A Critical Approach to Soft Power

Year 2017, Volume: 6 Issue: 2, 491 - 502, 20.12.2017

Umut Yukaruç

Abstract

The concept of
soft power has been widely used since it was first coined by Joseph Nye in the
1990s. Since then, academics and politicians have addressed this ‘new’ approach
to power and states have built their strategies according to this concept. Yet,
this concept has also been criticised and this work will contribute to these
criticisms. While it explains what soft power is and its instruments are, it
also aims to argue its limitations under three headings: originality of soft
power, immeasurable nature of soft power and its excessive focus on agent. 

Keywords

Soft Power, Public Diplomacy, Critical Approach

A Critical Approach to Soft Power

Abstract

Yumuşak güç konsepti Joseph Nye’ın ilk ortaya atmasıyla birlikte
1990’lardan beri kullanılmıştır. Akademisyenler ve politikacılar bu konsepte
başvurmuşlar ve devletler bu konsept doğrultusunda yeni stratejiler
oluşturmuşlardır. Fakat aynı zamanda bu konsept birçok akademisyen tarafından
eleştirilmiştir ve bu makale de bu eleştirilere katkıda bulunmayı hedeflemektedir.
Yumuşak güç kavramını ve araçlarını açıklarken ayni zamanda uç başlıkta sinirli
kaldığı yerler tartışılacaktır. Bunlar yumuşak güç konseptinin özgünlüğü,
doğasının ölçülemez olduğu ve yapana aşırı odaklanması olacaktır.

Keywords

Yumuşak Güç, Kamu Diplomasisi, Eleştirel Yaklaşım

References

• Armitage, R. L. & Nye Jr., J. S. (2008), ‘Implementing Smart Power: Setting an Agenda for National Security Reform’, Statement before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 24.
• Bieler, A., and Morton, A. D. (2004), ‘A critical theory route to hegemony, world order and historical change: neo-Gramscian perspectives in International Relations’, Capital & Class, Vol. 28 No.1, pp. 85-113.
• Bilgin, P. and Elis, B. (2008), ‘Hard Power, Soft Power: Toward a More Realistic Power Analysis’, Insight Turkey, Vol.10 No.2, pp.5-20.
• Carr, E. H. (1946), The Twenty Years’ Crisis 1919-1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations, London: Macmillan.
• Cox, R.W. (1983), ‘Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations: An Essay in Method’, Millennium- Journal of International Studies, Vol.12 No.2, pp.162-175.
• Dalacoura, K. (2005), ‘US Democracy Promotion in the Arab Middle East since 11 September 2001: a Critique’, International Affairs, Vol. 81 No.5, pp. 963-979.
• Fontana, B. (1993), Hegemony and Power: On the Relation Between Gramsci and Machiavelli, Minneapolis; London: University of Minnesota Press.
• Gilboa, E. (2008), ‘Searching for a Theory of Public Diplomacy’, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol.616 No.1, pp. 55-77.
• Gill, S. (Ed.). (2012), Global Crises and the Crisis of Global Leadership, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Gramsci, A. (1971), Selections from the Prison Notebooks, London: Lawrence and Wishart.
• Herman, E. S., and Chomsky, N. (1988), The Political Economy of the Mass Media, New York: Pantheon Books.
• Herman, E. S. (2000), ‘The propaganda model: A retrospective’, Journalism Studies, Vol. 1 No.1, pp. 101-112.
• House of Lords Committee on Soft Power and UK Influence (2013) Available at https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201314/ldselect/ldsoftpower/150/15002.htm (accessed 9 October 2017).
• Kalin, I. (2011), ‘Soft Power and Public Diplomacy in Turkey’, Perceptions, Vol. 16 No: 3 (Autumn), pp. 5-23.
• Layne, C. (2010), ‘The Unbearable Lightness of Power’ in Inderjeet Parmar and Michael Cox (eds.), Soft Power and US Foreign Policy: Theoretical, historical, and contemporary perspectives, London; New York: Routledge.
• Lock, E. (2010), ‘Soft Power and Strategy: Developing a ‘Strategic’ Concept of Power’ in Inderjeet Parmar and Michael Cox (eds.), Soft Power and US Foreign Policy: Theoretical, historical, and contemporary perspectives, London; New York: Routledge.
• Lukes, S. (1974), Power: A Radical View, London: MacMillan Press.
• McClory, J. (2011), ‘The New Persuaders II: A 2011 Global Ranking of Soft Power’, Institute for Government, Available at: <http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/new-persuaders-ii>.
• McClory, J. (2017). The Soft Power 30: A Global Ranking of Soft Power. Report. London: Portland Communications, available at: < https://softpower30.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/The-Soft-Power-30-Report-2017-Web-1.pdf>
• Nisbet, E.C., Nisbet, M.C., Scheufele, D.A., & Shanahan, J.E. (2004), ‘Public Diplomacy, Television News, and Muslim Opinion’, The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, Vol.9 No.2, pp. 11-37.
• Nye Jr., J. S. (1990), Bound to Lead: the Changing Nature of American Power, New York: Basic Books.
• Nye Jr., J. S. (2004), Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics, New York: Public Affairs.
• Nye Jr J. (2006) Think again: Soft Power. Foreign Policy 22/2. Available at: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2006/02/22/think_again_soft_power (Accessed 9 October 2017).
• Nye Jr., J. S. (2010), ‘The Future of Soft Power in US Foreign Policy’ in Inderjeet Parmar and Michael Cox (eds.), Soft Power and US Foreign Policy: Theoretical, historical, and contemporary perspectives, London; New York: Routledge.
• Tokyay M. (2012), ‘Turkish media expands presence into Balkans’, SETimes, Available at: <http://www.setimes.com/cocoon/setimes/xhtml/en_GB/features/setimes/articles/2012/05/29/reportage-01>, Accessed 06 August 2013.
• Van Ham, P. (2002), ‘Branding Territory: Inside the Wonderful Worlds of PR and IR Theory’, Millennium-Journal of International Studies, Vol.31 No.2, pp. 249-269.
• Waltz, K. N. (1979), Theory of International Politics, Reading: Addison-Wesley.
• Zahran, G., and Ramos, L. (2010), ‘From hegemony to soft power: implications of a conceptual change’ in Inderjeet Parmar and Michael Cox (Eds.), Soft power and US foreign policy: Theoretical, historical and contemporary perspectives, pp. 12-31, New York: Routledge.