Many Types of Power in Good Policy

Yes, let us pay tribute to Joseph Nye Jr. ’58 for coining the term “soft power,” which has enriched the geopolitical vocabulary. But we shouldn’t claim that it “changed how states all over the world approached diplomacy,” as stated in the PAW eulogy (February issue). Soft power may be a general climate in which diplomacy is conducted, but the actual weather is made by specific policy, good or bad.

In my many years in the Foreign Service, I never heard mention of soft power as leverage, a force to be deployed. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave currency to the term “smart power” in a nod to Nye. Yet it referred to the formulation of actual policy. The Economist once ran a cover story on the “sharp power” of China trying to influence foreign states. Again, it referred to a deliberate set of actions. Soft power is … well, a bit too squishy.

For success in diplomacy, I would offer the terms “staying power” — a long-term strategic commitment; and “sweet-spot power” — a sustainable domestic construct within an effective international framework. Good policy, not soft power, is the gold coin of diplomacy.