History and geography of “soft power”

By Vestnik Kavkaza

The phenomenon of soft power more and more attracts the Russian authorities. The term “soft power” can be found in many program speeches and articles by President and other Russian heads. The head of Rossotrudnichestvo Konstantin Kosachyov speaks about history and geography of soft power.

The main theorist in the sphere of soft power is an American Josef Nay who used to be the deputy minister of defense under Reagan, but also actively developed the theory of using soft power. He defined soft power as a capacity to gain a desired result using conviction of partners that what they do is needed to them, even though they are working on schemes and models favorable for the initiator of soft power.

Nay has many theoretical works on soft power. The acutest instruments of soft power, according to Nay, are official diplomacy, public diplomacy, values – key elements of soft power – and more traditional instruments like spreading high and mass culture.

Soft power of Cold War

A phenomenon of soft power appeared in foreign politics long before theorists could detect and define it. Appearance of this instrument is connected with spreading of instruments of massive influence on people’s minds, while scales of soft power’s implementation are connected with effectiveness of these instruments. The instruments are well-known: at first newspapers, then radio, TV, and internet. That is why full-scaled spreading of soft power began in the post-war period: since the 1950s and so on. Chronically appearance of soft power coincided with the Cold War period, i.e. after appearance of an ideological contradiction. However, it is clear that approaches to this ideological contradiction were different in both sides. The Soviet Union spread Soviet ideology where prosperity of the state was in first place. America promoted “American dream” where prosperity of a person was in the center.

When instruments of soft power became numerous, the factors of hard power lost their monopoly – army and fleet used to be considered the only allies of the states which provided foreign economic and foreign political expansion. I think hard power and soft power have one big difference. Hard power means submission of territories where people live; soft power means holding on minds of people who control these territories. During Cold War the Soviet Union and the US were balanced both in hard power – army and fleet – and soft power, and attraction of the Soviet model was rather serious for many people.

European soft power

Following America, Europe began to implement instruments of soft power in last 2-3 decades. There is no common theory of what it should be, but there are common elements of the construction, which are presented in people’s minds as happy, free, and prosperous Europe. It is the most successful integration project in humanity’s history called the European Union. It is an active support of partners. It is spreading of European languages, high standards in the educational sphere, in the sphere of democratic institutes. Of course there is a peculiarity: for example, in Germany it is powerful business brands which are very attractive; in France and Italy it may be fashion, cuisines, and design, not mentioning football. At the same time, it is obvious that Europe is not only developing the theory today, but also implementing the concept of soft power in practice as actively as Americans.

Chinese soft power

Five years ago China joined this working with pleasure. At the last session of CPC the Chinese leader presented his vision of the soft power concept, even though in the Chinese language the term of “soft power” is not used – they have to hieroglyphs: one means “soft”, another is “power”, but they try to find some other term.

The Chinese concept is based on three whales. First is cultural expansion, promotion of Chinese history, philosophy, and culture. Second is direct support of partners, it is written in the Chinese conception. Third – non-confrontational foreign policy, i.e. China empowers other countries to be on a front line even in the sharpest situations, like the current crisis in Syria, while Beijing itself only supports this or that position without taking an initiative in its hands.

Russian soft power

We can claim a balance in hard power, but it is clear that we cannot do it in soft power. What place do we take in a rating of soft powers? There are several expert views. Of course all of them are rather subjective. For example, in one American source Russia takes the 28th place, giving way to Chili and other countries. In this case criteria of appraisal are looming. A more favorable for Russia rating was developed by the find of Skolkovo and the company Ernst&Young. Here Russia takes the tenth place. In this case the approach is more scientific, I believe. There are 13 criteria divided between three categories: a state’s image in the globalizing world; correlation with international moral norms and values; global integration. Many special aspects are included into the criteria: universities global rating; presence of national politicians in top-100 of the most important politicians of the world, according to Time; a number of Olympic medals; attention to environment. Even this complimenting rating shows that Russia is not in a front line from the point of view of using soft power.

Regarding the Russian concept of soft power, we have to admit that it doesn’t exist actually. There are many versions of what could be peculiarities, factors which would be exclusive for Russia and able to attract internationals observers. The variety of opinions is huge – from traditional referring to the Great Russian culture, literature, poetry to our virgin environment, mysterious Russian soul, an ability to live in one country among many cultures, ethnic groups, and confessions, our responsibility and negotiability.

At the moment we have received the Ministry for International Affairs support in development of the plan of actions in the sphere of soft power for the government. It is only an idea; the project has just begun travelling across ministries and offices. I hope next year we will agree the document with the government and it will be adopted, i.e. we will establish a legal base for working in this direction. At the moment Rossotrudnichestvo is presented in 76 countries of the world. We have 59 Russian centers of science and culture. If we succeed in the sphere of legislative and investments, in next 3 years we would like to double offices in the CIS from 15 to 30 centers and extend our presence in other countries.

We are ready to work with our partners without imposing preliminary conditions on them. Americans and Europeans require fulfillment of a huge amount of conditions for a comfortable cooperation with them: one need to follow certain models, duties, being a member of certain organizations. Only after fulfillment of these conditions a country is considered to be a partner, interesting if not equal, by the US or Europe. In this context the Russian model of behavior in the modern world can be a very attractive for our potential partners. First of all, it is security: Russia stands for basic principles of the international law, equality of participants, rejections of hard power, priority of negotiations. It may be a serious counterbalance to the models of settlement international problems proposed by America and Europe. I mean the model which was implemented in the Middle East and North Africa. At last, it is readiness to respect our partners and nonintervention into their internal affairs.