ETVT Hard Power is now more significant in Global Politics than Soft Power

T1 - Upholding International Norms, it is not

Soft power more sig as leads to long term influence and global stability through IGOs and multilateral coop between states. Appealing to shared values/cultural ties/int norms creates trust between states, stability.

E.g. EU offering economic incentives to adopt EU member style governance. EU provided sig financial and institutional supp to Ukraine pre-war through Association Agreement, encouraging judicial reforms and anti-corruption measures. Strengthen democratic gov, align with future EU standards to move closer to EU membership. Viewed as sig by Russia, war to disrupt upholding int norms.

Using hard power for this fails, negative long term. E.g. US attempts to impose democracy through military intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq, both failed due to limits of US soft power (democracy conflicts with traditional religious structures esp in rural areas).

Hard power not useful without soft power providing support for its use.

T1 - Upholding International Norms, it is

Hard power is more consistent and effective at upholding int norms than soft power. Esp the case when state seeks to challenge them, using hard power to defend democracy/human rights sometimes the only effective response (as states can simply not respond to diplomacy or persuasion).

Hard power from NATO in Kosovo occurred without full UN approval, but fast so effectively halted ethnic cleansing, effectively upheld int standard regarding HR.

Britain’s of hard power against militias in Sierra Leone stopped severe HR abuses incl. child soldiers / prostitution, mutilation.

UN authorisation of hard power in East Timor allowed for long term commitment and investment to building strong legitimate state, defending int norm of democracy.

If state/body is prepared to use hard power to protect int norms, shows they are strong and meaningful.

T1 - Upholding International Norms, overall

Centrality of soft power in promoting global stability contingent on willingness to use hard power should norms not be followed. Esp the case given hard power can disrupt upholding int norms via soft power. Use of hard power has both literal and symbolic weight, suggesting of greater importance than use of soft power that tends to be more symbolic.

T2 - Achieving a State’s Aims, it is not

Soft power enhances a State’s global reputation and legitimacy. States that can successfully wielding soft power seen as sig, can shape int outcomes through persuasion rather than force.

E.g. Saudia Arabia sig expansion of glob influence through use of soft power with investment in sport ($4.5B LIV golf league, hosting 2034 FIFA world cup). Extends reach of country, strengthens relationships with US, China, Russia beyond just economic (incentivised as economically strong oil producer). Leads to influential outcomes such as hosting 02/25 peace talks between US, Ukraine, Russia.

Soft power sig tool for superpowers to enhance global reputation e.g. global reach of Hollywood to promote US values (individualism), makes US seem less strange/threatening, improve perception of US.

Uses of Hard power can damage reputation e.g. Israel reduced legitimacy after killed over 70,000 Palestinians as of 2026, has led to European leaders openly criticising Netanyahu.

T2 - Achieving a State’s Aims, it is

Hard power more sig as it achieves immediate results.

Most obviously with previous Israel answer, large scale bombing with evacuations cleared land, helped IDF gain control (60% territory), perhaps to make way for settlements (original goal).

Also seen with Russia annexation of Crimea, extremely fast use of special forces to take land from Ukraine in less than 3 weeks. Despite being illegal violation of int law, faster than others’ ability to form diplomatic response allowed for Russia to effectively use hard power to achieve aim.

Obvious example with Tiananmen Square pro-democracy peaceful protests. Chinese gov failed for weeks to halt, yet when using hard power of live ammunition and tanks, cleared protest in 2 days. Damage to regime image and soft power seen as worthy cost for effective use of hard power to achieve aims.

T2 - Achieving a State’s Aims, overall

Soft power and hard power both important, often rely on one another to be impactful. However, weakness of soft power in that it can be ignored compared to hard power that can lead to tangible success, or at least pressure. Hard power comes at greater cost but that is consequence for being more useful.

CCLN

Both important, and clear that states should combine both ‘smart power’ to achieve aims and uphold international norms. However, growing conflict and military assertiveness across the world especially in recent years suggest greater significance of hard power over soft power (given soft power is more variable), use of hard power is more consistent (examples of its success range through many decades).