10/5/2017 Smart power - Wikipedia

Smart power
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In international relations, the term smart power refers to the combination of hard power and soft power
strategies. It is defined by the Center for Strategic and International Studies as "an approach that underscores
the necessity of a strong military, but also invests heavily in alliances, partnerships, and institutions of all levels
to expand American influence and establish legitimacy of American action."[1]

Joseph Nye, former Assistant Secretary of Defense under the Clinton administration and author of several
books on smart power strategy, suggests that the most effective strategies in foreign policy today require a mix
of hard and soft power resources. Employing only hard power or only soft power in a given situation will
usually prove inadequate.[2] Nye utilizes the example of terrorism, arguing that combatting terrorism demands
smart power strategy. He advises that simply utilizing soft power resources to change the hearts and minds of
the Taliban government would be ineffective and requires a hard power component. In developing relationships
with the mainstream Muslim world, however, soft power resources are necessary and the use of hard power
would have damaging effects.

According to Chester A. Crocker, smart power "involves the strategic use of diplomacy, persuasion, capacity
building, and the projection of power and influence in ways that are cost-effective and have political and social
legitimacy" essentially the engagement of both military force and all forms of diplomacy.[3]

Contents
1 Origin
2 History
2.1 United Kingdom
2.2 United States
3 Contemporary application
3.1 United Kingdom
3.2 United States
4 Challenges in the application of smart power
4.1 Rule of law
4.2 Organizational roadblocks
4.3 Financing smart power
4.4 Strategic communications
5 United Nations as an instrument of smart power
6 Global perspectives on smart power
6.1 U.S.-China relations
6.2 U.S-Turkish Relations
7 Debate surrounding smart power
7.1 Transformational diplomacy versus smart power strategy
7.2 Smart power as an instrument of American imperialism
7.3 Ineffective use of smart power
7.4 Questioning old institutions and alliances
8 See also
9 External links
10 References

Origin
The origin of the term "smart power" is under debate and has been attributed to both Suzanne Nossel and
Joseph Nye.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_power 1/8
10/5/2017 Smart power - Wikipedia

Suzanne Nossel, Deputy to Ambassador Holbrooke at the United Nations

during the Clinton administration, is credited with coining the term in an
article in Foreign Affairs entitled, "Smart Power: Reclaiming Liberal
Internationalism", in 2004.[4] In her article in the CNN, she has criticized the
Trump administration for its "tunnel-vision" foreign policy that neglects both
soft power and smart power. She writes: "..Trump seems oblivious toward the
brand value of what Joseph Nye has called the 'soft power' that comes from
projecting appealing aspects of American society and character abroad. He is
also indifferent to my own concept of 'smart power,'or the imperative to
engage a broad range of tools of statecraft, from diplomacy to aid to private
sector engagement to military intervention."[5]

Joseph Nye, however, claims that smart power is a term he introduced in

2003 "to counter the misperception that soft power alone can produce
effective foreign policy."[6] He created the term to name an alternative to the
Joseph Nye's book describing the hard power-driven foreign policy of the Bush administration. Nye notes that
concept of "soft power" smart power strategy denotes the ability to combine hard and soft power
depending on whether hard or soft power would be more effective in a given
situation. He states that many situations require soft power; however, in
stopping North Korea's nuclear weapons program, for instance, hard power might be more effective than soft
power.[7] In the words of the Financial Times, "to win the peace, therefore, the US will have to show as much
skill in exercising soft power as it has in using hard power to win the war."[8] Smart power addresses
multilateralism and enhances foreign policy.

A successful smart power narrative for the United States in the twenty-first century, Nye argues, will not obsess
over power maximization or the preservation of hegemony. Rather, it will find "ways to combine resources into
successful strategies in the new context of power diffusion and the 'rise of the rest.'"[9] A successful smart
power strategy will provide answers to the following questions: 1) What goals or outcomes are preferred?[10] 2)
What resources are available and in which contexts?[10] 3) What are the positions and preferences of the targets
of attempts at influence?[10] 4) Which forms of power behavior are most likely to succeed?[11] 5) What is the
probability of success?[11]

History
United Kingdom

Since the period of Pax Britannica (18151914) the United Kingdom has employed a combination of influence
and coercion in international relations.[12]

United States

The term smart power emerged in the past decade, but the concept of smart power has much earlier roots in the
history of the United States and is a popular notion in international relations today.

1901: President Theodore Roosevelt proclaims: "Speak softly and carry a big stick."

1948: The United States initiates major peacetime soft power programs under the authority of the Smith-Mundt
Act, including broadcasting, exchange and information world wide to combat the outreach of the Soviet Union.

1991: The end of the Cold War was marked by the collapse of the Berlin Wall, which fell as a result of a
combination of hard and soft power. Throughout the Cold War, hard power was used to deter Soviet aggression
and soft power was used to erode faith in Communism. Joseph Nye said: "When the Berlin Wall finally
collapsed, it was destroyed not by artillery barrage but by hammers and bulldozers wielded by those who had
lost faith in communism."[13]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_power 2/8
10/5/2017 Smart power - Wikipedia

2004: Joseph S. Nye introduces the term "smart power" in his book, "Soft Power: The Means to Success in
World Politics". "Smart power is neither hard nor soft. It is both," he writes.[14] In an article in "Foreign
Affairs", analyst Suzanne Nossel uses the term "smart power". For Nossel, "Smart power means knowing that
the United States' own hand is not always its best tool: U.S. interests are furthered by enlisting others on behalf
of U.S. goals."[4]

2007: In light of 9/11 and the war in Iraq, the Bush administration was criticized for placing too much emphasis
on a hard power strategy. To counter this hard power strategy, the Center for Strategic and International Studies
released the "Commission on Smart Power" to introduce the concept of smart power into discussion on which
principles should guide the future of U.S. foreign policy in light of 9/11 and the war in Iraq.[1] The report
identifies five critical areas of focus for the U.S.: Alliances, Global Development, Public Diplomacy, Economic
Integration, and Technology and Innovation.[1] According to the report, these five goals constitute smart foreign
policy and will help the United States achieve the goal of "American preeminence as an agent of good."[1]

2009: The Center for Strategic and International Studies, released a second report, "Investing in a New
Multilateralism", to address the concept of smart power in international releases. This report addressed the
United Nations as an instrument of U.S. smart power. By collaborating with the UN, the U.S. can lead the way
in reinvigorating multilateralism within in the international community in the 21st century.[15]

2009: Under the Obama administration, smart power became a core principle of his foreign policy strategy. It
was popularized by Hillary Clinton during her Senate confirmation hearing on January 13, 2009 for the position
of Secretary of State:

We must use what has been called smart power---the full range of tools at our disposal---
diplomatic, economic, military, political, legal, and cultural---picking the right tool, or combination
of tools, for each situation. With smart power, diplomacy will be the vanguard of foreign policy.[16]

Both Suzanne Nossel and Joseph Nye were supportive of Clinton's encouragement of smart power, since it
would popularize the use of smart power in U.S. foreign policy.[17] That popularization has been accompanied
by more frequent use of the term, and David Ignatius describes it as an "overused and vapid phrase meant to
connote the kind of power between hard and soft".[18]

2010: The "First Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR)" entitled, "Leading through
Civilian Power", called for the implementation of a smart power strategy through civilian leadership.[19]

2011: Obama's "2011 May Speech on the Middle East and North Africa" called for a smart power strategy,
incorporating development, in addition to defense and diplomacy, as the third pillar of his foreign policy
doctrine.[20]

Contemporary application
United Kingdom

The UK government Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015 was based on a combination of hard power
and soft power strategies.[21][22][23][24][25]

United States

In recent years, some scholars have sought to differentiate smart power further from soft power, while also
including military posture and other tools of statecraft as part of a broad smart power philosophy. Christian
Whiton, a State Department official during the George W. Bush administration, described smart power in a
2013 book, Smart Power: Between Diplomacy and War, as: "the many financial, cultural, rhetorical, economic,
espionage-related, and military actions that states can take short of general war to influence political outcomes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_power 3/8
10/5/2017 Smart power - Wikipedia

abroad," adding, "It most crucially should involve a revival of political warfare: the non-violent push of ideas,
people, facts, and events with which our adversaries would rather not contend."[26] Whiton recalled U.S.
political influence activities from the Cold War, including CIA-backed programs like the Congress for Cultural
Freedom, and called for adapting these to contemporary challenges to the U.S. posed by China, Iran, and
Islamists.[27]

Challenges in the application of smart power

According to "Dealing with Today's Asymmetric Threat to U.S. and Global Security", a symposium sponsored
by CACI, an effective smart power strategy faces multiple challenges in transitioning from smart power as a
theory to smart power in practice. Applying smart power today requires great difficulty, since it operates in an
environment of asymmetric threats, ranging from cybersecurity to terrorism. These threats exist in a dynamic
international environment, adding yet another challenge to the application of smart power strategy. In order to
effectively address asymmetric threats arising in a dynamic international environment, the symposium suggests
addressing the following factors: rule of law, organizational roadblocks, financing smart power, and strategic
communications.[28]

Rule of law

In order to implement smart power approaches on both a domestic and international level, the United States
must develop a legal framework for the use of smart power capabilities. Developing a legal foundation for
smart power, however, demands a clear concept of these asymmetric threats, which is often difficult. The cyber
domain, for instance, presents an extremely nebulous concept. Hence, the challenge will be conceptualizing
asymmetric threats before formulating a legal framework.[28]

Organizational roadblocks

The inability to promote smart power approaches because of organizational failures within agencies presents
another obstacle to successful smart power implementation. Agencies often lack either the appropriate authority
or resources to employ smart power. The only way to give smart power long-term sustainability is to address
these organizational failures and promote the coordination and accessibility of hard and soft power
resources.[28]

Financing smart power

With the ongoing financial crisis, the dire need for financial resources presents a critical obstacle to the
implementation of smart power. According to Secretary Gates, 'there is a need for a dramatic increase in
spending on the civilian instruments of national security---diplomacy, strategic communications, foreign
assistance, civic action, and economic reconstruction and development." In order to successfully implement
smart power, the U.S. budget needs to be rebalanced so that non-military foreign affairs programs receive more
funding. Sacrificing defense spending will, however, be met with stalwart resistance.[28]

Strategic communications

"Asymmetries of perception," according to the report, are a major obstacle to strategic communications. A
long-term smart power strategy will mitigate negative perceptions by discussing the nature of these threats and
making a case for action using smart power strategy. The report states that the central theme of our strategic
communications campaign should be education of our nation in our values as a democratic nation and in the
nature of the threats our nation faces today.[28]

United Nations as an instrument of smart power

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_power 4/8
10/5/2017 Smart power - Wikipedia

Of all the tools at the disposal of smart power strategists in the United States, experts suggest that the U.N. is
the most critical. The Center for Strategic and International Studies issued a report, Investing in a New
Multilateralism, in January 2009 to outline the role of the United Nations as an instrument of U.S. smart power
strategy.[15] The report suggests that in an increasingly multipolar world, the UN cannot be discarded as
outdated and must be regarded as an essential tool to thinking strategically about the new multilateralism that
our nation faces.[15] An effective smart power strategy will align the interests of the U.S. and the UN, thereby
effectively addressing threats to peace and security, climate change, global health, and humanitarian
operations.[15]

Global perspectives on smart power

U.S.-China relations

As announced by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in November 2011, the United States will begin to shift its
attention to the Asia-Pacific region, making the strategic relationship between the U.S. and China of supreme
importance in determining the future of international affairs in the region. The Center for Strategic and
International Studies, in "Smart Power in U.S.-China Relations," offers recommendations for building a
cooperative strategic relationship between the U.S. and China through smart power strategy.[29] Rather than
relying on unilateral action, the U.S. and China should combine their smart power resources to promote the
global good and enhance the peace and security of the region. The report recommends the following policy
objectives: implement an aggressive engagement agenda, launch an action agenda on energy and climate, and
institute a new dialogue on finance and economics. Overall, the report suggests that U.S.-Sino relations should
be pursued without the black-and-white view of China as either benign or hostile, but rather, as a partner
necessary in serving the interests of the U.S. and the region while promoting the global good.

U.S-Turkish Relations

The Obama administration continually stresses the importance of smart power strategy in relations with the
Middle East and especially Turkey due to its increasing leadership role as a regional soft power.[30] As not only
an Islamic democratic nation but also the only Muslim member of NATO, Turkey's leverage in the region could
inspire other nations to follow in its footsteps. By establishing a cooperative relationship with Turkey and
working to clarify misunderstandings through smart power, Turkey could eventually become the bridge
between the East and the West. A smart power approach to U.S.-Turkish relations will expand the leadership
role of Turkey in the region and increases its strategic importance to NATO.

Debate surrounding smart power

Transformational diplomacy versus smart power strategy

Condoleezza Rice, Bush's Secretary of State, coined the term "Transformational Diplomacy" to denote Bush's
policy to promote democracy through a hard power driven strategy.[31] "Transformational diplomacy" stands at
odds with "smart power," which utilizes hard and soft power resources based on the situation. The Obama
administration's foreign policy was based on smart power strategy, attempting to strike a balance between
defense and diplomacy.

Smart power as an instrument of American imperialism

In an interview with the Boston Globe, interviewer Anna Mundow, questioned Joseph Nye over the criticism
that smart power is the friendly face of American imperialism.[32] By the same token, the Bush doctrine has
also been criticized for being "imperialistic," by focusing on American power over partnerships with the rest of
the world. Joseph Nye defends smart power by noting that criticism often stems from a misunderstanding of the
smart power theory. Nye himself designed the theory to apply to any nation of any size, not just the United

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_power 5/8
10/5/2017 Smart power - Wikipedia

States. It was meant to be a more sophisticated method of thinking about power in the context of the
information age and post-9/11 world.19 President Obama defined his vision for U.S. leadership as "not in the
spirit of a patron but the spirit of a partner."[33]

Ineffective use of smart power

Ken Adelman, in an article entitled "Not-So-Smart Power," argues that there is no correlation between U.S. aid
and the ability of America to positively influence events abroad.[34] He points out that the nations who receive
the most foreign aid, such as Egypt and Pakistan, are no more in tune with American values than those who
receive less or no U.S. foreign aid. Overall, he criticizes the instruments of smart power, such as foreign aid and
exchange programs, for being ineffective in achieving American national interests.

Questioning old institutions and alliances

In the application of smart power in U.S. strategy, Ted Galen Carpenter, author of the work Smart Power',
criticizes U.S. foreign policy for failing to question outdated alliances, such as NATO.[35] Carpenter articulated
his disapproval of interventionist foreign policy, saying, "America does not need to be and should not aspire
to be a combination global policeman and global social worker." Rather than utilizing antiquated
institutions, the U.S. should rethink certain alliances in arriving at a new vision for the future of American
foreign policy. Carpenter fears that America's domestic interests will be sacrificed in favor of global interests
through smart power. Essentially, interventionist foreign policies advocated by U.S. smart power strategies
undercut domestic liberties.

See also
Cold war
Cultural diplomacy
Engagement (diplomacy)
Public Diplomacy
Noopolitik
Carrot and stick approach
Progressive realism
Transformational Diplomacy

External links
Soft Power, Smart Power and Intelligent Power (http://www.ngds-ku.org/Presentations/IR04.pdf) A
lecture in honor of Joseph Nye
Smart-Intelligent Power and Conflict management at State Level (http://www.ngds-ku.org/presentations/
Smart-Intelligent.pdf) Paper presented during ICCTSS 2014, held at University of Karachi
Soft Power Committee 'Persuasion and Power' report (http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/co
mmittees-a-z/lords-select/soft-power-and-the-uks-influence/news/soft-power-report-24mar14/) UK
Parliament
Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015 (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-secu
rity-strategy-and-strategic-defence-and-security-review-2015) UK Government

References
1. "CSIS Commission on Smart Power: A Smarter, More Secure America." (http://csis.org/files/media/csis/
pubs/071106_csissmartpowerreport.pdf) (PDF). Center for Strategic and International Studies. Retrieved
12 April 2012.
2. Gavel, Doug. "Joseph Nye on Smart Power" (http://www.hks.harvard.edu/news-events/publications/insig
ht/international/joseph-nye). Harvard University Kennedy School. Retrieved 26 April 2012.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_power 6/8
10/5/2017 Smart power - Wikipedia

3. Crocker, Chester A,; Hampson, Fen Osler; Aall, Pamela R. (2007). Leashing the Dogs of War: Conflict
Management in a Divided World (https://books.google.com/books?id=x8EJHUhAk7kC). US Institute of
Peace Press. p. 13. ISBN 978-1-929223-97-8.
4. Nossel, Suzanne. "Smart Power" (http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/59716/suzanne-nossel/smart-po
wer). Foreign Affairs. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
5. http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/05/opinions/trumps-worrying-foreign-policy-nossel-opinion/index.html
6. Nye, Joseph. "Get Smart: Combining Hard and Soft Power" (http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/6516
3/joseph-s-nye-jr/get-smart?page=1). Foreign Affairs. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
7. Nye, Joseph. "Wielding Smart Power in World Affairs" (http://www.wcfia.harvard.edu.node/6279).
Boston Globe. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
8. Nye, Joseph. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics (New York: Public Affairs, 2004).
9. Nye, Joseph S. (2011). The Future of Power (https://books.google.com/books/about/The_future_of_powe
r.html?id=jThyCT8d3mYC). New York: PublicAffairs. pp. 207208. ISBN 9781586488925.
10. Nye, Joseph S. (2011). The Future of Power (https://books.google.com/books/about/The_future_of_powe
r.html?id=jThyCT8d3mYC). New York: PublicAffairs. p. 208. ISBN 9781586488925.
11. Nye, Joseph S. (2011). The Future of Power (https://books.google.com/books/about/The_future_of_powe
r.html?id=jThyCT8d3mYC). New York: Public Affairs. p. 209. ISBN 9781586488925.
12. Sondhaus, Lawrence (2009). Soft power, hard power, and the Pax Americana (https://books.google.com/
books?id=ujlMly6WVxIC&lpg=PA204&pg=PA204#v=onepage&q&f=false). Taylor & Francis. pp. 204
8. ISBN 0415545331.
13. Nye, Joseph. "Get Smart: Combining Hard and Soft Power" (http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/6516
3/joseph-s-nye-jr/get-smart?page=1). Foreign Affairs.
14. Nye, Joseph (2004). Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs.
p. 32.
15. "Investing in a New Multilateralism" (http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/090128_mendelsonforman_un
_smartpower_web.pdf) (PDF). Center for Strategic and International Studies. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
16. Clinton, Hillary. "Clinton: Use "Smart Power" in Diplomacy" (http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-250_162-4
718044.html). CBSNews. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
17. Etheridge, Eric. "How Soft Power got Smart" (http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/14/how-soft
-power-got-smart/). The New York Times. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
18. Ignatius, David (June 19, 2014). "In Hard Choices, Hillary Clinton opens up about world leaders and
what she got right" (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/in-hard-choices-hillary-clinton-opens-up-
about-world-leaders-and-what-she-got-right/2014/06/09/b4ecc0d2-efeb-11e3-bf76-447a5df6411f_story.h
tml). Washington Post.
19. "First Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review: Leading through Civilian Power" (https://ww
w.state.gov/s/dmr/qddr/). Department of State. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
20. "Obama's Speech on the Middle East and North Africa" (http://www.cfr.org/middle-east/obamas-speech-
middle-east-north-africa-may-2011/p25049). Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
21. "National Security Strategy and Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015" (https://www.gov.uk/gover
nment/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/478933/52309_Cm_9161_NSS_SD_Review_web_o
nly.pdf) (PDF). HM Government. November 2015. Retrieved 23 November 2015.
22. "The 2015 Strategic Defence and Security Review and its Implications" (http://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectu
res-and-events/the-2015-strategic-defence-and-security-review-and-its-implications). Gresham College.
27 October 2015. Retrieved 18 November 2016.
23. "Strategic Defence and Security Review Motion to Take Note" (https://www.theyworkforyou.com/lor
ds/?id=2015-12-03a.1250.0). TheyWorkForYou. 3 December 2015. Retrieved 18 November 2016.
24. "Shadow defence secretary Vernon Coaker to call for 2015 review to focus more on long-term strategy
and 'smart power' " (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/24/labour-defence-review-cyberwar
-threat). The Guardian. 24 March 2014. Retrieved 18 November 2016.
25. "Smart power in defence" (https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/2012-03-13-smart-power-in-defenc
e). Ministry of Defence. 13 March 2012. Retrieved 18 November 2016.
26. "TheDC Interview: Christian Whiton explains smart power" (http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/07/thedc-in
terview-christian-whiton-explains-smart-power). The Daily Caller. Retrieved 27 May 2014.
27. "Warfare of Ideas" (https://www.weeklystandard.com/print/articles/warfare-ideas_756460.html). The
Weekly Standard. Retrieved 27 May 2014.
28. "Dealing with Today's Asymmetric Threat to U.S. and Global Security" (http://asymmetricthreat.net/doc
s/asymmetric_threat_3_paper.pdf) (PDF). CACI. Retrieved 12 April 2012.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_power 7/8
10/5/2017 Smart power - Wikipedia

29. "Smart Power Relations in U.S.-China Relations" (http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/090309_mcgiffert

_uschinasmartpower_web.pdf) (PDF). Center for Strategic and International Studies. Retrieved 30 April
2012.
30. Fotoui, Eleni. "Smart Power and U.S. Turkish Relations" (http://www.kas.de/wf/doc/kas_18793-544-2-3
0.pdf) (PDF). Expert Advisory Group (EAG). Retrieved 30 April 2012.
31. Dimitrova, Anna. "Obama's Foreign Policy: Between Pragmatic Realism and Smart Diplomacy" (http://w
ww.culturaldiplomacy.org/culturaldiplomacynews/participant-papers/academy/Anna-Dimitrova-Obama's
-Foreign-Policy-Between-Pragmatic-Realism-and-Smart-Diplomacy.pdf) (PDF). Retrieved 12 April
2012.
32. Mundow, Anna. "Wielding "Smart Power" in World Affairs" (http://www.boston.com/ae/books/articles/2
011/02/06/wielding_smart_power_in_world_affairs/). Boston Globe. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
33. Dimitrova, Anna. "Obama's Foreign Policy: Between Pragmatic Realism and Smart Policy?" (http://ww
w.culturaldiplomacy.org/culturaldiplomacynews/participant-papers/academy/Anna-Dimitrova-Obama's-F
oreign-Policy-Between-Pragmatic-Realism-and-Smart-Diplomacy.pdf) (PDF). Retrieved 12 April 2012.
34. Adelman, Ken. "Not-So-Smart Power" (https://foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/04/18/not_so_smart_pow
er?page=full). Boston Globe. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
35. Bandow, Doug. "A Prudent Foreign Policy" (http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0908f.asp). Freedom Daily.
Retrieved 30 April 2012.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Smart_power&oldid=790552166"

This page was last edited on 14 July 2017, at 13:58.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may
apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia is a registered
trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_power 8/8