Economic Strenght is Soft Power (original) (raw)
Related papers
Who Holds the Power in Soft Power?
This article explores the concepts of 'soft power' and 'cultural diplomacy' from both a theoretical perspective as well as thinking about how they manifest in practice. Britain is used as a case study to demonstrate how these terms have shifted in line with the advancement of neoliberal politics. Any belief in intercultural cooperation has been usurped by the notion of global competition, wholeheartedly embraced by market-oriented Western nations. As soft power relies on the resources of the State, its corporations, industries and institutions, wealthy nations will always have the monopoly. This article argues that at a time when power is shifting to the East and the Global South, culture remains one of the last enduring weapons through which traditionally powerful states attempt to resist or slow down the changing world order. Soft power becomes a means by which the existing hegemony is reimagined, repackaged and reaffirmed.
Revising the soft power concept: what are the means and mechanisms of soft power?
The power of attraction (soft power), as developed by Joseph Nye, has been increasingly discussed in international relations literature and policy, yet soft power has not been fully utilized because of under‐specified tools and mechanisms by which soft power influences international actors. This article revises the concept of soft power by generating a continuum of power based on the tools useful for implementing different degrees of soft or hard power. In addition, the article describes two mechanisms through which soft power influences international actors, beginning the call for exploration of other such mechanisms. Reconceptualizing soft power in terms of objects that are controlled and utilized by policy‐makers, such as agenda‐setting and framing, provides us with more useful analytical variables to understand international relations and to provide policy recommendations.
E-IR, 2020
The irrelevance of Soft Power stems not from its theoretical dimension, but from a changing global landscape. The 21st century will be characterized by growing competition among three giants – China, India and the United States. To contend with this triumvirate, nations will create short-termed strategic alliances that will collectively bargain opposite the giants, or force their hands. These alliances will rest on shared interests, not shared values. In a world governed by increased competition, as opposed to cooperation, the practice of Soft Power will become secondary. The benefit of strategic alliances lies in their malleability. Unlike the Cold-War era, nations will not be bound to one giant. On the contrary, nations will collaborate with different giants towards different ends. National power will emanate from a nation’s status as a desirable member in strategic alliances. This desirability may rest on diverse resources ranging from economic stability to technological infrastructure and geographic location. Now is not the age of uni-polarity or bi-polarity. Now is the age of giants. And in this age, power will function differently, as explained in this article.
The concept of power is central to the analyses of international relations, politics, society, economy as well as human life. Power could be regarded as the lifeblood of a social and political system. Power is multifaceted and, therefore, is hard to measure in concrete quantitative use of the term. It is of two basic types: hard and soft power. Nearly three decades ago, American political scientist Joseph Nye put forth the idea of soft power, a concept that caught fire and went on to define the post-Cold War era (Nye 1990). He asserts that soft power is the 'ability to affect others by attraction and persuasion rather than just coercion and payment' (Nye 2017, p. 17). A country's soft power comes from its civil society and culture rather than from the government. The conceptual definition of soft power offered by Nye is indeed precise, useful and also impactful. The state apparatus; especially the military, police, para-military, and border forces constitute the core of the hard power. The use of force is conceptually linked to hard power. Soft power and hard power are not mutually exclusive, and that soft power complements hard power. This current book entitled, Soft Power: The Forces of Attraction in International Relations by Hendrik W. Ohnesorge, Managing Assistant and Research Fellow at the Center for Global Studies/Chair in International Relations at the University of Bonn (Germany) is a new addition to the literature on the study of soft power. The book, originating from a doctoral dissertation, provides a detailed examination of the concept of soft power both from theoretical and empirical perspectives. It seeks 'to elucidate and elaborate on the concept of soft power in international relations' (p.1). In total, the book has five chapters. In chapter 1, the author illustrates the concept of soft power, its current state of research and importance of the study in light of the existent research gap. The author raises a number of pertinent questions, including:
Complicated Currents: media flows, soft power and East Asia., 2010
Thesis I: Entertainment is no substitute for foreign policy, and the soft power of culture industries cannot replace the hard power of arms. Thesis II: The power of the culture industries is no proxy for the power of art. Thesis ill: Only serious art that possesses a transcultural power can adequately address the great historical and political questions that confront nations at war or states embroiled in chronic conflict.
Can Soft Power be Bought and Why Does It Matter?
Art & International Affairs, 2021
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has undergone a rapid transformation over the last fifty years. From a scattering of coastal fishing villages and desert settlements, it is now home to hyper-real metropolises, iconic skylines, luxury hotels, and world-class tourist attractions, all fuelled by the discovery of oil in the late 1950s. It has established itself as the global capital of luxury, building a world "beyond imagination," where "the impossible doesn't exist." This article explores whether soft power can be bought and why it matters, using the UAE as a case study. Once a measurement of political values, foreign policy, and culture, soft power is now a misused and overused term that has become synonymous with nation branding, tourism, and trade. Viewed through this contemporary lens, the acquisition of the Louvre, the Guggenheim, and New York University outposts and the establishment of Dubai as a luxury holiday destination are arguably, as examples, ways for the UAE to secure its position on the world stage as a welcoming, tolerant, and modern country. However, this recent cultural development and glamorous veneer overshadows and obscures the country's aggressively authoritarian politics: from a wealthy royal family that pays its citizens for their acquiescence to human rights abuses such as arbitrary detention and forced labour, and from state-run media to some of the heaviest restrictions on free speech in the region. At a time when scrutiny should be focused on the UAE, soft power enables its autocratic governance to appear benign, ensuring that the country retains a palatable reputation and remains attractive to international visitors and investors alike.