According to explanations by some Western scholars, the above-mentioned two achievements should roughly be seen as victory won with "hard strength". "Hard strength" refers to military, economic and other material levers, while "soft strength" means attracting capabilities from other countries through cultural and ideological appeals.
In the eyes of American scholar Joseph Nye and others who set forth the differentiation of the two strengths, victory in the Cold War, the wide dissemination of US-styled democracy and concept of value were realized through "soft strength". What currently worries them is that the United States is excessively relying on and using "hard strength" and has weakened "soft strength". Two American scholars said that inordinate reliance on "hard strength" in fact would possibly weaken US "soft strength". If other countries feel that Washington is haughty and arrogant, they would unlikely follow its leadership.
An article carried in British newspaper, The Times, points out that a biggest problem facing Europe-US relationship today seems to be such a fact, i.e., the Bush administration is willing to sacrifice its long-term "soft strength" in order to seek realization of its short-term military and diplomatic ambition.
Compared with aircraft carriers, nuclear weapons and airplanes and cannons and other "hard strength", Hollywood films, Coca Cola, Disney, Nike and some other products featuring the symbols of the United States, have greater affinity and influence. For many years, this kind of "soft strength" has not only brought enormous economic benefits for the United States, but has helped extensively spread the US concept of value.
Hollywood is a typical example. Beginning from the 1980s, Hollywood has quickened the pace of its expansion to global markets, its box-office revenues have risen steeply, currently it has 65 percent shares on the Japanese market, and 78 percent shares in Thailand. Among the 100 films sold like hot cakes on the French video and DVD markets in 2002, 77 were Hollywood films. From 1950 to 1970, the profits Hollywood earned from foreign markets accounted for 30 percent of its total benefits, the figure has now exceeded 50 percent, which keeps increasing, it is estimated that the figure will top 80 percent in the next two decades. Hollywood has become the most important export industry of the United States. Hollywood stars and the parts they play have all the more fascinated thousands upon thousands of youngsters around the world.
An expert with the globalization research center of Yale University said that only Hollywood can shoot a film that cost millions of US dollars; and only Hollywood has the strength to set up global sales-promotion networks. Hollywood can also receive great impetus from Washington and help from the US government to open foreign markets. It is hard to compete with Hollywood, McDonald's and other such US brands, because that is not merely a film, a restaurant, but also a strong commercial and cultural system. Behind them is the world's most powerful country-the United States.
After conclusion of the Iraq War, the influence of US "soft strength" began to change quietly. US foreign policy and security strategy characterized by unilateralism are the major reasons for the weakening of "soft strength". A Washington Post report analyzes: Some Middle East intellectuals have aversion to the United States, their dissatisfaction is directed not at US culture, but at the policies of Bush. The United States is paying a "soft strength" price for the victory of "hard strength".
An associate professor with New York University visited Syria after the first Gulf War. A local friend said that he wanted to bring the professor to a special restaurant. A look around there revealed that it was an American chain snack bar, "Hamburger King". Perhaps the period then was the time when the Americans were most pleased in the Middle East. McDonald's had set up branches in almost all Arab countries, a famous American cafe also fought it way into the Middle East.
But since the anti-terrorism war was launched, people in the Middle East have become increasingly disgusted with US products. Before the United States started war against Iraq, US exports to the Middle East region dropped by 25 percent-40 percent. McDonald's declared that it would close 175 branches in 10 Muslim countries, Coca Cola's sales volume also began to go down.
Perhaps the Iraq War would not change the power of US "soft strength", America can still rely on its powerful military and economic strengths to push its concept of value worldwide, but it is impossible to control people's feelings.
In Europe, although criticism made against the war is not as sharp as it was a year ago, a sense of indifference, however, is spreading. A letter from a European friend to the reporter said the Europeans are still watching US films and eating US fast foods as before. The flavor of US culture has not changed, what has changed is people's psyche relating to their approach to this kind of culture.
For many years, the Europeans have never felt the "estrangement of feeling" emerged between them and American brothers. At the mention of the United States, the most complaints uttered by many common people are that the Americans went so far as to reject the "Kyoto Protocol". They said that the Americans are the world's super-consumers, but they ignore the "Kyoto Protocol" and disregard global poverty and environmental problems, thus becoming a selfish stratum for enjoyment.
Some experts are worried that if this kind of sentiment was allowed to go on for long, it would cause people to doubt about the Americans' way of life and the concept of value they pursue. Because some people have begun to think about this question: What kind of culture, what kind of value in pursuit, is doing mischief behind the arrogance of the United States?
The Iraq War gives people the opportunity to re-examine the American "soft strength" from the angle of economic globalization. In recent years, along with the deepening of economic globalization, the United States, as the world's only superpower, has all along been propagating its concepts of culture and value by aid of this process. An article carried in Christian Science Monitor said that as a peerless global superpower, the United States is exporting its culture on an unprecedented scale. From music to mass media, movie to fast food, language to sports, the influence of American culture is expanding mercilessly as the Great British Empire did in the past.
What US enterprises and products have brought about are not only market change, but also individualism-based US concepts of culture and value. This kind of "soft strength" has generated violent collision between it and the different cultures of different nations. In the famous Mexican historical city, Oaxaca, as local intellectuals learned that McDonald's planned to open branches in the city, they immediately launched boycott activities with an aim to protect traditional local culture. Finally, the local government could not but reject McDonald's request.
In the process of economic globalization, the collision between different cultures actually is nothing surprising. The crux of the matter lies in the fact that globalization is not a McDonald's style, nor Americanization. The United States is the most powerful country in the world, it invariably believes its concept of value is universal and so should be accepted by the whole world.
The crux of the Iraq War lies in the idea that not only the social system of a nation or country should be chosen by the United States, but also the concepts of culture and value of a nation should be determined by Washington. The carrot "soft strength" under the "hard strength" big stick has increasingly revealed its "aggressiveness", it is bound to cause violent rebound of other cultures.
Return to Bush Administration Page