hard power is more effective than soft power

para

military hard pwr

econ hard pwr

structural hard pwr

military hard pwr

yes: states invest in hard pwr, total global expenditure of over $2.1 trillion in 2021. usa responsiblle for appx 40% global military spending china 2nd largest military spender w 14% global spending. us hard pwr: strike iran 2024 midnight hammer strikes nuclear weapon sites/war 2026. israel hard pwr hezbollah remotely launched pager attack.

no: us underestimate econ impact of iran war- closure states of hormuz- oil at $100+ a barrel. russa not deterred despite econ sanctions and supply of weapons to ukraine. defeat of islamist terrorism not achieved only thru hard military pwr. killing terrorists can create martyrs can encourage greter radicalisation.

economic hard pwr

yes: us aid programmes provide carrot encouraging support for usa in strategically imp n-s eg egypt israel afganistan. top 10 countries recieving us foreign aid in 2024: drc$1.3bn. investing in africa, china sig strategic influence accross region 2018 china africa forum beijing pledged $60bn for african development. belt and road initiative. eu wields enormous econ hard pwr wrlds 2nd biggest econ negociate TTIP on equal terms w usa. econ sanctions can coerce n-s eg extensive un sanctions led to iran negociating nuclear agreement in 2015. 90% n.kor exports go to china, chinese sanctions sig in persuading n.kor denuclearisation.

no: soft pwr cheaper, less risky. avoid military intervention or econ sanction allows n-s to focus attention on other interests. nye- imp thing in global relations is whose story wins. us cultural appeal sig role in ending of cold war cant compete w materialistic appeal of free market. won with levis jeans-o’roarke. can be more influential in the long term w spread of culture ideas and values.

structural hard pwr

yes: capacity to influence igos. eg global acceptance of liberal economic principles of washington consensus enabled usa to influence development of global econ. eg usa biggest vote share on wb and imf. us military pwr ensures it dominates nato. veto pwr of 5 perm members provide structural pwr. emerging pwrs now trying to get structural pwr to boost influence eg 2015 china est AIIB to enhance econ impact on developing wrld. EU holds own place in imf and regularly invited to G7

no: soft pwr allows goals 2b achieved thru collaboration and cooperation w/o damaging costs of hard pwr use. hard ineffective in est long term positive relationships needed for global consensus to collective dilemmas eg climate change. only thru summits, igos can progress happen. hard pwr of ns can be undermined by expose of ruthless actions eg bombing of iranian girls skl march 2026. internet pic of hr violations carried out at us prison Abu Ghraib following iraq war shows internet can undermine n-s soft pwr influence