Smart power

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Smart power is a term in international relations defined by Joseph Nye as "the ability to combine hard and soft power into a winning strategy."[1][2] According to Chester A. Crocker, Fen Osler Hampson, and Pamela R. Aall, smart power "involves the strategic use of diplomacy, persuasion, capacity building, and the projection of power and influence in ways that are cost-effective and have political and social legitimacy" – essentially the engagement of both military force and all forms of diplomacy.[3]

The term, invented in the aftermath of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, comes as a reaction to George W. Bush's more neoconservative-driven foreign policy.[4] Viewed as a liberal alternative to such policy, its proponents prefer international institutions that provide a major role, as opposed to solo role, to the United States.[4] Smart power has also been viewed as an alternative for soft power because the latter can reinforce stereotypes of Democratic politicians being perceived as weak.[5][6] According to Foreign Policy, there is a debate on who should be credited for coining the term, though it found the most likely candidate to be Suzanne Nossel, who in 2004 wrote an article entitled "Smart Power" in Foreign Affairs.[7] Earlier in 2004, Nye referred to "smart power" in his book Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics.


[edit] Clinton usage
The term gained notice when New York Senator Hillary Clinton used it frequently during her Senate confirmation hearing on January 13, 2009, for the position of Secretary of State under the administration of President Barack Obama.[8]

We must use what has been called smart power – the full range of tools at our disposal - diplomatic, economic, military, political, legal, and cultural - picking the right tool, or combination of tools, for each situation. With smart power, diplomacy will be the vanguard of foreign policy.

—Hillary Clinton[9]
Clinton's view contrasts with Condoleezza Rice's strategy of Transformational Diplomacy. Clinton's plans have not been realized to the point of a comparison of the similariries and differences in diplomatic relations between Rice's plans and the smart power approach.