What are the benefits and issues surrounding the ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ power?
This ensures that those states with the better reputations are more likely to acquire what they need due to other countries and states willing to create positive links with these other states that predominantly use ‘soft power,’ rather than ‘hard.’ There are many methods and examples of how ‘soft’ power is quickly surpassing the use of hard power due to its list of benefits. An example of this would be that research suggests that the use of this power can increase a country’s exports and create more, and stronger, relations between countries and states. This, overall, shows how influential ‘soft’ power can be. Meaning that the use of ‘soft’ power should be encouraged rather than ‘hard’ power due to the increasing amount of benefits and increasing reputation that builds around the state, which increases the likely-hood of achieving a state’s objective.
There are both benefits and issues that surround both ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ power with clear examples of modern usage in today’s society. Through the use of ‘Hard power, states can use aggressive forces such as the military to achieve goals. However, this damages the reputation of a country and, also, is very expensive meaning that it is often the wealthier states that use their wealth as power to achieve their objective. This shows that ‘hard’ power is often seen to be surrounded by negative connotations even if used correctly and not to manipulate but rather to aid in projects. It is obvious that ‘soft’ power is another potential candidate for states to use. By using attraction to achieve goals, states can boost reputations and, ultimately, create stronger international relations. This will have further benefits including more trade opportunities and an increase in exports, for example. However, there are limits to ‘soft’ power too, as previously mentioned, it only takes a stubborn actor to refuse the connection with the specific state, and the whole process collapses as the attraction and links cannot be forced, such as within the example given of the Iranian president refusing co-operation with Europe to dismantle the Iranian nuclear project due to his desire to continue with it.