Soft Power is More Effective than Hard Power

Soft power is the use of persuasion to change people’s perceptions to get what you want. Hard power involves coercion in any form such as economic or military to force people into submitting to your requests. While hard power is immediate, it also only has a short-term effect because it’s an involuntary change. On the other hand, soft power requires time, but it makes for long-term change because the people or state act voluntarily. Soft power can be proven more effective than hard power because it reduces the chance of conflict and increases the contentedness of the state, while still creating deep change.

While hard power has its advantages, such as a near-guarantee of success and control. However, in today’s age it creates discourse and conflict. Hard power is tangible and involves threats such as an army or economic sanctions. Coercion is a key tool that results in immediate results but only make short-term change. The people that are being coerced are not content with their situation and will rebel in some form or another, increasing the chance of conflict and even war. An example of hard power lacking effectiveness is the demands placed on Germany after World War I. The Treaty of Versailles required Germany to pay huge reparations. The treaty gave the Allies a blank check to later specify the sum that Germany would have to pay. The country had large sums to pay, but had been forced to accept defeat and accept the Treaty. They had little motivation to pay the reparations. Germany often defaulted on payments until France used more hard power and occupied the Ruhr. Their passive resistance led to inflation that wrecked the economy. This gave Hitler the stepping the stones he needed to begin his movements, gain support, and ultimately lead to World War II. This example shows how hard power can make change, but since it’s involuntary and forced, the change is shallow and short.

Soft power, on the other hand, does not guarantee success nor does it guarantee control in the same way that hard power does. It takes time and patience, but it results in long-term effects because the change is voluntary. By using persuasion and non-coercive methods, a state creates trust and respect with the other states or people it is trying to make an agreement with. It usually results in people that are more content with whatever change occurs because they agree that it is right for them. This, in turn, reduces the chances of discourse and conflict. Soft power is intangible, and rather than using military, it uses culture and ideology to influence peoples’ beliefs. The European Union was created to make a collection of states that wasn’t based on force, as so many preceding empires had been. Many negotiations created agreements between countries based on cooperation, allowing each country to ensure it’s own state would be kept safe. In 1993, when the EU was officially created, changes were made to improve the economy. Because of this, peace prevails. Now, mutual confidence exists between countries that used to be enemies, and it’s due to the use of soft power, persuasion, cooperation, and agreement.

Many factors hinder hard power, including globalization, new military technology, and new types of international problems. The world’s interdependence economically, agriculturally, and militarily makes coercion hard to enforce and hard to even use. If it were to used in one state and created conflict, that could affect many other states and circle back to harm the original state. Soft power is not only more practical in today’s society, but it is also the method that leads to a content state with happy people and peace.