Latest news with #softPower
Arab News
7 days ago
- Business
- Arab News
The future of American soft power
Power is the ability to get others to do what you want. That can be accomplished by coercion ('sticks'), payment ('carrots') and attraction ('honey'). The first two methods are forms of hard power, whereas attraction is soft power. Soft power grows out of a country's culture, its political values and its foreign policies. In the short term, hard power usually trumps soft power. But over the long term, soft power often prevails. Joseph Stalin once mockingly asked, 'How many divisions does the Pope have?' But the papacy continues today, while Stalin's Soviet Union is long gone. When you are attractive, you can economize on carrots and sticks. If allies see you as benign and trustworthy, they are more likely to be open to persuasion and follow your lead. If they see you as an unreliable bully, they are more likely to drag their feet and reduce their interdependence when they can. Cold War Europe is a good example. A Norwegian historian described Europe as divided into a Soviet and an American empire. But there was a crucial difference: the American side was 'an empire by invitation.' That became clear when the Soviets had to deploy troops to Budapest in 1956 and to Prague in 1968. In contrast, NATO has not only survived but voluntarily increased its membership. A proper understanding of power must include both its hard and soft aspects. Niccolo Machiavelli said it was better for a prince to be feared than to be loved. But it is best to be both. Because soft power is rarely sufficient by itself, and because its effects take longer to realize, political leaders are often tempted to resort to the hard power of coercion or payment. When wielded alone, however, hard power can involve higher costs than when it is combined with the soft power of attraction. The Berlin Wall did not succumb to an artillery barrage; it was felled by hammers and bulldozers wielded by people who had lost faith in communism and were drawn to Western values. If allies see you as benign and trustworthy, they are more likely to be open to persuasion and follow your lead Joseph S. Nye Jr. After the Second World War, the US was by far the most powerful country and it attempted to enshrine its values in what became known as 'the liberal international order' — a framework comprising the UN, the Bretton Woods economic institutions and other multilateral bodies. Of course, the US did not always live up to its liberal values and Cold War bipolarity limited this order to only half the world's people. But the postwar system would have looked very different if the Axis powers had won the Second World War and imposed their values. While prior US presidents have violated aspects of the liberal order, Donald Trump is the first to reject the idea that soft power has any value in foreign policy. Among his first actions upon returning to office was to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement and the World Health Organization, despite the obvious threats that climate change and pandemics pose. The effects of a US administration surrendering soft power are all too predictable. Coercing democratic allies like Denmark or Canada weakens trust in our alliances. Threatening Panama reawakens fears of imperialism throughout Latin America. Crippling the US Agency for International Development — created by President John F. Kennedy in 1961 — undercuts our reputation for benevolence. Silencing Voice of America is a gift to authoritarian rivals. Slapping tariffs on friends makes us appear unreliable. Trying to chill free speech at home undermines our credibility. This list could go on. Trump has defined China as America's great challenge and China itself has been investing in soft power since 2007, when then-President Hu Jintao told the Communist Party of China that the country needed to make itself more attractive to others. But China has long faced two major obstacles in this respect. First, it maintains territorial disputes with multiple neighbors. Second, the party insists on maintaining tight control over civil society. The costs of such policies have been confirmed by public opinion polls that ask people around the world which countries they find attractive. But one can only wonder what these surveys will show in future years if Trump keeps undercutting American soft power. Will America's cultural soft power survive a downturn in the government's soft power over the next four years? Joseph S. Nye Jr. To be sure, American soft power has had its ups and downs over the years. The US was unpopular in many countries during the Vietnam and Iraq wars. But soft power derives from a country's society and culture, as well as from government actions. Even during the Vietnam War, when crowds marched through streets around the world to protest US policies, they sang the American civil rights anthem 'We Shall Overcome.' An open society that allows protest can be a soft power asset. But will America's cultural soft power survive a downturn in the government's soft power over the next four years? American democracy is likely to survive four years of Trump. The country has a resilient political culture and a federal constitution that encourages checks and balances. There is a reasonable chance that Democrats will regain control of the House of Representatives in the 2026 midterm elections. Moreover, civil society remains strong and the courts independent. Many organizations have launched lawsuits to challenge Trump's actions and markets have signaled dissatisfaction with Trump's economic policies. American soft power recovered after low points in the Vietnam and Iraq wars, as well as from a dip in Trump's first term. But once trust is lost, it is not easily restored. After the invasion of Ukraine, Russia lost most of what soft power it had, but China is striving to fill any gaps that Trump creates. The way Chinese President Xi Jinping tells it, the East is rising over the West. If Trump thinks he can compete with China while weakening trust among American allies, asserting imperial aspirations, destroying USAID, silencing Voice of America, challenging laws at home and withdrawing from UN agencies, he is likely to fail. Restoring what he has destroyed will not be impossible, but it will be costly. Copyright: Project Syndicate
Jordan Times
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Jordan Times
Education as Soft Power: Shaping Influence in a Divided World
In an era shaped by globalization, international cooperation, and rapid communication, intercultural dialogue is more urgent than ever. It remains one of the most effective tools for building mutual understanding and bridging divides in an increasingly polarized world. Amid these global shifts, education has stepped into the spotlight—not just as a means of personal advancement but as a powerful lever of soft power. Defined by Harvard's Joseph Nye as the ability to influence others through attraction rather than force, soft power allows nations to shape perceptions through shared values, cultural exchange, and knowledge. The 2024 Global Soft Power Index shows that countries investing in ethical, inclusive education often enjoy stronger international credibility. Yet turning this promise into meaningful impact remains a challenge. In this light, education becomes more than a tool of national influence—it's a bridge connecting cultures, diplomacy, and mutual understanding. At its best, it promotes trust by sharing ideas and values across borders. Beyond coexistence, interculturalism calls for deeper engagement. It encourages respect, challenges assumptions, and nurtures empathy—skills essential for navigating difference while remaining rooted in one's identity. Challenges to Interculturalism in a Multi-Polar World Yet this ideal is under strain. In today's fragmented world, national agendas often assert themselves more aggressively—sometimes tipping into cultural dominance. As Edward Said once warned, cultural imperialism can hide behind noble intentions. Education, once a hopeful bridge-builder, is increasingly caught in this tension. This raises questions: Can education still act as a genuine force for soft power, or is it becoming just another tool of influence? How can interculturalism evolve in modern systems to foster global awareness? And what conditions are needed to ensure education connects, not divides? Expanding the Scope of Soft Power: The Notion of Smart Power As global competition grows, soft power alone may no longer suffice. Its subtlety often lacks the speed or force needed in urgent geopolitical situations. This has led to the rise of 'smart power'—a blend of persuasion and pressure, combining soft influence with economic or strategic tools. Education plays a key role in this shift. Now tied to broader policy aims, it's shaped by diplomacy, national priorities, and emerging technologies like AI. Governments are using AI not only to enhance learning but to influence civic behavior and national identity. Separately, Russian analyst Shabalov has argued that strategies like 'controlled chaos,' 'color revolutions,' and 'cultural hegemony' are being deployed in cultural arenas—including education. While not directly tied to AI, his insights show how learning environments have become front lines in wider battles over influence and perception. Moral Dilemmas of Evolving Strategies This shift brings ethical questions. Can education stay grounded in values like dialogue and trust while also serving strategic aims? As the lines blur, the risk grows that influence overshadows integrity. Yet education's potential remains—if rooted in fairness, transparency, and open exchange, it can still guide global engagement. Education as a Hybrid Tool in Soft and Smart Power Education now blends cultural outreach with strategic goals. Exchange programs still foster understanding, but they also support diplomacy. Governments invest in innovation—especially AI—while using curricula to reinforce civic values and national narratives. These trends show how education can inspire global respect even as it advances domestic priorities. Contradictions and Opportunities So what happens next? Can education evolve without losing its ethical foundation? Can it support national aims and still promote cross-cultural dialogue? And how can we keep it from being co-opted as a tool of manipulation? These questions go beyond education policy—they speak to the core of democratic society. As strategic interests increasingly shape public discourse, education's role as a space for reflection and open exchange has never been more important. Countries with greater resources often dominate education systems and the narratives they promote, sidelining local voices. Western models, seen as universal, can drown out diverse worldviews. Another concern is financial influence. Foreign funding can shape curriculum direction. Confucius Institutes, for example, have been accused of promoting selective narratives and silencing dissent. U.S.-backed exchanges face similar criticism. These programs aim to build goodwill—but may embed ideological agendas. This financial reliance can compromise academic integrity. Universities dependent on international donors may feel pressured to align with those interests. In the U.S., controversial donations have sparked debate about freedom of thought and institutional independence. The line between partnership and compromise can blur. In 2022, the University of Helsinki ended its Confucius Institute partnership due to concerns about censorship and ties to the Chinese government. The move reflected wider fears over academic freedom and politicized learning. Education is also part of the global fight against disinformation. In the UK, the Open Information Partnership works with schools to teach media literacy. Across the Arab world, ALECSO supports efforts to protect cultural integrity and challenge misinformation. But this strategy has a double edge. As education enters the information war, the line between cultural diplomacy and propaganda grows blurry. While every country has the right to protect its national interests—especially from foreign interference—this must be balanced with efforts to promote digital literacy, critical thinking, and open inquiry. These tools help learners engage globally while upholding academic freedom and mutual respect. The Way Forward Looking ahead, education must stay anchored to its core values. That means protecting academic freedom, using AI ethically, and promoting global citizenship through equity, openness, and trust. If done right, education can still shape a better world—not just by informing minds, but by connecting them. By Razan B. Nweiran | Policy Researcher in Global Education and Diplomacy
Times
23-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Times
King Charles's mission in Canada: deliver ‘soft power with impact'
From hockey matches to a public procession through the capital, the King's visit to Canada will mark an important moment in the country's history. A palace source described the visit as 'a diplomatic tight rope' but one that Charles 'knows how to walk'. And the mission? To deliver 'soft power with significant impact'. The world's media and no fewer than four sketch artists will be there to capture the raison d'être of the trip: the King's speech, delivered from a throne that was carved from a walnut tree grown in Windsor Great Park. Canadians believe that Charles's presence, accompanied by military honours and gun salutes for the King of Canada, will send a 'powerful' message that Canada is not, and never will be, America's 51st
Irish Times
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Irish Times
How the Kremlin's ‘soft power' agency supporting expats overseas skirts sanctions
Following its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, it became increasingly difficult for Russia to continue its influence operations in Europe. For years, the Kremlin had operated a network of organisations designed to increase Russian soft power overseas. One of these organisations was the Fund for the Support and Protection of the Rights of Compatriots Living Abroad, known by its Russian acronym Pravfond. Since 2012 Pravfond had been paying for legal services for Russians living abroad, including in Ireland. However, according to various western intelligence agencies it was, in some countries, also funding influence operations and acting as an extension of Russian intelligence. Following the invasion, the EU placed extensive sanctions on Russia's banking sector, which made it increasingly difficult for Pravfond and similar organisations to move money overseas. READ MORE In 2023, the EU also specifically sanctioned Pravfond, accusing it of acting in the Kremlin's foreign policy interests. One person who was affected was Elena Berezhnaya, a 72-year-old Ukrainian who had risen to prominence by criticising Ukraine's pro-EU government and advocating pro-Russian positions. In 2022, Berezhnaya was arrested by the Ukrainian security service and accused of 'high treason'. Documents contained in a collection of more than 70,000 emails and records detailing the activities of Pravfond, show she started to receive help from Sergey Borisovich Zavorotny, who previously served as press secretary to Ukraine's pro-Russian prime minister Mykola Azarov. In 2014 Azarov fled to Russia following the Euromaiden protests that resulted in the ousting of the pro-Russian government in Kyiv. [ Investigation: The links between lawyers in Ireland and Putin's soft-power agency Opens in new window ] After her arrest, Pravfond agreed to provide Zavorotny with $3,000 (€2,644) for Berezhnaya's medical care in custody. The following year, as they discussed another payment, Zavorotny raised the problem of sanctions, which he said made it 'impossible' to receive Pravfond funds. This is where another Ukrainian woman came in, specifically a woman living in the northwest of Ireland. In April 2023, Zavorotny proposed a plan to Pravfond. The fund would give money to parents who had adult children living in the United States. These children would then transfer the money to the Ukrainian woman living in the northwest. This woman was a close associate of Berezhnaya and would ensure the money got to her legal team in Kyiv, Zavorotny said in a note. Later that month Zavorotny signed another contract with Pravfond for $3,000 for Berezhnaya. In 2024 there was another similar agreement. It was not the first time the Ukrainian woman living in the northwest had handled money linked to Pravfond. A Western Union receipt, which was found in the Pravfond records, shows she received just over $2,800 from a US account in November 2022. The Irish address on the receipt is the same as a location previously used to house Ukrainian refugees. It is not known if Berezhnaya continues to receive money from Pravfond or if this money is been funnelled through Ireland. In December 2024, according to international media reports, Berezhnaya was jailed for 14 years by a Ukrainian court. Records concerning operations in Ireland and other countries show Pravfond quickly adapted to the new reality of wartime sanctions. In fact, it appears they were little more than a speed bump. In March 2024 a draft annual report of the foundation's activities, sent to the Russian foreign ministry and included in the leaked communications, noted that sanctions had imposed 'certain difficulties for practical work'. 'Nevertheless,' the executive director of the foundation Aleksandr Udaltsov wrote in the report, 'so far it has been possible to resolve issues in each specific case, using, among other things, alternative and workaround options.' In response to queries, the Russian embassy in Dublin said it 'firmly rejects preposterous allegations' made against Pravfond, which it said acts in 'full accordance with universally recognised humanitarian principles and norms of international human rights law'. The embassy spokesman compared its activity to Ireland's Emigrant Support Programme, which provides assistance to the Irish diaspora. The spokesman dismissed the queries from The Irish Times, saying they had 'nothing to do with journalism and amounts to libel and open Russophobia', he said.
Jordan Times
18-05-2025
- Politics
- Jordan Times
The future of American soft power
CAMBRIDGE — Power is the ability to get others to do what you want. That can be accomplished by coercion ('sticks'), payment ('carrots'), and attraction ('honey'). The first two methods are forms of hard power, whereas attraction is soft power. Soft power grows out of a country's culture, its political values, and its foreign policies. In the short term, hard power usually trumps soft power. But over the long term, soft power often prevails. Joseph Stalin once mockingly asked, 'How many divisions does the Pope have?' But the papacy continues today, while Stalin's Soviet Union is long gone. When you are attractive, you can economize on carrots and sticks. If allies see you as benign and trustworthy, they are more likely to be open to persuasion and follow your lead. If they see you as an unreliable bully, they are more likely to drag their feet and reduce their interdependence when they can. Cold War Europe is a good example. A Norwegian historian described Europe as divided into a Soviet and an American empire. But there was a crucial difference: the American side was 'an empire by invitation.' That became clear when the Soviets had to deploy troops to Budapest in 1956, and to Prague in 1968. In contrast, NATO has not only survived but voluntarily increased its membership. A proper understanding of power must include both its hard and soft aspects. Machiavelli said it was better for a prince to be feared than to be loved. But it is best to be both. Because soft power is rarely sufficient by itself, and because its effects take longer to realize, political leaders are often tempted to resort to the hard power of coercion or payment. When wielded alone, however, hard power can involve higher costs than when it is combined with the soft power of attraction. The Berlin Wall did not succumb to an artillery barrage; it was felled by hammers and bulldozers wielded by people who had lost faith in Communism and were drawn to Western values. After World War II, the United States was by far the most powerful country, and it attempted to enshrine its values in what became known as 'the liberal international order' – a framework comprising the United Nations, the Bretton Woods economic institutions, and other multilateral bodies. Of course, the US did not always live up to its liberal values, and Cold War bipolarity limited this order to only half the world's people. But the postwar system would have looked very different if the Axis powers had won WWII and imposed their values. While prior US presidents have violated aspects of the liberal order, Donald Trump is the first to reject the idea that soft power has any value in foreign policy. Among his first actions upon returning to office was to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement and the World Health Organization, despite the obvious threats that climate change and pandemics pose. The effects of a US administration surrendering soft power are all too predictable. Coercing democratic allies like Denmark or Canada weakens trust in our alliances. Threatening Panama reawakens fears of imperialism throughout Latin America. Crippling the US Agency for International Development (USAID) – created by President John F. Kennedy in 1961 – undercuts our reputation for benevolence. Silencing Voice of America is a gift to authoritarian rivals. Slapping tariffs on friends makes us appear unreliable. Trying to chill free speech at home undermines our credibility. This list could go on. Trump has defined China as America's great challenge, and China itself has been investing in soft power since 2007, when then-Chinese President Hu Jintao told the Communist Party of China that the country needs to make itself more attractive to others. But China has long faced two major obstacles in this respect. First, it maintains territorial disputes with multiple neighbors. Second, the CPC insists on maintaining tight control over civil society. The costs of such policies have been confirmed by public opinion polls that ask people around the world which countries they find attractive. But one can only wonder what these surveys will show in future years if Trump keeps undercutting American soft power. To be sure, American soft power has had its ups and downs over the years. The US was unpopular in many countries during the Vietnam and Iraq wars. But soft power derives from a country's society and culture as well as from government actions. Even during the Vietnam War, when crowds marched through streets around the world to protest US policies, they sang the American civil-rights anthem 'We Shall Overcome.' An open society that allows protest can be a soft-power asset. But will America's cultural soft power survive a downturn in the government's soft power over the next four years? American democracy is likely to survive four years of Trump. The country has a resilient political culture and a federal constitution that encourages checks and balances. There is a reasonable chance that Democrats will regain control of the House of Representatives in the 2026 elections. Moreover, civil society remains strong, and the courts independent. Many organizations have launched lawsuits to challenge Trump's actions, and markets have signaled dissatisfaction with Trump's economic policies. American soft power recovered after low points in the Vietnam and Iraq wars, as well as from a dip in Trump's first term. But once trust is lost, it is not easily restored. After the invasion of Ukraine, Russia lost most of what soft power it had, but China is striving to fill any gaps that Trump creates. The way Chinese President Xi Jinping tells it, the East is rising over the West. If Trump thinks he can compete with China while weakening trust among American allies, asserting imperial aspirations, destroying USAID, silencing Voice of America, challenging laws at home, and withdrawing from UN agencies, he is likely to fail. Restoring what he has destroyed will not be impossible, but it will be costly. Joseph S. Nye, Jr., was Dean of Harvard Kennedy School, a US assistant secretary of defense, and the author of Do Morals Matter? Presidents and Foreign Policy from FDR to Trump (Oxford University Press, 2020) and the memoir A Life in the American Century (Polity Press, 2024). Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2025.
