Issues Navigator

Global Challenges

Strategic Regions

Domestic Debates

Tag cloud

See All Tags

October 5, 2011 |  5 comments |  Print | E-Mail Your Opinion  

Judy Dempsey

The Failure of Soft Power

Judy Dempsey: Europe’s efforts to exert influence on the world through soft power has proven ineffective. To restore Europe’s credibility in the world, Europe must open itself up to trade and immigration, provide more aid to civil society groups in the greater European neighborhood and be more vocal against dictatorial regimes.

Europeans have long believed soft power to be the best instrument to promote their values and their security.

They have a strong sense of moral superiority about it, particularly when looking at hard, or military, power.

Military action is something that the Europeans leave to the United States, Britain, and France. Even if it wanted to, the European Union cannot do it. It lacks the basic capabilities, such as heavy airlift and logistics. It lacks an integrated defense policy for armament procurement. It also lacks a security strategy that includes the use of hard power as an option.

The soft power instruments Europeans have used over the years consist of development aid and civilian assistance, such as training the police and judiciary in some countries. The Europeans also sometimes couple soft power with trade incentives or with sanctions. Above all, they pride themselves on basing their actions on the defense of human rights which are, at least officially, at the core of Europe's value system.

But Europe's record in making soft power the cornerstone of its security strategy has been patchy. It has been worked incredibly well in Eastern Europe. Enlargement with its plethora of promises and incentives is soft power at its most powerful. But Europe cannot enlarge to the rest of the world.
That is where Europe's soft power policies have had so little, if any success.

Take Iran.

Years of negotiations with Iran to get it to abandon its nuclear ambitions have gotten the Europeans nowhere. Promises of technical assistance and closer economic cooperation have had no impact on the regime in Teheran, even though some of the sanctions are biting.

The reason why the Europeans have failed is because Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is just too stubborn. He seems determined to develop a nuclear military capability for Iran's own geo-strategic interests no matter what the cost to his people. Soft power can find no grip there.

Bosnia-Herzegovina is another case where the instrument has failed. Fifteen years after the Dayton accords that ended the civil war in the former Yugoslavia, Bosnia is mired in corruption and misrule. This is despite the presence of a large EU police force, not to mention the billions of euros the European taxpayer has poured into this tiny country. The state that the EU is trying to build has never really been accepted by the ethnic communities living there. And the EU is not prepared to stop the bullying and separatist tactics of the Bosnian Serbs in particular.

Afghanistan is another stain on the EU's soft power record. There, the Europeans have done too little and too late, wasting the initial good will of the Afghan people after the Taliban regime was overthrown in 2001. While the U.S. and its coalition forces were distracted by the war in Iraq, the Europeans did little to fill the gap left in Afghanistan. Europe's most abject failure is its police-training mission there. It is still under-financed and under-staffed. What a shame for what should have been a stellar example of the EU's use of soft power.

And there is North Africa and the Middle East. Europe's record in colluding with dictators in the region before the Arab Spring is well known. Now would be the chance to repair its credibility by putting its soft power to work.

It would not require much.

First of all, Europe would have to become much more outspoken and committed in it defense of human rights. How? It would need to do more to support the opposition to dictatorial regimes. For instance, it could support political prisoners in Iran by discreetly providing aid or and even legal assistance to their families. Europe should also open its doors to asylum seekers from these countries. That's not idealism. This is about Europe defending its human rights values.

Then there is trade. The EU must open up for trade from North Africa and the Middle East. This is crucial for economic reform, prosperity, and the development of a vibrant middle class which would strengthen stability and security across the Mediterranean.
Borders, too, should gradually be opened despite the growing anti-immigration movements across Europe. Young people from North Africa and the Middle East must be allowed to travel to Europe and they must have access to education there. Indeed, the Arab Spring presents an ideal opportunity for the EU's Erasmus higher education programs to take the initiative. Trade and education in the Middle East are very much in Europe's long term strategic interests.

Development aid should no longer be channeled to such a large extent to state-controlled organizations. Of course, it is naïve to think that aid which is targeted for civil society movements would be free from corruption or misuse. It would need rigorous monitoring, too. Once the EU's external services finds its feet, there is no reason why there could not be a specialized civil society department, with well trained staff, set up in the new embassies.

Also, Europe could do much more to get police and judicial missions off the ground quickly. This certainly requires more money, but, even more importantly, a core group of experts in every country ready to pack their bags at short notice.

But above all, soft power requires sustained attention. Europe's political leaders need to do something that is very difficult when so many issues compete for their time: They need to keep their eye on the burgeoning civil societies in their greater neighborhood, as they did on Eastern Europe when those countries were getting ready to join the EU.

None of this will be easy, but the EU needs to do it if it is serious about making soft power work to defend human rights. Of course, neither soft power nor indeed hard power is a panacea. But the Arab Spring could be Europe's chance to restore its credibility. Failure to do so would mean the long term erosion of Europe's values and its own security.

Judy Dempsey is senior Europe correspondent for the International Herald Tribune.

This essay was first published by Carnegie Europe. To reinvigorate debate over European foreign policy and Europe's role in the world, Carnegie Europe is publishing a series of essays from leading policymakers, diplomats, experts, and journalists on Strategic Europe.

  • 9
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this Article! What's this?

 
 
Comments
Unregistered User

October 6, 2011

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Societies are becoming more open to to at least talk about that
" Millions of people will become expandable over the next years"........
It is now accepted that there is a level of "superfluous people" as a result of
chronic unemployment.
Mostly these are young people who are the first to lose jobs in downsizing
or there is limited manufacturing base to make use of their skills and education.
In 2008 20 million people lost their jobs and another 20 million the years after that.
Between the developed and developing countries about 200 million are unemployed.
This is within the sovereign of all these nations and a result of misguided
economics where sustainable growth is not an option.
Europe is a conglomerate of countries with different versions of democracies in
governance. Most of them have a historic baggage of human rights violations, yet
their value structure is arranged around promoting human rights and also national
security or homeland security, if an island nation.
Soft power as a promotional instrument for defending human rights is certainly not a panacea, nor is indeed hard power a magic bullet.
Power still carries the stigma of evil and unjust. Power is a measurement of an entity's ability to control its environment, including the behavior of all entities.
After all these years" bullying" other sovereigns should become a thing of our diplomatic past and be replaced with dignified positive influence for education and know-how.
"We must win", seems to be a political term to arouse the people to get (re-)elected.
So, soft-,or hard power is still in the category of "winning", like in the past and many sovereigns will say, we would like to trust you, but verify.... that we can not.


HRF






Tags: | tx/ europe |
 
Magdalena  Noga

October 7, 2011

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Important point raised on development aid. Where it goes, how it goes, and what actually goes needs to be monitored. The political implications of aid also cannot be ignored, and giving aid as to buy some short-term alliances will likely result in failure. I agree on the vigorous monitoring, and soft power with a bottom-up approach could prove to be more successful.
Tags: | development aid |
 
Lamprini  Basdeki

October 11, 2011

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
It really looks like the European Neighbourhood Policy has totally failed, not to mention the Union for the Mediterranean forum - both have this very target, to increase cooperation between the the Europeans and the neighbours. Europe is also failing at the moment to enlarge itself, since the EU-mediated talks between Serbia and Kosovo, which plan to make Serbia an EU candidate member state, have just been ceased for the time being, after the events in Northern Kosovo. It is even failing in security issues with its neighbours, since Turkey is threatening with a halt of EU-Turkey relations during the Cypriot presidency, and the eastern mediterranean finds itself to be a hot region, with Cyprus drilling for oil and Turkey claiming for a share in a region that is disputable. All that Europe has managed to do on the issues above, is say through Catherine Ashton that it is extremely worried.
The point is, we have different countries that are "united in diversity". Each one is governed differently and has a different version of democracy, as stated above. Fair enough. Keeping that in mind, at the point that the EU is not a Political Union yet, it cannot increase its soft power - it will definetely meet states within its interior that will possibly disagree with some of the soft power policies (and probably because of nationalism, or because they are afraid of involving themselves into certain issues that don't concern them). This is what keeps Europe behind. Despite the fact that soft power can be a very successful way to gain back the credibility that is now lost, the EU needs to stabilize itself first - and remove nationalism from the field.
 
Monika  Noniewicz

October 14, 2011

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
A comprehensive analysis with many valid points. What might also be interesting to consider in the context of EU’s soft power failure is the internal crisis that the organization is currently grappling with. What with the public finance upheaval in Greece – which adds credibility to the argument that the single currency area is still mainly a product of ideas rather than a result of bringing in sync economic and fiscal policies – the EU and the political model that is strives to perpetuate may sound like a less appealing option to emulate for aspiring members and other partners of the organization. The proverbial carrot of membership or preferential treatment may consequently lose in significance as an incentive for these countries to adopt values deemed to form the ideological cornerstone of the EU, as they see that ideas are not backed up by actual policies and capabilities.
 
Ben  Osborn

October 18, 2011

  • 2
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
It seems to me that the concept of power is being analyzed in a vacuum, here.

First, power, even soft power, should mean different things in different contexts. Power is a transitive property-- it begs the question of 'power over whom?' Different actors respond to different incentives, and each will have a different payoff calculus to cooperate or obfuscate.

Second, to refer to Europe in the singular implies unity within its members. This begs mention of Europe's impending financial problems that have fractured its members from within and without. If Europe is too busy trying to keep itself together, any measure of power will be more difficult.

Third, soft power is unique in that it can actually empower those over whom soft power is exercised. By engaging Iran or other autocracies, soft power tactics are meant to empower certain factions within those states at the expense of others. Just as Europe may not be readily seen as a unified entity, nor should those states over which Europe seeks to exercise soft power. Indeed, its exercise depends on those states being fragmented.

Finally, I was a bit unclear as to when hard power was being advocated in the article. Some scholars have argued that coercion through brute force is not actually a form of power. Or at least that it cannot generate power. Power does not come from the barrel of a gun, writes Hannah Arendt. Guns can serve as a substitute for power in some cases, but remove the gun and you lose the power. This is where the European model is most promising. Europeans used a unique form of soft power to create the EU, and continue to do so among themselves. I think the future of EU's foreign policy depends on applying that form of soft power abroad.
 

Create Comment

Type the characters shown in the image below into the textfield.
Captcha

What are tags?

Community

Jobs / Internships

Call for Papers

Atlantic Events

Partners

User of the day

Anna  Przybyll
Anna Przybyll
"A wise old owl lived in an oak The more he..."

Poll

Should NATO intervene in Syria?