Clinton Focuses On Soft Power

[Posteritatis]

Have a BBC article about Clinton's diplomatic style.

Although Iran and Afghanistan dominated many of the conversations, there didn't seem to be a specific theme to the trip and the only common thread to the locations was the general geographical area of Europe and Eurasia.

But there is a common theme to her travels in general from her first trip to Asia in February to her marathon tour of Africa in August - soft power.

Whether she's in Russia talking about Iran's nuclear programme, in South Korea discussing the threat posed by Pyongyang, or in Northern Ireland appealing to rival factions not to return to the bad old days of violence, Mrs Clinton continues to fill her schedule with "soft" events during which she meets students, women's activists or human rights advocates.

She talks about the books that have had an impact on her life, raises awareness about rape as a weapon of war, and makes repeated references to people's God-given potential. (In fact so often, that some reporters who travel with her and attend her events regularly just use the short-hand "GGP" when taking notes.)

(For context: "hard" power, which was only vaguely defined in the article, is a lot of what you'd think of as more traditional approaches to foreign policy - mainly economic and military influences, treaties, alliances, sanctions, etc. - as opposed to the approach that Clinton's tied to in this article.)

I like the approach, and heaven knows it's a breath of fresh air from the hard-power-only approach that the Bush administration exalted.

The article suggests the 'soft power' approach is a result of being marginalized as a result of appointed envoys taking up many of the major postings in the Middle East and other hot spots, leaving the Secretary of State with nothing else. While I can see why people might suggest that, I can't say I agree. Both the more formal diplomatic styles they're using and the one Clinton's becoming known for have their uses, and given the growing influence of various non-state actors and the like, I imagine soft power's going to become a lot more significant in years to come than people assume it is. I like the idea of an administration taking more notice of that approach, to say nothing of putting its top diplomat front and center along those lines.

What do you guys think?

[LLStarks]

1. As a polisci student, I'm a big fan of Joseph Nye and soft power. nt

[Posteritatis]

2. Any book/site recommendations for an interested newbie? (nt)