Analysts have always been comfortable defining diplomacy in opposition to the use of war and armed force in relationships between states. Diplomacy is thus generally explained as the art and practice of maintaining interstate relations and persuading other peoples through peaceful means. However, its meanings are so diverse and its scope so vast that it is difficult for the uninitiated person to grasp all the facets of diplomatic practice, as the art and technique of implementing a country’s foreign policy, but also as a generally unknown profession, sometimes surrounded by mysteries and misconceptions.
Diplomacy remains the art and practice of managing international relations through dialogue, negotiation, and compromise rather than through conflict and force. It involves interactions between states, their governments, officials, and representatives, to resolve conflicts, establish alliances, negotiate treaties, and promote national interests. Yet, today, modern diplomacy extends beyond simple interactions between governments. It includes new forms of activity that support, and sometimes challenge, classical diplomacy. New forms and names came into use over the past few decades, such as:
– Public diplomacy, or activities by a state or its representatives to communicate directly with foreign populations;
– Cultural diplomacy, or sharing of traditions, arts, and values, to foster mutual understanding and promote a State’s image and culture;
– Parliamentary diplomacy, whereby legislative institutions engage in bilateral, regional, or international relations to defend national interests and even to coordinate and carry out actions that influence governments and peoples at the regional or global level;
– Popular diplomacy, or the activities of civil society organizations at the bilateral, regional, or international level, with or without the agreement of their respective governments;
– Sports diplomacy, the activities by sport players, organizations, and various stakeholders in the field, to represent a country and promote its image within international institutions, at sporting events, as well as in the media;
– E-diplomacy, a new trend that can encompass activities and interactions of Heads of State, public institutions and government officials, on social media, to defend national interests, inform the general public, promote the image of their respective countries, etc.
In addition, during the Cold War in the 20th century, a new concept came to enrich the vocabulary and broaden the scope of diplomacy, at the level of interstate relations or actions of one State towards the population of another State.
The term “soft power” appeared then in the United States and is used worldwide, sometimes without much precision or conviction as to its meaning or tools. However, for diplomacy, soft power is a tool that has become essential, even necessary, reflecting a relative power in addition to the political power and financial resources of wealthy or developed states.
The Concept of Soft Power as a Way to Perceive
International Politics Differently
In today’s interconnected world, influence is more related to the way how nations present themselves, the values they embody, and the appeal their cultures and policies exert on other nations and peoples. This is where diplomacy and the use of soft power come into complementarity: They are essential tools for building bridges, shaping global narratives, and promoting peaceful relations, generally used by States that have the capacity to make them a policy, with substantial financial and human resources.
It is worth recalling, for example, that during the Cold War, a simple gesture in the field of sport and a human exchange literally triggered a real impact in history. It happened in April 1971, when the U.S. table tennis team made a historic trip to China, becoming the first American delegation to visit the country in decades. It’s worth noting that after the Chinese Revolution of 1949, diplomatic relations between the United States and Communist China were nonexistent, trade was limited, and contact was limited.
In fact, the U.S. team was competing in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championship in Japan, when a meeting between Glenn Cowan, a player on the U.S. team, and Zhuang Zedong, a player on the Chinese team, caused an international sensation. Cowan had missed his bus after practice and boarded the Chinese team’s bus.
Zhuang approached the American and shook his hand. As they exited the bus, reporters photographed them together. Two days later, the American team received an official invitation to travel to China and play exhibition matches against the Chinese team, an invitation that was immediately accepted by the USA.
From that first encounters, diplomacy took over. Ten international journalists, including five Americans, were also invited to cover the team’s visit, ending the information blockade imposed by the People’s Republic of China since 1949. The American public followed the visit daily in newspapers and on television from April 11th to 17th, 1971, as the Americans played exhibition matches with their hosts, visited the Great Wall, and spoke with Chinese students and workers, among other activities.
Officially, Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai seized this public relations opportunity by hosting the American delegation at a banquet at the Great Hall of the People on April 14th. “You have opened a new chapter in relations between the American and Chinese peoples,” he told these representatives, adding: “I am confident that this renewal of our friendship will certainly enjoy the majority support of our two peoples.” He also invited more American journalists to visit China.
On the same day, the United States announced its intention to lift a 20-year trade embargo on China. And a Chinese table tennis team reciprocated by visiting the USA. Later, U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger made a historic visit to Beijing on July 15th, 1971.
The American Joseph Nye was first to use the concept “soft power” in the late 1980s. He devoted an entire 208-page book to it, entitled “Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics,” published in 2008. A University Professor Emeritus and former Dean of the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, he served as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, Chairman of the National Intelligence Council, and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Security Assistance, Science, and Technology, under the Bill Clinton Administration.
According to David W. Kearn, Jr., in the analysis entitled “The Hard Truths of Soft Power,” the evolution of the concept of ‘’soft power’’ in Nye’s work can be divided into four main stages, linked to the emergence of new processes and relationships between political forces on the international scene4:
– The first stage is linked to the intensification of nuclear confrontation risk between the United States and the USSR during the Cold War, which gave impetus to Nye’s development of the concept of ‘’soft power’’.
– The second stage corresponds to the collapse of the USSR and the establishment of American hegemony on world stage. During this period, Nye formulated the concept of soft power and considered it necessary to expand its use in international relations.
– The third stage is associated with the emergence of the concept of ‘’smart power’’, a dialectical combination of influence resources, both soft and hard, to resolve international conflicts.
– The beginning of the fourth stage is due to the emergence of the concept of “sharp power,” associated with the strengthening of information warfare and the widespread use of manipulation technologies in the modern communications space.
In this sense, the concept of ‘’soft power’’ evolved to be smart and sharp power, and goes beyond the classic Weberian definition of power, which refers to “any chance of making one’s own will triumph, within a social relationship, over the resistance of others5.”
Thus, since the end of the Cold War, by mobilizing more intangible, immaterial, and diffuse resources such as economic, intellectual, and political influence, the setting of behavioral, legal, economic, or ethical norms, seduction, and even persuasion, soft power has become integral to States’ assertion of their influence on the international stage.
What Makes Soft Power as Intriguing as Challenging?
It is in fact the effort, activity, and ability by a State to attract, influence, and persuade other peoples. Conceived in contrast to the concept of “hard power,” which is the use of force and the capacity for coercion, which are the manifestation of a country’s military or economic power, soft power stems from the attraction and influence created by its culture, values, and policies.
Hard power remains crucial in a world where states seek to preserve their independence and when non-State groups are willing to resort to violence. It is at the heart of the new national security strategy of various countries. But according to Joseph Nye, the neoconservatives in the United States, in his time, made a serious miscalculation: “they focused too much on using American military power to compel other nations to bend to their will, and they placed too little importance on soft power.”
For him, it was this “soft power that should help prevent terrorists from recruiting supporters among the moderate majority. And it is soft power that should help manage crucial global issues that require multilateral cooperation among states.” This is why he believed it is essential for America to understand and implement its soft power.
Traditionally, military power may yield short-term results, yet it often lacks sustainability and can breed long-term resentment. In contrast, the ability to influence stems from a country’s culture, political ideals, and foreign policy, when they are considered legitimate or morally acceptable.
Soft power comes from several sources. First, from culture. When a country’s music, art, food, movies, or fashion captivate people around the world, they project a positive image to various audiences and publics. American Hollywood films, Egyptian cinema and music, Japanese Manga cartoons, and more, are examples of exported cultural creations that have influenced millions of people and generations around the world. The public is well aware of the majority of actors and musicians from various countries, who have shaped artistic tastes and imagination for decades.
In the case of the USA, in addition to its global military, economic, and diplomatic power, it has wielded its soft power since World War II, through its entertainment industry, mass media, leading universities, lifestyle, and entrepreneurship, including the famous “American Dream,” as well as through its financial aid and development cooperation, and so on.
Cultural diplomacy has now become more essential than ever as a pillar of international relations, with the use of cultural product exchanges and creative media foster mutual understanding and strengthen relationships. At a time when global challenges demand empathy and cooperation, languages and arts are powerful tools for bridging divides between peoples, fostering cross-border dialogue, and, above all, exerting influence.
By promoting their political values, nations that champion democracy, freedom, human rights, and the rule of law have long earned the respect and admiration of populations around the world, particularly when these values are consistently applied at home and abroad and presented as human, universal values. Some states, particularly in the Arab-Muslim region, Africa, and Asia, use their soft power to promote their version of the practice of Islam, expand their networks of influence, and shape regional and even global events.
Moreover, through their foreign policies, countries that engage in humanitarian aid, peacekeeping, and multilateral cooperation often acquire moral authority and a positive international image. Also, countries with substantial financial means do not hesitate to promote their image through development aid to secure alliances, political support, and economic partnerships and extend their influence over a particular country or region.
The case of Qatar is worth mentioning. This country, so small in terms of its geographical and demographic size, has managed to carve out a prominent place for itself among the world’s nations thanks to a very long-term strategic vision. Its foreign policy primarily reflects the country’s considerable financial wealth. Based on its economic policy and colossal investments worldwide, it has also been combined with influence.
It is clear that this country has managed to influence an entire generation through its soft power, particularly focused on the global broadcasting by its television groups, ‘’Al Jazeera’’ and ‘’BeIN Sport’’, the purchase of football clubs in Europe, and through its political and financial support to political parties and religious groups in various regions, such as the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood and the Palestinian Hamas movement. Such examples of soft power demonstrate how non-coercive influence can shape the way the world perceives a country and how other nations choose to interact with it.
Smart Power: Combining Two Modes
But soft power is not without its challenges. It is a strategy that can be undermined by inconsistencies or contradictions in implementation policies, such as promoting human rights and values abroad while violating them at home. It is also vulnerable to disinformation, cultural misunderstandings, and competition, whether regional or global, from rivals who may use propaganda or cyber campaigns to damage the source country’s reputation.
Furthermore, soft power is largely a matter of considerable financial resources; and therefore, not all countries can afford the luxury of pursuing a foreign policy that combines classical diplomacy and soft power.
The most effective strategy for modern nations, capable of affording this luxury, is not to choose between hard power and soft power, but rather a smart power that combines the two modes in the same approach to implement foreign policy.
Its use was popularized and widespread in Washington, from 2001 to 2009, when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State in the Barack Obama administration. Smart power then combined the power of military and economic tools with the subtlety of soft power in the US foreign relations. It is proved that influence is most effective when it inspires cooperation rather than demands compliance.
In practice, Americans have used this concept in what has been called ‘’people-to-people diplomacy’’, aimed at gaining the sympathy and cooperation of the Iraqi and Afghan populations following the US military’s invasion of both countries.
The international community has been facing numerous challenges and new practices since the beginning of the 21st century. Global public opinion is judging the actions of various influential States, based on their impact on international cooperation and solidarity rather than on the strength of their armed forces.
It goes without saying that the global geopolitical landscape has undergone a profound transformation in recent decades, particularly with the rise of extreme populism and nationalism, as well as changes in the world order as known since the Second World War and especially since the end of the Cold War. In addition, Donald Trump’s second term as US President plays a central role in this shift, embodying a deep ideological belief in American supremacy and desire for hegemony.
With his “America First” slogan, he has implemented his decision to destroy a major symbol of soft power and an effective arm of American influence in the world, by dissolving the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), as part of a policy of drastic reductions in US foreign aid. This action has been criticized in many countries and by humanitarian organizations, national and international, which have benefited so much from American largesse and aid, including programs like scholarship grants to foreign students.
New challenges, New Attitudes and Behaviors
Despite the twists and turns of the international situation, soft power will continue to play a vital role in international relations today and tomorrow. If hard power can help winning wars, soft power, as a tool and support for diplomacy, will win the hearts and minds of people.
Countries that know and can use culture, values, and diplomacy to attract and persuade other peoples, will be better positioned to impact international affairs in the 21st century, through respect and influence that States can inspire among foreign peoples.
Added to this, of course, is the widespread use of new means of communication and influence available to States, such as new technologies and social media. This inevitably blurs, however, the understanding of distinction between soft power and the use of power, even non-physical power, such as the use of large scale fake news.
In these times of artificial intelligence and cyberattacks, fears are growing regarding influence and manipulation by foreign countries or actors who no longer limit themselves to convincing and influencing the public opinions of targeted countries. Such activities go beyond that to achieve manipulative effects at levels unprecedented in history.
