Anyone advocating "smart power" as a combination of brute force and attractiveness misses a key point: we have lost the lead in it.
America had a great opportunity to exercise its smart power, having emerged victorious from the cold war. Their model was triumphant, their military might unparalleled and feared the world over. People saw the US as a shining light at the end of a tunnel.
What do we have today? Compare the US to a company with a "panic button" which represents brute force. In the rare occasions when the panic button is pushed everyone gives 110% to ensure the company stays afloat. The panic button is revered and its call is taken as an appeal to an employee's honour and loyalty. But what if the panic button keeps on being pushed every five minutes? Everyone is disillusioned, people seek alternative employment, the company falls apart.
Same thing with the US today. By squandering its military might in useless efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq the US have weakened their appeal for their military failures bleaken their successes in other areas. It's not about imposing your way of thinking and your system on populations who in all honesty aren't ready for it. National security is about mere survival. If somebody threatens to nuke you, you nuke him first. Plain and simple, use force only when needed. Instead the operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have become a mishmash of national security, flawed democracy, Halliburton and God knows what else.
The US can't use smart power at all because they lack one of the components, and Europe is too weak on its own. They've got the "I told you not to" high ground, but this is no good tactic for attracting people to your model.
Where will "smart power" come from then? My bets are on India and China. Nations are eyeing up to them as a model for economic development, these countries are investing in Africa and Central Asia, they know their stuff. They don't waste time arguing with the US because they know there's a whole world out there ready to be conquered. You can't mess with them as their military (especially nuclear) might is something to fear without hesitation. Face it, they've got the lead now and they will use it.
Our soft power is our only resort. And we can use it only if we expand our horizons showing everyone else that we are doing it and achieving marvellous results. What are our assets?
1) Education. Our systems are the best. In their diversity they give the individual something beyond mere technical knowledge necessary for his/her profession. It is a global outlook and hopefully a mind that values ambition and effort. As long as other educational systems focus on the utilitarian approach to education, we've got a competitive advantage that we must rub in their faces. Not to impose our system on them, but to encourage them to change their system to something maybe even better than ours!
2) Our values.
We are founded on freedom. Freedom for an individual to dream, to live according to his wills, to satisfy his wants, to make his own decisions.
We are founded on rights. The right to own yourself and everything associated with your life, to own property and dispose of it as you see fit, to pursue your ambitions, to express your thinking and seek knowledge.
We are founded on the individual. Everything begins and ends at every single one of us. No entity is above the individual and his imprescriptible rights. No family, no State, no culture.
These mere three values are worth more than any might, because we are in the RIGHT. We have to realise this and stand armed with these three spears against the aggression by sets of values that aim to impose constraints on our rights, on our freedom or on the individual as a whole. And I speak of China especially here.
3) Trade. The exchange of goods fosters more efficient production and ultimately the best use of resources. Trade is a double-edged weapon, and we can use both edges. It is a vector for conveying our success to others (e.g. exporting our better products) as well as a coercion tool (I won't trade with you because you are crap). Let me exemplify with two controversial case studies:
a) GM seeds being sold to Africa. Now I am no expert in the field of agriculture, but if someone can't grow anything good on his land and we have something that'll grow like mad, it seems reasonable that we will want to sell this good and the poor sod will want to buy it. Free trade, duh. If the African countries don't want to be dependent on our seeds then sometime soon they'll realise that maybe building a lab and a factory is a better investment than buying AK-47s for rebels in a neighbouring country. Their squandering of their own resources and of our aid is no concern of ours because in a liberal world the entity has the right to make wrong decisions.
b) The Jackson-Vanik amendment and the extensions of it I advocate. If trade is free then I'm free to choose whom to trade with. And if the country doesn't satisfy my criteria then I must be free to not trade with them. If we set our criteria wisely we can compel the most despotic and mediocre countries into reform. Not necessarily "our reform", but some kind of change driving them into a new direction.
But is this all? Is it the usual "clash of civilisations" talk? Us against them? Right against wrong? Good against Evil? The never-ending deadlock that lies at the origin of today's troubles, trapping us in a spiral of mediocrity and utter short-sightedness and idiocy? Of course not. If we want others to change and follow our lead we've got to demonstrate we are going somewhere.
Now I maintain that our way of thinking as defined by the culture of freedom, independence, free trade and liberalism is the best so far achieved by mankind. While other mentalities/cultures might have enhanced certain positive aspects of human beings (industriousness, attachment to one's family, loyalty, etc) they have failed miserably to achieve the fine balance that allows our yet imperfect society to function as the leader in world progress. We've made the G7, for God's sake!
The greatest asset we possess is the ability to challenge ourselves and our knowledge. We can think centuries ahead, dream up new ideas, new approaches, new ways of thinking. Our greatest treasure and our best export is therefore ambition and the willingness to pursue it.
We've got an advantage over those able to use smart power: our soft power is stronger, is based on solid ground and is open to progress. Lets therefore focus on developing our thinking and rubbing our advantage into the faces of those who think they're smart enough to progress without reforming their ways.
If we are strong enough to demonstrate our superiority despite a lack of hard power we will show hard power is barely needed at all in a globalised, informatised, liberalised and ultimately CIVILISED world.
No comments:
Post a Comment