The Importance of Both Soft and Military Power in Modern International Relations

   James Nespole 

 Power is the thing that defines all relationships between people and states. Establishing power is extremely important for a state, as it allows the state to prosper and be protected. However, there is much debate amongst political theorists pertaining to how power should be established and what constitutes a state's power. I argue that military power and soft power are equally important in defining and establishing a state's level of power. 

      Realist political theorist John Mearsheimer argues that a state's power is essentially solely their military power. This way of thinking about establishing power basically means that any relations between two states is only because one state has the ability to inflict violence upon the other state. I would argue that the Mearsheimer and other realists' way of thinking about power as just military might is outdated. In today's society international organizations, such as the United Nations exist and war is avoided at all costs. However, in an earlier time, military power was much more dominant in establishing power than soft power. For example, during Classical Antiquity, a state/empire's level of power could be almost entirely measured by their military power. As portrayed in the "Melian Dialogue," the Athenians' relations with smaller Greek states were solely based on a threat of violence and destruction. The Melians attempted to use soft power to negotiate peace between Melos and Athens. These attempts failed miserably, as the Athenians killed all Melian men, sold all the women and children into slavery, and inhabited the island with Athenians. The Athenians didn't need to use skilled discourse to take over Melos. They simply took it by force. However in modern-day, society has grown and developed from this period of barbarianism. States can no longer only define their power by their military might. Therefore, soft power is extremely important in defining a state's level of power in the modern-day, as well as military power. 

    Robert Dahl defined power as getting someone to do something they wouldn't do otherwise. Given this, any way of making another state do something that you want them to do can be defined as power. One way a state can establish soft power over another is through foreign aid. This form of soft power is often used by a wealthier state to establish power over a "less developed" state. For example, the United States has provided over $92 million dollars of foreign aid to the country of Djibouti. Djibouti is strategically located on the horn of Africa and has access to many important routes for trade. In return for the aid that the US provides, Djibouti grants the US land for one of the only American military bases in Africa, Camp Lemonnier. Furthermore, the Djiboutian Government allows the US access to their international airport and seaports. These seaports give the US access to the Red Sea. Another way that the US uses soft power to establish power over other states is through the dominance of American culture throughout the world. American movies and music are some of the most popular forms of entertainment in the world, if not the most popular. People across the world are familiar with Hollywood Culture. The prevalence of American culture overseas causes people to adhere to American culture and allows the US to have more power over the lives of people in other countries. 

    Having a strong military and being a threat of violence is important when it comes to a state establishing power. However, being skilled in diplomacy and using soft power is just as important in today's society. 

Works Cited:

Cultural Power. University of Arkansas, 16 Aug. 2020, https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/55065.

Thucydides (Translated by Rex Warner). The Melian Dialogue

“U.S. Relations with Djibouti - United States Department of State.” U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of State, 14 Apr. 2021, https://www.state.gov/u-s-relations-with-djibouti/.



Comments

  1. Chris KFebruary 6, 2022 at 7:27 AM

    You make the point of how the United Nations exists with the intention of avoiding war at all costs. I think the presence of nuclear weapons strengthens this as if one nuclear bomb were to be dropped it would likely lead to the extinction of the planet. This has allowed for the United States to use more soft power to influence the world through, as you said, things like trade routes and culture. The United States supplements their soft power with military power by having bases all over the world and understanding how the two types of powers work in conjunction is crucial to understanding how the United States has been able to be so dominant since the second world war.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hayden Groves February 8, 2022 at 11:36 AM

    I think you make a great point how historically, power use to be defined specifically through military force and strength. While that is still important today, however, you make a good point acknowledging how soft power in diplomacy may even have greater force. Today conflicts are typically created or solved with soft power, which I agree in many cases is potentially more critical than military power. I totally agree with your statements, and appreciate the examples you used in your blog post. Similar to crisis comment, both soft power and military power work hand in hand when applied together correctly.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Kevin KlukowiczFebruary 8, 2022 at 6:10 PM

    While I do agree with your argument that soft power is crucial in establishing healthy relations with other countries, I believe that you have overshadowed the importance of strong military might. Yes, diplomatic skills are essential to building opportunities and alliances among countries to create symbiotic prosperity and to maintain peace. However, the presentation of a strong military is imperative to establishing power in international relations. Take the Cold War for example. If the United States did not have the threat of MIRV rockets and nuclear weaponry, there is a decent chance that our country would've been bombed, and communist influence would've spread throughout the world. There would be no Truman Doctrine, and no containment policies limiting communism, leading to the USSR ruling over the world. Instead of stating the importance of soft power and diplomacy, a more improved argument could be discussing the necessity of balancing a hardened military and peaceful and thoughtful diplomatic representation.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

ICC articles

When it comes to the arguments on the International Crimes Court, I think the article presented by Daniel Abebe is the most convincing to me. After reading the article presented right before it, (the article by Anne Marie Gotez), it seemed that maybe the best way to fix the problems within the ICC would be to give them more funding and allow them to give more financial aid to the victims of these war crimes. Furthermore, she said that the funding for this program had been below a million and it was not enough for the ICC to function effectively. However, after reading the article presented by Abebe it stated that since 2002, the ICC has spent over a billion dollars. If in 20 years they were able to spend this mass amount of money, then there is no way that they are being underfunded. Moreover, Abebe states that the funding for the ICC is over 100 millions dollars a year, which is an incredible quantity of money for people to be asking for more money to be pumped into the system. Abeb...
Read more

Global Justice and Nationalism

  The Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy writes in brief the philosophical values and traditions regarding global justice, how it is defined by their standards, and how it is played out within other nation states. I will be focusing mainly on section 2.3, which discusses the duties of compatriots versus non-compatriots, and goes on to further understand the differences between the two, such as how state actors and non-state actors view one another and potentially interact. While most have viewed nationalism in a positive light, nationalism goes beyond respect for national sovereignty, this ideology can perpetuate negative attitudes towards other countries and sometimes even make one states citizens seem morally superior than another citizen who is belonging to another state (Gillian, 2015). There is a debate among egalitarian theorists discussing whether or not concerns with equality should be confined to state members or be granted to every individually globally (Gillian, 2015). ...
Read more

The United States and the World Trade Organization

     Recently there has been large debates regarding the implications regarding the possibility of the United States potentially pulling out of the World Trade Organization. While some politicians and economists supported this idea and have argued that it would be beneficial for the US to leave this organization, the US would have to face some serious consequences that would be hard to bounce back from, not only domestically, but globally since other countries could potentially be positively affected if this deal were to go into effect. The debate is still ongoing, but the consequences and risks of this action, especially during an economic crisis from the covid-19 pandemic, are too great to ignore and continue to be in pursuit of departing from the World Trade Organization.       There are several strong arguments that support my claims that leaving would present more bad than good. First, the US being involved in the world trade organization adds gre...
Read more