Skip to main content
Access every election story that matters
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week for 24 weeks
Access every election story that matters
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

Joseph S. Nye is a professor at Harvard University and author of The Future of Power.

Russia's interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, and its suspected hacking of French president-elect Emmanuel Macron's campaign servers, should surprise no one, given President Vladimir Putin's (mis)understanding of soft power. Before his re-election in 2012, Mr. Putin told a Moscow newspaper that "'soft power' is a complex of tools and methods to achieve foreign-policy goals without the use of force, through information and other means of influence."

From the Kremlin's perspective, colour revolutions in neighbouring countries and the Arab Spring uprisings were examples of the United States using soft power as a new form of hybrid warfare. The concept of soft power was incorporated into Russia's 2013 Foreign Policy Concept, and in March, 2016, Russian Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov stated that responding to such foreign threats "using conventional troops is impossible; they can be counteracted only with the same hybrid methods."

Story continues below advertisement

What is soft power? Some think it means any action other than military force, but this is wrong. Soft power is the ability to get what you want through attraction and persuasion rather than threats of coercion or offers of payment.

Soft power is not good or bad in itself. Value judgments depend on the ends, means and consequences of an action. It is not necessarily better to twist minds than to twist arms. Osama bin Laden neither threatened nor paid the men who flew aircraft into the World Trade Center in September, 2001: He attracted them by his ideas to do evil.

The soft power of attraction can be used for offensive purposes. Countries have long spent billions on public diplomacy and broadcasting in a game of competitive attractiveness – the "battle for hearts and minds." Soft-power instruments like the Marshall Plan and the Voice of America helped to determine the outcome of the Cold War. After the Cold War, Russian elites believed that European Union and North Atlantic Treaty Organization enlargement, and Western efforts at democracy promotion, were designed to isolate and threaten Russia. In response, they tried to develop Russian soft power by promoting an ideology of traditionalism, state sovereignty and national exclusivity. This resonated in countries like Hungary, where Prime Minister Viktor Orban has praised "illiberal democracy."

Information warfare can be used offensively to disempower rivals, and this could be considered "negative soft power." By attacking the values of others, one can reduce their attractiveness and thus their relative soft power. The available evidence suggests that when the Russians began their intervention in the U.S. presidential election in 2015, their objective was to sully and discredit the democratic process. The election of Donald Trump, who had praised Mr. Putin, was a bonus.

Now, Russian interference in European democracies' domestic politics is designed to reduce the attractiveness of NATO, the embodiment of Western hard power, which Russia views as a threat. In the 19th century, the outcome of contests for mastery of Europe depended primarily on whose army won; today, it also depends on whose story wins.

Information warfare goes well beyond soft power, and it is not new. Manipulation of ideas and electoral processes by cash payments has a long history, and Hitler and Stalin were pioneers in radio attacks. But broadcasting which seems too propagandistic lacks credibility and thus does not attract – or produce soft power among – some audiences.

With international politics becoming a game of competitive credibility, exchange programs that develop personal relations among students and young leaders are often far more effective generators of soft power. In the 1960s, the broadcaster Edward Murrow said the most important part of international communications is not the 10,000 miles of electronics, but the final three feet of personal contact.

Story continues below advertisement

But what happens in today's world of social media, where "friends" are a click away, fake friends are easy to fabricate and fake news can be generated and promoted by paid trolls and mechanical bots? Russia has perfected these techniques. In addition to formal public diplomacy mouthpieces like Russia Today and Sputnik, Russia employs armies of paid trolls and botnets to generate false information that can later be circulated and legitimated as if it were true. Then, in 2016, Russian military intelligence went a step further, by hacking into the private network of the Democratic National Committee, stealing information and releasing it online to damage Hillary Clinton's presidential candidacy.

But while Russian information warfare has been somewhat successful in terms of disruption, affecting the 2016 U.S. election somewhat, it has failed in terms of generating soft power. The Portland Consultancy in London publishes a "Soft Power 30" index that ranks Russia 27th.

And a Chicago Council on Global Affairs poll in December indicated that Russia's popularity among Americans was the lowest since the Cold War year of 1986.

As some analysts point out, the best response to a "fire hose of falsehoods" is not to try to answer each lie, but to forewarn and inoculate against the process. As Mr. Macron's victory has shown, the European elections of 2017 may benefit from such forewarnings.

Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2017.

Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies