<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">A global approach has almost generalized over the last decades, suggesting that human security and, related to it – society security- are among the most important themes of contemporary international relations.The management of the Yugoslavian crisis, the terrorist attacks of September the 11th, 2001, as well as the debates over US and its allies’ military interventions in Kosovo, Afghanistan or Iraq, pointed out, on the one hand, that states are not prepared to deal with the cross-border threats of the 21st century alone, and, on the other hand, the fact that military interventions (the “hard” approach to security) do not always represent the optimum solution in managing international security. However, peace-building and security building (the ”soft” approach) are usually more discreet, do not attract attention, do not draw the media interest.In recent studies, the issue of “soft” power and “hard” power has been increasingly discussed. “Soft” power refers to the power derived mainly from cultural and imagological sources, exercising its influence more through persuasion or by attracting the weak one to a particular model rather than by coercion. ”Hard” power consists especially of military and economic means contributing to enforcing the will of one actor over another actor. These two forms of power do not exclude each other, but, on the contrary, combining “soft” with “hard” means facilitates greater efficiency in achieving the main goal.</abstract>

A global approach has almost generalized over the last decades, suggesting that human security and, related to it – society security- are among the most important themes of contemporary international relations.The management of the Yugoslavian crisis, the terrorist attacks of September the 11th, 2001, as well as the debates over US and its allies’ military interventions in Kosovo, Afghanistan or Iraq, pointed out, on the one hand, that states are not prepared to deal with the cross-border threats of the 21st century alone, and, on the other hand, the fact that military interventions (the “hard” approach to security) do not always represent the optimum solution in managing international security. However, peace-building and security building (the ”soft” approach) are usually more discreet, do not attract attention, do not draw the media interest.In recent studies, the issue of “soft” power and “hard” power has been increasingly discussed. “Soft” power refers to the power derived mainly from cultural and imagological sources, exercising its influence more through persuasion or by attracting the weak one to a particular model rather than by coercion. ”Hard” power consists especially of military and economic means contributing to enforcing the will of one actor over another actor. These two forms of power do not exclude each other, but, on the contrary, combining “soft” with “hard” means facilitates greater efficiency in achieving the main goal.

Culture As Soft Power In International Relations

“Decebal” Training Centre for Communications and Information Technology, Sibiu

International conference KNOWLEDGE-BASED ORGANIZATION

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

{"article-title":"Culture As Soft Power In International Relations"}

A global approach has almost generalized over the last decades, suggesting that human security and, related to it – society security- are among the most...

Culture As Soft Power In International Relations

Online veröffentlicht: 24. Nov. 2015

Seitenbereich: 32 - 37

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/kbo-2015-0005

Schlüsselwörter
soft power, hard power, mental power, cultural power, national power

© 2015 Nicolae Haneş et al., published by De Gruyter Open

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Culture As Soft Power In International Relations

Online veröffentlicht: 24. Nov. 2015

Seitenbereich: 32 - 37

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/kbo-2015-0005

Schlüsselwörtersoft power, hard power, mental power, cultural power, national power

© 2015 Nicolae Haneş et al., published by De Gruyter Open

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Schlüsselwörter
soft power, hard power, mental power, cultural power, national power