Smart Power – The Theory
The end of World War II ushered in a period of relative peace and global stability. After 1945, states and non-state actors have engaged in the most intense and far-reaching interactions. This brought together people of different backgrounds to trade, interact, share ideas, and promote prosperity and peace. Thus, the old system of purposive and exploitative interactions between states, driven by interests, realism, and war, began to fade. In its stead, dynamic methods of nurturing power and utilizing influence among state and non-state actors developed. This article examines the basics of the concept of smart power and its role in contemporary international relations and the international political economy.
Evolution of the Notion of Power in Statecraft and International Affairs
International relations evolved on the basis of realism—that is, a state's pursuit of its interests. This is premised on the fact that a state's government does not inherently need to engage with other states or nations. Thus, it can be assumed that the only thing that will get a state to engage with other parties internationally is a goal or interest. This refers to something of value that a state can benefit from, therefore necessitating the effort to engage with other countries or states.
In the pursuit of interests in the international order, a state uses its power to gain what it wants. This power is an asset to every state. Thus, gaining the ability to get what one wants overseas and around the world is an important resource that can be leveraged to gain a lot more benefits and value. Hence, power development is important to every state's resources or assets.
After 1945, the world accepted liberalism – which involves the development of systems and structures for international relations and the application of international law. Liberalism is driven by a body of customary laws that regulate relationships between states and other international players. This placed limits on the type of power that can be acceptable and what is not. Thus, the post-World War II international relations system placed caps on things like genocide, crude invasions, colonialism, and similar acts of mass cruelty used by powerful states to pursue their interests. Naturally, liberalism changed the notion of power and the pursuit of interests in the international order.
Then came the Cold War (1949-1991), which created justifications for various means. However, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the tensions that justified various crude and apparently illegal maneuvers in international relations faded away. This was replaced by structuralism and constructivism in international affairs. They are two contingent and consequentialist approaches to international relations that require power to be defined in response to existing realities rather than the pre-determined dictates of a few elites.
Structuralism involves paying attention to the different combinations of relevant parties in the creation of a specific international affairs space. This is inclusive and covers the poor, oppressed, and other stakeholders previously excluded from classical/traditional international relations. Thus, the focus shifts from a few career diplomats to include transnational organizations, multinationals, and other diagnostic methods to understand and resolve the most important problems. This meant what was considered power was bound to change with the shift towards structuralism.
Constructivism asserts that relevant stakeholders' actions, interactions, and perceptions shape the nature and scope of international relations in any place and time. Thus, power is more of an engagement-driven derivation than a few immutable fixed expectations and standards.
Thus, what is considered "power" or "goals" in any international political order varies with the circumstances at any given moment. The old measure of power as interests and goals is now outdated, and new forms of complex interactions define the scope of the agenda in international relations and how it can be met.
Power As Defined in Statecraft & International Relations
Internally, a state or any actor on the international stage has to contextualize their goals and pursue them. In this inside context, "power” is construed as the ability to affect the behavior of others or get others to do what one wants.
Power is, therefore, linked to influencing others to do what one wants, and this is attained through three ways: (a) Coercion, (b) Payment, and (c) Attraction.[1].
The contemporary international ecosystem driven by constructivism and structuralism gives room for three re-classification of power:
1. Hard power
2. Soft power, and
3. Smart power.
Hard power is the use of coercion and payment to get players in the international to do what one wants. This involves threats to use military power or offering economic power to attain their goals.
Soft power is the ability to attain a desired outcome through attraction. This involves co-option, or laying down several paths towards a definite end and encouraging other players to work with them. This form of co-option involves convincing others to see the benefits of one's path or offer. This way, a state or non-state actor shows how their way is better and much more superior to what competitors might offer.
Smart power is a functional blend of soft and hard power to attain a desired end. It is defined as the “capacity of an actor to combine elements of hard power and soft power in ways that are mutually reinforcing such that the actor’s purposes are advanced effectively and efficiently.”[2]
More On Smart Power
Smart power is responsive. It functions based on:
1. Defining a context based on goals,
2. Gathering relevant contextual intelligence and
3. Undertaking targeted acts to attain specific goals.
Smart power, therefore, combines soft power and hard power as "international assets" so that they can be used smartly to attain defined ends.
Smart power is goal-oriented. A state or international actor must have an endgame and use a structured and logical approach to attain it in a disciplined and organized manner.
This means that the coincidence of soft power and hard power does not necessarily lead to smart power.
Rather, smart power is a structured approach that ensures thatactors attains their greatest and best outcomes based on their goals or endgame.
Thus, smart power is simply the structured and efficient deployment of soft power, which includes culture, values, and policies, alongside hard power, which is military and economic strength, to achieve a desired goal.
In effect, the end game of an international engagement plays a role in defining and deploying the most effective blend of soft and hard power. This is the essence of smart power.
Smart Power – Going Beyond a Mechanical & Uncoordinated Application of Power
The world has evolved significantly. In the past, countries simply deployed one extreme form of power to attain their goals. In 2001, after the terrorist attacks on New York, the US government pursued a strong hard power policy. This included invading Afghanistan and Iraq in the name of going after the perpetrators of the September 11 attacks and also re-establishing American deterrence.
By 2008, Americans were simply tired of the expensive and counterproductive war. Thus, the administration voted into power was put on a path toward developing soft power. Indeed, the application of soft power came with various short-term benefits. The US economy was stabilized. America's reputation was restored worldwide, and the losses from the many wars ended.
However, soft power failed in 2011 when the same concept was applied to countries in the Middle East. The US administration simply refrained from using military power to stabilize the global order. The famous statement of "not putting boots on the ground" and intervening when "red lines are crossed" became the signature of US foreign policy between 2012 and 2016. In hindsight, the wars that evolved from America's over-reliance on soft power saw over a million deaths in wars in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen.
Thus, we can see that hard power alone or soft power alone cannot ensure optimal goals. In reality, though, anyone who uses one extreme of hard or soft power will likely invoke various minimalist elements of the opposite[3]. This shows the mechanical and uncoordinated combination of smart power.
Smart power is:
1. Targeted, and
2. Coordinated.
Smart power is premised on a state or international player's desired goal. This goal must lead to targeted plans and strategies that lay out activities for the party in question.
Secondly, smart power involves bringing together all the assets and resources of the entity in question to attain the desired end. This involves getting different units of the entity to work together to attain the desired end. An uncoordinated deployment of soft power is ineffective at best. In many cases, it becomes counterproductive.
Context & Contextual Intelligence in Smart Power
Since smart power is targeted and coordinated, it is done in a context. There should be clearly defined parameters for understanding and attaining the end game. Efficiency is driven by optimizing the outputs of inputs. Therefore, smart power is an aspiration to attain a definite goal within a specific space and time—this is the context. This is best done through the identification and application of relevant information or "intelligence."
Once the context is defined, smart power must be attained through three things:
1. Intelligence (for targeting)
2. Intelligence (for monitoring), and
3. Intelligence (for remedial or corrective action).
Smart power is a genuine blend of heart and mind[4]. The values, goals, and realities change over time with changes in relevant variables.
Defining the end game for smart power application requires intelligence. This involves a clear identification of what must be pursued and targeted over a period of time. In many cases, broad goals should be translated into specific objectives through intelligence or the application of relevant information as it emerges.
Once the end game is defined and a strategy is formulated and implemented, it must be monitored at every stage. The process requires proactively gaining information and compiling it to measure outcomes at the different stages.
Thirdly, intelligence is important for remedial action as a strategy is implemented. This involves continuously evaluating and analyzing options on the field as they emerge. Intelligence will help the decision-makers reposition their efforts to attain the desired end game.
Conclusion
Smart power is a coordinated and targeted application of power to attain a desired end in international affairs. Smart power combines soft power (co-option and attraction) with hard power (military and economic influence) in the most effective and efficient way. The attainment of an end goal drives smart power. Thus, smart power starts with forecasting, strategizing, implementation, variance analysis, remedial actions, and the optimal attainment of the end game. All in all, smart power involves leveraging power resources in a strategic framework driven by relevant information and proactive steering of stakeholders to attain a desired end.
[1] Joseph S. Nye. "Get Smart: Combining Hard and Soft Power" Soft Power & Great-Power Competition. 2023. pp63-66 DOI: 10.1007/978-981-99-0714-4_8
[2] Ernest J. Wilson III. “Hard Power, Soft Power, Smart Power” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political & Social Science 616 2009, pp110-124
[3] Joseph S. Nye. "Get Smart: Combining Hard and Soft Power" p64
[4] Joseph S. Nye. "Get Smart: Combining Hard and Soft Power" p64