Assignment 2

I think that the point that Prime Minister Tony Bair was trying to make is that soft power is as important, not even more important, that military power for powerful nations to be able to maintain their power. Everyone is familiar with hard power. We know that military and economic might often get others to change their position. Hard power can rest on inducements ("carrots") or threats ("sticks"). But sometimes you can get the outcomes you want without tangible threats or payoffs. The indirect way to get what you want has sometimes been called "the second face of power." A country may obtain the outcomes it wants in world politics because other countries admire its values, emulate its example; aspire to its level of prosperity and openness. This soft power —getting others to want the outcomes that you want—co-opts people rather than coerces them. Soft power rests on the ability to shape the preferences of others. In the business world, smart executives know that leadership is not just a matter of issuing commands, but also involves leading by example and attracting others to do what you want.
Political leaders have long understood the power that comes from attraction. If I can get you to want to do what I want, then I do not have to use carrots or sticks to make you do it. Soft power is a staple of daily democratic politics. The ability to establish preferences tends to be associated with intangible assets such as an attractive personality, culture, political values and institutions, and policies that are seen as legitimate or having moral authority. If a leader represents values that others want to follow, it will cost less to lead.
Some skeptics object to the idea of Soft Power because they think of power narrowly in terms of commands or active control. In their view, imitation or attraction does not add up to power. The skeptics who want to define power only as deliberate acts of command and control are ignoring the second or "structural" face of power —the ability to get the outcomes you want without having to force people to change their behavior through threats or payments. Soft power is also likely to be more important when power is dispersed. A dictator cannot be totally indifferent to the views of the people under his rule, but he can often ignore popularity when he calculates his interests. In settings where opinions matter, leaders have less leeway to adopt tactics and strike deals.
The conditions for projecting soft power have transformed dramatically in recent years. The information revolution and globalization are transforming and shrinking the world. At the beginning of the 21st century, those two forces have enhanced American power. But with time, technology will spread to other countries and peoples, and America's relative preeminence will diminish. Even more important, the information revolution is creating virtual communities and networks that cut across national borders. Political leadership becomes in part a competition for attractiveness, legitimacy, and credibility. The ability to share information—and to be believed—becomes an important source of attraction and power. To achieve these goals, many leaders throughout history have used international media. Examples would be 'SAWT AL ARAB' during Nasserism. More recently another example would be 'AL HOURRA TV'.
Finally,this political game in a global information age suggests that the relative role of soft power to hard power will likely increase. The most likely gainers in an information age will have multiple channels of communication that help to frame issues, cultural customs and ideas that are close to prevailing global norms, and credibility that is enhanced by values and policies.