Obama and Soft Power (II)

Several people responded to my earlier blog about Obama by asking what I meant by soft power. There is an entire chapter (and references) in my book The Powers to Lead for those who want to pursue it further, but put simply, soft power is the ability to obtain what you want through attraction rather than coercion or payment. We all experience it every day. The better we are able to attract others, the less we have to spend on carrots and sticks. That is important, and it is a lesson that we have to re-learn as a nation after the past eight years.

Some people pointed out that soft power makes a poor slogan in Amercan electioneering. That may be true, but soft power is an analytical term, not a slogan. It refers to an important dimension of power. I invented the term in 1990 when I was writing a book about why I disagreed with the then conventional wisdom that the United States was in decline. After summing up American military and economic power, I realized that something was missing -- our ability to attract others through our culture (where it has appeal), our values (when we apply them without hypocrisy) and our policies (when they are regarded as inclusive and legitimate in the eyes of others). Of course, hard power is also very important, and the ability to combine hard and soft power effectively is what I have called "smart power." That comes closer to being a useful slogan in American politics. It is ironic that China's President Hu Jintao last year proclaimed China's objective of increasing its soft power while Americans are unable to talk seriously about this dimension of power. ( A notable exception was Defense Secretary Robert Gates' plea for more investment in soft power tools last November.) So long as we have a truncated political discourse that ignores part of the tools in our toolbox, we will wind up with policies like those of past eight years. My belief is that Obama, because of his background and emotional intelligence, will be better able to understand the role of soft power and better able to provide effective leadership.

Comments

[Organotic]

I absolutely agree, Mr. Nye. As I touched upon in your last post, America needs to utilize all of the tools at its disposal. The abandonment of international institutions that the US has created such as the UN is rediculous. That is a tool that needs to be implemented and America should get back to leading the international community in a way that fundamentally shapes it that does not supplement culture with values; but rather, adds to it in way that positively influences both the US and other cultures throughout the world. The rules of the game, as stands, are rules that have been written, in large part, from a manifestation of American values and culture. If the US gets back to that in order to utilize soft power, it will once again be perceived as a legitimate entity in the eyes of many states throughout the world. Essentially trying to adopt the Gramski notion of hegemony and abandon the more Machiavellan idea that states comply because they have to is idealistic but possible.

[ApolloSpeaks]

America is a nation at war and needs a war time leader, a warrior with the credentials and credibility to fight and awe our pitiless enemies and beat them. And this is coming from a man, formally of the Left, with an emotional intellect more powerful and robust than Obama's.

[LiveFromNY]

ApolloSpeaks: You have an intellect more powerful and robust than Obama's? My God, man, why have you deprived us of it these past 8 years? The screen name you have chosen for yourself is quite appropriate, as it's obvious from your post that you are indeed a veritable Apollo.

P.S. You're joking, right?

[ApolloSpeaks]

I said emotional intellect. On the emotional-intuitive-psychic side it would take Obama twenty life times to catch up to me. On the intellectual side about ten. I am the source of my energies, they are natural to my being. Obama uses an extramental source. His inspirational powers are not his own. It's a secret that he learned from his pastor. Like his pastor Obama is a hoax. Give me ten minutes alone with John McCain and I'll turn him into a dynamo that will blow Obama away-McCain is made of stronger stuff and is the greater soul.

Google ApolloSpeaks go to my webpage and you'll see that I'm no joke.

[daddysboy]

Yes, people respond positively when you do the right thing for them and yourself; much better than when you scare them or hit them over the head. We are all innately aware of what progress is even if many folks choose to bury their head in the sand, obstruct, or run away in fear. My definition of a good leader is someone that never has to point out or use leverage (hard power) to accomplish shared progress. My father always referred to this as creating light instead of heat.

[dwmulenex]

Soft power will be more effective when it is backed by a hard capacity to reflect the values on which it is based. Soft power also has to be persistent, resilient, and have sufficient explanatory and predictive value for our friends and enemies alike to believe it will inform our actions in and out of crisis. The Bush doctrines on first strike, no law, and no respect for the sovereignty of other nations, have eroded global confidence in U.S. soft power. It's hard to see how we get that confidence back in the near term, without redrawing the lines in some way betweeen our national security interests and our national values. Iraq is muddled up precisely because Bush, Rice and others coupled up our values(idealism) with our national security(realism) to the detriment of both, and to the concept of soft power, which is strategic in contrast to the way that a military action is tactical. If we declare victory on national security grounds (Al Qaeda gone) and leave a divided Iraq, we have a soft power vacuum. If we stay and impose democraracy, we have a soft power perversion. A real conundrum for McCainor Obama . The real Bush, real neocon legacy is that we will have to show the big stick a lot more often when we are speaking softly that we did eight years ago. Soft power looks more and more--Iran, Lebanon, Darfur, Zimbabwe, Myanmar-- like crying wolf.

[daddysboy]

AL QAEDA IS NOT FROM IRAQ, IS NOT BASED IN IRAQ AND IS ONLY THERE NOW BECAUSE OF OUR INVASION AND DESTRUCTION OF IRAQ. We do not have to continue this criminal foreign policy for any reason and are not obligated to continue to have a presence in the middle east except where direct stability and security reasons are fully proven and specific goals and timelines are in place to accomplish that security and stability along with the direct approval and support of the United Nations council. Only by returning to a reasonable faith and cooperation with our neighboring countries will we ever succeed in securing our planet.

[UnionJok]

Remind the Rambo coalition of the first part of "speak softly and carry a big stick".
Another term that comes to mind is "setting a good example". In another thread here, someone mentioned the Golden Rule, which sums up the whole idea very well.

The word "soft" enrages the Rambo types, so call it "strong, silent power".

[wanttruth]

Nice column. I definitely believe Obama has a better grasp of "smart power" !

[SamEllison]

"You get more bees with honey than you get with vinegar."

[hrayovac]

Thanks you for responding to the readers as you have done, Mr Nye. You may have demonstrated exactly what you meant via your further efforts to clarify. This being Father's Day, I will demonstrate using my father as an example why I think the expression "soft power" doesn't resonate with me.
My father quietly worked through all my formative years as a union laborer, first a longshoreman then a warehouseman. Heavy lifting was not a metaphor but the actual definition of his job. He complained sure, but didn't quit until his retirement, working until sixty-three years old. Built like an ox. He and my mother divorced, causing great bitterness which he buried with drink. But only one time did he ever strike me physically and I distinctly remember deserving the rather light and minimal swat he gave. He had so much heart and love, it definitely hurt him more than me as that old expression goes. He managed to straighten out my course in life and teach me without abusing me. You might describe my father's character as soft power. I would call it integrity, true strength and love.
In the political sense, I don't call those who abuse others powerful. I describe them as fascist. And they are only temporarily fearsome, the treasonous tyrants like Bush who deceive, always out for the quick and transient gain while those with integrity such as Obama exhibit the strength that is eternal.

[dzho]

'Soft power' is well understood in Asia, exemplified in practices like Judo, Aikido, and Tai Chi.
The irony meter peaked in '06 when President Hu presented a copy of Sun Tzu's the Art of War to mr bush. Too bad he can't read.

[ContraEgoiste]

"...to attract others through our culture, our values and our policies..." - Joseph Nye

I believe "others" have already been "shock and awed" sufficiently about our culture, our values and our policies. Damage control to regaining some credibility seems more like the place to begin now.

[egal]

Considering that nothing done under our current president in any way reflects th culture, values, and policies of the American nation and people, we all know that isn't what shock and awed them.

[ContraEgoiste]

Some facts you should consider.

Almost 50% of voters elected GWB to a 2nd term.

Only 54% of the population eligible to vote do so. We rank 35th in voter turnout out of the world's prominent democracies.

Only 20% of americans have a Passport

Estimates are about 45% or 52 million of american households owning 260 million guns.

57% of all Americans read a book in 2002. Fewer Than Half of American Adults Now Read Literature.

In education a 2003 study conducted by UNICEF that took the averages from five different international education studies, the researchers ranked the United States No. 18 out of 24. Other studies ranked the US 48 out of 100.

The US represents less that 5% of the worlds population, but consume 31% of the world's resources. In 2005 we spent $276 Billion in advertising mostly to create an ethos of infantilization aimed to sustain "consumer capitalism".

Culture. Our biggest blockbusters are comic book characters (Hulk, Spiderman, shrek...); Icons: Paris Hilton, Britney Spears; Entertainment: XBox, American Idol

We spend as much in the military and weapons as the rest of the world combined. And less you forget history, our recent military aggression are not limited to Iraq. ViteNam, Salvador, Nicaragua, Panama..

[LizM]

That you actually felt the need to explain the subject matter of your last post tells me everything I need to know about how George W. Bush gets elected...twice...and why it will be President McCain in 2009. However, I am still confounded by your complete lack of attention - to my knowledge, at least - to the Democratic candidate who understands most intimately what soft power is all about and how to make it a prominent part of US foreign policy.

Perhaps you could explain that in another post.

[Heidfeld]

Which is it Liz, Biden or Hillary? Cause they are the only two that come to my mind.

Once again, I am baffled as to what the author sees in Obama's "background and emotional intelligence" that leads him to these conclusions.

What does being a community leader and state senator have to do with international statesmanship? Nothing. Or did he mean the 'broken home' aspect of his background that his campaign tries to exploit for sympathy.

Emotional intelligence? What? As evidenced by what exactly? His crying to reporters if they ask him too many hard questions, or follow him on vacation? His threats of voilence against people who don't agree with him?

[LizM]

Well, slap my wrists! I can't believe that I missed an opportunity to mention his name around here.

Senator Biden is the undisputed leader among Democrats - and Republicans, for that matter - on all issues related to foreign policy, national security, constitutional matters (Biden STILL teaches constitutional law, if you catch my drift)...and soft power...with credentials in these realms that were wholly unmatched by ANY of his presidential rivals, in either party...by a LONG shot!

Senator Obama would do well to remember this when choosing his VP...unless he has completely relegated that authority over to his 'vetters' on the 'VP search team'...gimme a break!

[egal]

My thought as well...when people don't even know what "soft power" is--let alone that it is consistently a better predictor of success than anything hard power can accomplish (even the greatest military achievements are generally the way the existence of the military convinces enemies NOT to attack, which falls under soft power)--pretty much sums up why Bush got so much leeway due to his active response to terrorism when more knowledge about how power works would have revealed how tragically counterproductive that reaction was.

[LizM]

You're right...I don't suspect that a majority of the electorate knows what soft power is, much less what it can do for them!

I guess we'll just have to hope that Obama chooses his running mate wisely and then Senator Biden can explain all about the merits of soft power and about other related matters...at length and often...especially under the national spotlight of the vice-presidential debates.