise of China by talking about high and low soft power. In high level, soft power is targeted at elites, this boosts Beijing’s influence over leaders in less democratic countries, while in the lesser level soft power is targeted at the broader public, this allows democratically elected leaders in places like Philippines to move closer to China. [5]

A more interesting fact is that due to globalization, states are not the only actors that exert soft power. Soft power or rather the ability to attract and persuade can be clearly demonstrated by both state and non-state actors. But the actions of both affect the perception of the populous leading to change in the behaviour of states.

In the case of China, the government which is the brain of the state controls the state to behave in a certain manner to display its soft power resources in a bid to attract other nations. According to Kurlantzick, Beijing has used strategies and policy tools to make it easier for Chinese actors, from language schools to business people, to have an effect on the populous of foreign nations.[6] 

In reference to culture as a resource, by analyzing the establishment of Confucius Institutes, one can draw a projected conclusion that it will play a dramatic role in increasing China’s soft power. The students of Chinese culture and language will have an enlightened knowledge of China, when in positions of influence they will direct their nation to want what China wants, a harmonious world where sovereign states do not intervene into the internal affairs of another by strongly upholding the real meaning of sovereignty. On the same note, educational aid in the form of Chinese government scholarship for foreign students to study in China will have precisely a parallel effect.

In contrast, Hollywood as a non-state actor has already played its part in telling the world that democracy is the best ideology. American values of freedom, equality, justice and fairness are depicted in a smart way and distributed throughout the world for all to know. This has made America by a huge margin more attractive then any other states in the world. People around the globe are fascinated by movies about terrorism showing Americans as the good guys fighting for a better and safe world.

As well as Coca Cola, Pepsi, Mac Donald’s, Nike and other American multinational corporations are strategic investments that show the position of the nation. These respective brand names monopolize their sectors and spontaneously promote the Western culture of fast food and fast life, or to be more exact western consumerism.  

To counter the idea that only soft power is needed to attain the status of being a powerful nation, the concept of smart power emerged. Smart power is the strategic combination of both soft and hard power to achieve certain outcomes, or in the words of Nye “smart power is the ability to combine hard and soft power into a successful strategy”[7]. Highlighting the inevitable fact that hard power is still viable in a nation’s quest for power.

After 9/11, the years of hard work and finance spent on building America’s image since the Cold War went down the drain when it abandoned its workable strategy of using both soft and hard power resources to gain influence. America shifted to hard power and thought that it could use it more strategically to hunt down its enemies and spread democracy around the globe. This miscalculation led to a growth in anti-American sentiments; in a BBC world service poll of 18 countries, the once positive American influence began to slowly decline starting in 2005 all the way to 2007[8].

America’s realization and its efforts to reignite its soft power appeal has led Nye, Defence Secretary Robert Gates, and organizations like the Center for Strategic and International Studies with its Smart Power Commission to come out openly and press for a change. In Nye’s analysis he stated that “the current struggle against transnational terrorism is a struggle over winning hearts and minds, and over reliance on hard power alone is not the path to success”[9]. As such combining both dimensions of power effectively in a smart way is the way forward.

An example of a state with smart power is China, as a smart country it is trying to balance both dimensions of power. The increase in trade, investments, aid and Confucius Institutes complements the modernization of the military and the rapid growth of the economy. Even though, China’s strength is no match to the US, it is on a path to finding equilibrium between soft and hard power. The Chinese have come up with a strategy which is very quantitative in nature called ‘Comprehensive National Power’.

Smart power can as well be used as an analytical tool to show the change in America’s behaviour. From having a foreign policy oriented towards applying both concepts in order to maximize favorable outcome during the Cold War, to depending solely on hard power to fight against terrorism, a non-traditional threat. History is repeating itself because both forms of power in contemporary international relations have become more important. 

The theory by Nye divides the concept of power in international relations into two separate parts. This makes it easy for one to analyze the behaviour of states using either hard or soft power as a tool. Soft power has become one of the widely used phrases in the 21st century, if a poll was conducted to find out the most widely used phrase in contemporary international relations it has to be soft power. From books, journals, media, to the internet there are countless use of the phrase applied in different contexts.  

Analysts and statesmen alike have in this century viewed soft power as an important analytical tool to determine the position of a state in the international power hierarchy. Hu Jintao in the 17th NPC meeting in 2007 exclusively mentioned that China needed to increase its soft power. This call supported the fact that soft power resources like culture, values, foreign policy, investments, aid and diplomacy are now fashionable to achieve great power status because of the indirect effect they have in attracting other nations.
[1] KEOHANE R O, NYE J S. Power and Interdependence in the information Age [J] Foreign Affairs, 1998, 5: 81-94.
[2] NYE  J S. Soft Power (J). Foreign Policy, 1990, 80: 153-171.
[4] NYE J S. The Changing Nature of World Power [J] Political Science Quarterly, 1990, 2: 182.
[5] KURLANTZICK J. China’s Charm: Implications of Chinese soft power  Carnegie Endowment for International Peace – Policy Brief 47.
[6] Ibid.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

FPA: Organizational Process Model

-
This model centers on the fact that different bureaucracies have different standard operating procedures. These procedures are made in order to allow day to day operations to be carried out. Thus, a foreign policy decision is made based on these standard operating procedures. It is hard for a bureaucracy to make a decision or let alone function out of character or contrary to their standard operating procedure. The reading Chapter 4: Foreign policy shares a straight forward explanation of the OPM: "An alternative to the rational model of decision making is the organizational process model. In this model, foreign policy decision makers generally skip the labor-intensive process of identifying goals and alternative actions, relying instead for most decisions on standardized responses or standard operating procedures. For example, the U.S. State Department everyday receives more than a thousand reports or inquiries from its embassies around the world and sends out more than a ...
Read more

Commercial liberalism and the six norms

-
Image
Liberal internationalism is defined by Griffiths, O'Callaghan and Roach (2008, p.190) as a project to transform international relations so that they conform to models of peace, freedom, and prosperity allegedly enjoyed within constitutional liberal democracies. The same scholars go further by dividing liberalism into three distinct groups. They say these are the three ways to implement the project. The way they present liberal internationalism as a project makes their work interesting. Three distinct groups Firstly, commercial liberalism is about free trade between states. States bilaterally or multilaterally via a platform like APEC pursue the goal of trade liberalization. Griffiths, O'Callagahan and Roach (ibid.) argued that economic interdependence would decrease the likelihood of going to war. Republican liberalism is about democratic peace. The scholars argued that the spread of democracy among states so that governments will be accountable to their citizens makes it di...
Read more

Allison's rational actor model

-
There are 3 common models of foreign policy decision making according to Graham Allison: rational actor model organizational process mode government politics model.  We will discuss the 3 models and compare them with the 3 levels of analysis. However, I challenge you to use your own initiative to learn about the other models of decision making. This will help you as future decision makers or analysts to understand how decisions are made and the processes. When one wakes up from bed he or she decides whether or not to brush their teeth, comb their hair and have a shower. These decisions are paramount, they affect and influence how the individual interacts in a social setting. This highlights the fact that as human beings we make decisions every day. Decision making is defined as the thought process of selecting a logical choice from the available options. In the case of the ‘Kibung peles boy’ analogy; the male student had a choice of approaching the girl to ask he...
Read more