Hard and Soft Power
Hard and soft power are concepts used in a bid to understand the behavior of leaders. The two concepts, in political science, are used to explain how political leaders act. Power and leadership are concepts that have a close relationship with the ability to influence the behavior of others. To this end, leaders have a variety of options such as coercion, using threats, inducing through financial rewards and attraction through cooperation .
When a leader employs soft power, they mainly harbor the ability to influence what others prefer. The leaders in support of soft power acknowledge that it is impossible to stay in command through the exclusive use of issuing threats and commands . A successful leader needs to be able to attract others to what they profess. Soft power is applied through the use of intangible aspects such as values, visions, and personality. It is through these intangible assets that a leader can successfully influence individual preferences . In the case of international relations, soft power refers to the ability of the states to use its values and culture as assets in negotiations. Here, other countries are attracted to these aspects and are therefore moved to change their preferences.
Hard power, on the other hand, refers to the form of power that is more frequent and experienced as compared to soft power. This type of power is defined as the ability of leaders to get what they want through the use of force, either economic or military. It is a form of power that is used to influence the actions of others through threats. Hard power is based on the assumption that one of the parties I negotiation has superior capabilities . These capabilities are used to force band influence the preference of opposing parties. Hard power is heavily dependent on physical resources. This is in contrast to the soft power that is based on intangible assets. It is through the resources that leaders and political actors influence the will and preferences of others.
A comparison between the application of hard and soft power reveals that hard power is relatively cheaper to roll out and apply. As an ideology, it is an approach to power that has been used for a longer time compared to the soft power. Besides, it is clearer to see, with its effects more evident . When applied to the field of international relations, hard power views the international community as an environment where only the states matter. States, in international relations, are only concerned about their survival, which requires the use of hard power .
Culture is an important aspect in conceptualizing soft power. As pointed out in the definition, soft power is dependent on various intangible aspects with a major one being culture. The concept of culture is, therefore, more relevant when talking about soft power than when speaking about hard power. Culture, in regards to a state, refers to the values that are highly regarded by the members of the society in the said state. It relates to the practices that various actors within the state view as necessary and as defining to the state .
States and leaders strive to cultivate a culture likely to produce soft power. Such a culture is one that embraces universal values that are accepted universally. A good example is an American culture that exudes confidence in the rule of the constitution and justice. Such a culture attracts other stakeholders in the international relations environment to align with such power. To this end, America has an abundance of soft power based on its culture, that can be used to influence the actions of other states.
Bibliography
Nye, J. S. 2006. Soft Power, Hard Power and Leadership. Retrieved April 25, 2016, from harvard.edu: https://www.hks.harvard.edu/netgov/files/talks/docs/11_06_06_seminar_Nye_HP_SP_Leadership.pdf
Pallaver, M. 2011. Power and its forms: hard, soft, smart. Doctoral dissertation. London School of Economics.
