a search for a better measurement

Dominique Lopes

SIS-628-02 Applied Public Diplomacy
Craig Hayden

 Do you feel the New Persuaders report provides a good measure of a nation-state's "soft power?" What works, and what do you think the measure misses?

In the New Persuaders, Jonathan McClory, presents “soft power” as a multidimensional approach to foreign diplomacy. Increasingly today foreign nations respond more favorably to soft power tactics than the traditional hard power of military, hard coercion, and GDP. Therefore, we must look into culture, education, diplomacy, how our government is perceived by foreign populations, and whether our business models are attractive to foreign investment in order to raise our attractiveness on a global scale. I believe that McClory does present a decent set of measurements for soft power, both those just stated and those in the subjective category, and by explaining that measurement of “soft-power” is inherently subjective we understand that this will be an ever evolving process.

Expanding Joseph Nye’s three main sources of soft power: culture; political values; and foreign policy, to the five more substantive categories of culture, education, diplomacy, government, and business/innovation the New Persuaders gives a broader definition of how we think about countries abroad. In the example of Ai Wei Wei, the arrest of the artist still effects the perception of China on a global scale. Though McClory sites this as a snapshot example that is hard to measure using these indices, I believe that the categories of culture and government give a great framework of China’s soft power. The arrest of the controversial artist portrays the country’s government as counter to social/human-rights norms causing a dent in the government’s soft power. This is admittedly a Western concept, but because we think of a government’s soft power in these western ideals until this changes China will be subject to these parameters. However, because of the artistic magnitude of Ai Wei Wei, his very existence is a boon to China’s cultural soft power.

McClory, I believe, could strengthen his measurement evaluation by expanding on how the different categories affect one another. He briefly mentions the importance of culture and education, but could benefit from an assessment of which is worth more or how one can trump the other. The New Persuaders report exhibits a start in a long process of fully understanding how to measure “soft power”, so in that light I believe that McClory has done a good job in providing a base measurement.