The latest hot button in conversations all across the world
is ISIS. Here in the U.S it has gain major news media attention. ISIS, also
known as Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant and Islamic State, major goal is
to create an Islamic state across Sunni areas of Iraq and Syria. The problem most
of the western world sees with this organization is its extremist methods of
force, like massive killings, public executions and crucifixions. This has
created a major alert and threat to states all around the world. Some have come
to believe it is stronger threat than Al Qaeda.
In the past
couple of weeks the U.S. has taken action over ISIS threat. At first
surveillance was sent over Syria to gain more information of the group. Today
the U.S. is at war and has sent several air strikes over Syria to demolish this
dangerous group. More than 50 other countries have joined anti-ISIS coalition. Actions taken by other countries after the
U.S. decision can show how much soft power the U.S. has over other states.
After the
U.S. initial decision to airstrike Syria and Iraq, U.S. officials did not use
coercion to get other states to also place attacks. They persuaded other
countries that ISIS is a real threat to many nations and action is needed. President
Obama spoke with the U.N. two days after sending airstrikes to several militant
targets in Syria. He urged other countries to join the effort to dismantle ISIS
“network of death.” This is an example of the U.S. soft power among the world.
It can be
argued that the U.S. used hard power to get other states to join. The U.S. has a strong military and economy which
places them in a high rank of worldly power. They have legitimate authority
over there own government and have in the past set norms and rules of
appropriateness for other countries. We see this reflected in the U.S.
Influence in popular culture around the world. So some may question that the
reason that other countries joined was not because they feared the Islamic
state but instead feared the U.S. if they didn’t follow along.
The U.S. strong and large military
power can be threatening to other counties. What is flawed with this argument
is that there is no direct proof that the U.S directly threaten other countries
to follow their actions. Instead it was the art of persuasion and the bandwagon
approach to join in on the attacks. When a large world power makes a decision
in most cases its allies and other states join in as well because of the
influence of soft power.
What can be said is the use of hard
powers are the actual air strikes against the Islamic State. The U.S. does not
intend to persuade and seduce the ISIS to stop their gruesome executions but
instead destroy the group itself. It has come to the severity that the U.S.
government sees no other way to stop the group. The U.S. will use their hard
power to get them to stop one way or another.
Whether the U.S. and the others
states who joined the anti-ISIS coalition hard power is successful is still
unknown. The country can be at the war for many years. If the U.S. comes out
victorious and destroys ISIS it will ultimately prove its legitimate authority
and power it has over the world.
Sources: http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/08/world/isis-fast-facts/
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/25/world/middleeast/obama-syria-un-isis.html?_r=0
Sources: http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/08/world/isis-fast-facts/
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/25/world/middleeast/obama-syria-un-isis.html?_r=0
ReplyDeleteThere’s no denying the US has a lot of power when it comes to international affairs, and I definitely agree that soft power was involved in the US leading so many international states into war with ISIS. However, I’m not sure I can say hard power was completely non-existent in this. I agree with the notion that there’s no proof to say the US threatened other countries to join us, however I think the image of America is kind of an unspoken threat in itself. What I mean by this is it’s no secret the US has power. And it’s no secret the US is willing to use their power if that’s what it comes down to. I think in the end, most countries have come to the realization then when it comes to war, they’d rather be with America then against America and I believe that with this idea in the back of their heads, not much persuasion by the US is needed to get other countries on board when it comes to foreign affairs.
I agree with you that it is difficult to separate the hard powers influence from the soft power. In fact, without a doubt these two are very much linked. Soft power is only effective when backed by hard power. And without soft power, hard power has no use in negotiating. Only when a state has the hard power to back up what they say on the international stage will other states listen. The US has both the economic and military power to back up their soft power and the soft power to effectively persuade others to listen.
DeleteBecause soft power is so tough to put a finger on, it's usually hard to measure just how much a country has, or how much they used in a certain situation. With ISIS, I don't think there has been much soft power exerted by the United States. ISIS doesn't care about imitating our culture or our political values. In fact, those are two of the main reasons why they want us obliterated. It can certainly be argued that ISIS is not acting rationally. Therefore, hard power is the only way that the United States is going to exert any sort of power over them.
ReplyDeleteThe soft power here exists in the anti-ISIS coalition. The United States seems to be the benchmark for countries around the world. They do want to imitate our culture and political values. Therefore, when our President makes a decision and expects cooperation, they feel pressured to cooperate. This could very well be the reason why the United States is often the first country to organize attacks such as this. Putting aside the fact that we have the strongest military, perhaps other countries become hesitant to take action until they see us take action.