25 July 2013

Editorial: The Hard Side of Soft Power

By Zachary Keck

It often seems the more well-known a concept becomes, the less it is understood.
Such was the case with Francis Fukuyama’s End of History theory, which proclaimed—quite accurately thus far— that the end of the Cold War was also the end of the Hegelian dialectic struggles between opposing universalistic worldviews. With communism and fascism discredited that world was left with only one remaining self-proclaimed universal ideology, that of liberal democracy.
There was much to criticize about Fukuyama’s theory—starting with whether Hagel had a proper view of history as a dialectic struggle towards a predetermined end—but he was most certainly not arguing that each state was on the cusp of becoming a liberal democracy, or that the U.S. should necessarily adopt an a grand strategy predicated on spreading democracy by force.     
Joe Nye’s soft power has perhaps eclipsed Fukuyama’s End of History theory in terms of its influence in the policy debate in the U.S. and elsewhere. As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton became a particularly strong proponent of the concept—or at least its close cousin smart power, which seeks to integrate hard power and soft power into a coherent strategy. Indeed, Clinton began and ended her tenure as Secretary of State by touting a smart power approach to the world, and took some notable steps in between to realize this goal.

Read the full story at The Diplomat