What is Soft Power and How do Countries Compare in It ?

1. What is Soft Power and How do Countries Compare in It? By JuditTrunkos PhD Student at the University of South Carolina trunkos@email.sc.edu Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina

2. Outline • Development of Power • Definition of Soft Power • Measuring Soft Power • International Comparison Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina

3. Ideologies in International Relations Realism • Power is the core concept • States are the actors • National security is the most important international agenda • States behave rationally Liberalism • Other issues such as economics or diplomacy can be the focus of the agenda • Non-state actors can also be the actors • State is subject to outside influence • Interdependence, reciprocity (Nye and Keohane 1977) Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina

4. Power • First Face of Power: (Dahl,1961)-coercion, threats or rewards • Second Face of Power: (Bachrach and Baratz, 1964)-agenda setting Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina

5. Power • Third Face of Power: (Lukes, 1970)-shaping the initial beliefs and preferences • Second +Third faces of Power: (Nye,2011)-Soft Power Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina

6. Definitions of Soft Power Nye 2004 • “The ability to get what you want through attraction rather than coercion or payment. Includes culture, values and foreign policies.” Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina

7. Definitions of Soft Power Nye 2011 • “The ability to affect others through the co-optive means of framing the agenda, persuading, and eliciting positive attraction in order to obtain preferred outcomes. Includes intangible factors such as institutions, ideas, values, culture, perceived legitimacy of policies.” Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina

8. Hard Power • Coerce with political, economic or military power. • (Realism: force, military capability) Soft Power • Ability to get what you want though attraction and not coercion (Nye, 2004). • (Liberalism: education, art, sports, values). Judit Trunkos. Global Soft Power. University of South Carolina

9. Tools of Soft Power: Public Diplomacy v. Cultural Diplomacy Public Diplomacy • Government sponsored programs intended to inform or influence public opinion in other countries: its chief instruments are publications, motion pictures, cultural exchanges radio and TV. (One way communication) • Sponsored by the government • Embassies and diplomats play a major role Cultural Diplomacy • Cultural diplomacy establishes a two-way communication with other countries. • Primary focus is not merely political but also cultural (athletic, education, art) • The actor can take on his/her own agenda independently of the government. • More high culture and education focused (less popular culture, publications, radio or TV) • Can be sponsored by the government but also by private institutions or NGO. • Embassies play a major role but not the only role Judit Trunkos. Global Soft Power. University of South Carolina

10. Skeptics of Soft Power • Ferguson(2004) “There is nothing new about Soft Power. Soft Power is merely the velvet glove concealing an iron hand.” • Gelb(2009) “Soft Power now seems to include everything.” Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina

11. Skeptics of Soft Power • Gray (2011) “Hard Power must remain the essential instrument of policy, Soft Power is unsuitable for policy directions and control as it relies too much on the foreign countries’ perception.” Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina

12. Soft Power as a Foreign Policy Tool • Nye (2011): Culture, values and foreign policy are the main sources of Soft Power. Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina

13. State Application of Soft Power Unites States:(2010 Global Cultural Diplomacy Ranking: 8, 2012 Soft Power Ranking 2 ) USIA-United States Information Agency Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) of the U.S. Department of State • Academic Programs Fulbright Program • Professional and Cultural Exchanges International Visitor Leadership Program The Netherlands: (2010 Global Cultural Diplomacy Ranking: 1, 2012 Soft Power Ranking 15) SICA Dutch Centre for International Cultural Activities • Visitor Program (diplomats and professionals) • Regional Projects (Russia, Turkey, Brazil, China) Judit Trunkos. Global Soft Power. University of South Carolina

14. Previous Measurement Methods • Nye (2004)-Surveys+ Public Diplomacy Spending. • Holyk (2011)-Surveys and Bivariate Correlation. • McClory (2012):Composite metrics across various indicators-statistical metrics and subjective data (50 metrics in total). Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina

15. McClory’s Soft Power Index 2012 • Business/Innovation • Education • Government • Culture • Diplomacy Judit Trunkos. Global Soft Power. University of South Carolina

16. McClory’s Soft Power Index 2012 Judit Trunkos. Global Soft Power. University of South Carolina

17. Non-State Actors of Soft Power • Private Individuals (actors, directors, artists, athletes, immigrants, writers) • Civil Societies • Private Institutions (art, dance, music, sports) • NGO’s (UNESCO) Judit Trunkos. Global Soft Power. University of South Carolina

18. Thank you Judit Trunkos. Global Soft Power. University of South Carolina

19. Appendix A:Public Diplomacy v. Soft Power • Public diplomacy: refers to the every day diplomacy aimed to create a favorable image abroad through daily communication and planning of strategic events.-short term goals. • Soft power: relies on programs that are designed to advance American values and human rights as well as restoring alliances, promoting the rights of women and girls. -long term goals Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina

20. Appendix B: Concept of Soft Power 1st-face Coerce, Payment Direct National Resources Influence Government/ Strategy Soft Power Indirect Indirect 2nd face-Agenda Setting Indirect (Trunkos) Soft power=indirect use of government resources 3rd face-Preference and Belief Setting Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina

21. Appendix C: Mechanism • Influencing mechanism Foreign Public Foreign Government's Foreign Policy Government using Soft Power Media, Internet, Public Opinion money Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina

22. Appendix D: McClory 2012 Method • Objective (70%) (statistical data):Business/Innovation, Government, Education, Culture, Diplomacy • Subjective (30%): Design/Architecture, Cultural Output, Global Leadership, Soft Power Icons, Cuisine, National Airline/Major Airport, Commercial Brands • Includes 40 countries & 3-year data Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina

23. Appendix D: McClory Index (2012) Culture: • Tourism, Reach of State Sponsored Media Outlet, Foreign Correspondents, Language, Influential Languages, Sporting Success Diplomacy: • Foreign Aid Overseas, Languages Spoken by Leader, Visa Freedom, (Strength of National Brand 2010), Number of Cultural Missions • Red: policiesBlack: cultureblue: values Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina

24. Appendix D: McClory’s Index (2012) Business/Innovation: • International Patents; Business competitiveness, corruption,Level of Corruption: Transparency International Corruption Perception Index, Innovation Education: • Think Tank Presence, Quality of Universities, Foreign Students Government: • UN HDI Score Index, Good Governance Index, Freedom Score Index of political freedom and personal liberty, Trust in Government, Life Satisfaction Judit Trunkos. Soft Power. University of South Carolina