Hard Power vs. Soft Power

Jessica Nott

GVPT200 Blog 1

28 September 2014

            International power can be put into two categories: hard power and soft power. Hard power is tough military power that is easy to see and very coercive. Soft power is very different. Soft power is under the radar and more about attraction and maybe a little bit of persuasion. A lot of countries have a little bit of both kinds of power. The United States, for example, has ample amounts of both powers. We have the strongest, largest and most adapt military as well as great influence over many countries due to our reputation to aid in human rights crises. Our aid goes a long way in gaining the support of the people that live in that area. Other countries do not have as much power, and some have more hard power than soft power like North Korea, and vice versa like Norway. One question, though, is whether or not it is better to have more hard power than soft power or the other way around. Which will take a country further in international affairs?

            Hard power is a powerful tool that a lot of countries do not have. A threatening army is the biggest part of this type of power. Places like the United States and North Korea have a lot of hard power but there is a huge difference between the two. North Korea solely has hard power. Their military, as we believe it to be, is a huge threat to the world. If they threaten an attack on a country, the world is likely to take them seriously, and believe that they might actually go through on this threat. On the other hand, North Korea has absolutely no soft power in the world’s eyes. No one would believe them if they claimed they wanted to send aid to poor places in Africa.

            Soft power is completely different than hard power, and a lot of times it is hard to find a balance between the two. Countries that have more soft power might not have quite as strong of an army. For example a country like Iceland. They might not have a strong army but if they came to an international meeting and offered humanitarian aid to falling countries and governments, other countries would take them seriously. The countries they help might offer them favors in return. Persuasion and reputation are not the only ways countries use soft power. Cultures are spread around the world all the time through foreign exchange programs, studying abroad, and just any type of tourism.

            In my opinion, soft power is far more powerful in the long run. Military power is extremely important for self-defense but soft power is good for long term. Reputation and a helping hand go a long way in long term relationships with other countries. If other countries start to use, for example, our culture and ways of doing things in their every day life than they will be more likely to defend it should a conflict come up. If we help a country in, lets say Africa, to get back up on its feet, they will be more likely to back us up in the future and follow through on favors if we ever need anything. Soft power is a lot more influential in the long run and hard power is very persuasive in the short run. It is good to have both, like the United States does, but soft power could help gain a lot more allies than military and hard power could.