The following is my answer to a Quora
question: “What
contributes to the soft powers of relatively smaller countries like the UK and
Singapore? Are they sustainable in your
opinion?”
The term “soft power” was coined by Dr.
Joseph Samuel Nye Jr., an American political scientist, in the 1990s. He further expounded on it, in his book, “Soft
Power: The Means to Success in World Politics”, published in 2004. Nye defined it as the ability of a country to
persuade others to do what it wants without force or coercion. Interestingly, Nye is also the intellectual
architect of American neoliberalism.
As per “The Soft Power 30 Report of 2018”,
the United Kingdom is top of the list, and Singapore, one of the smallest
nations in the world, is at number 21. The
UK has some inherent advantages, and established institutions that help it
maintain its position as one of the most culturally influential nations on the
world. And this is despite the debacle
of a drawn-out Brexit. Much of her soft
power lies in her cultural influence, her engagement with her former colonies,
and in education.
For example, the publicly funded BBC has
been instrumental in continuing to spread British influence and cultivate soft
power through its cultural and educational engagement. The BBC World Service still has a substantial
global following, and is viewed as far more credible than American news
outlets. There is a flourishing arts,
music, film and fashion scene, independent of the British government. The English Premier League is still the most
popular football league in the world. These
are all areas of soft power that the UK excels at. They are not a “small nation” in the global
sense.
Singapore is one of only four Asian
countries in the top 30 of the global soft power index, and was just edged into
21st place by South Korea, riding the K-Pop wave. Regardless, it is punching way above its
weight considering the fact that it is, by far, the smallest nation both in
geographic size and population. However,
its footprint is large. What Singapore
lacks in cultural depth because it is a new nation that has not even reached a
century, it makes up in innovation, technology, governance, and business model.
It attracts the wealthiest and the most
ambitious, and is a major banking and business hub. Singapore is the Wakanda of the world. Singapore overcomes its limitations in
engagement by the wholesale adoption of social media by the government and
private sector, making it the most connected nation in the world. Its reputation as a safe neutral venue makes
it one of the few viable places to hold events such as the historic
China-Taiwan summit and the US-North Korea summit. This means that while it is not particularly
visible in the popular consciousness beyond its region, it is well-known and
respected in the corridors of power.
Both Singapore and the UK have been
consistently ranked on the index since its inception in 2015. What Singapore does is the result of clever
positioning on the global stage. The
immense wealth that it has garnered has also allowed it to finance this
successfully. These are not options
available to many small nations of similar population size.
Smaller nations come in two types:
developing and poor, or immensely wealthy. The former have no soft power because they are
still grappling with issues a developing nations, such as corruption, conflict,
and resource mismanagement. Then there
are nations such as Liechtenstein, Monaco and Luxembourg. They are wealthy, but not cosmopolitan global
cities. Monaco is a tax haven and the
playground of the ultra-wealthy. Whilst
there is some mystique to that, it is not as accessible.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for taking the time to share our thoughts. Once approved, your comments will be poster.