Obituary: The Death Of Joseph Nye Sounds Requiem For Soft Power | Vijay Kumar

Like Life, the trajectory of history, too, cannot be wholly immune from irony. Joseph Samuel Nye, the distinguished Political Scientist and Professor Emeritus of Harvard University, who propounded the concept of “soft power” and emphasised its importance for liberal democracy, died on 6th May, 2025. His death at the ripe age of 88 years coincides with the erosion of soft power — not only in other parts of the world— but in his own country, the United States, after the emergence of Trump.

Joseph Samuel Nye, along with Robert Keohane, co-founded the International Relations Theory of neoliberalism, which they developed in their 1977 Book: Power and Inter-Dependence. But Joseph Samuel Nye will always be remembered for coining the concept of soft power. He graduated from Princeton University and did his Doctorate from Harvard, and thereafter, taught at Harvard University till his last breath. Eventually, he became the dean of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. He was also chosen for the post of Assistant Secretary of Defence for International Security Affairs in the Bill Clinton administration. According to the 2011 Report, compiled after surveying 1700 international relations experts, he was rated as the 6th most influential scholar.

Soft power means a country’s ability to influence others through attraction rather than coercion and payment. The soft power is manifested through cultural appeal, such as music, movies, and even cuisine, which can influence the attitude and preference of citizens of other parts of the world. For the promotion of soft power, the Universities and their independent and autonomous functioning are critical, as the knowledge and the ideas produced and propagated there have great influential power.

But the free flow of ideas is generated only when there is a guaranteed right of freedom of speech and expression. Thus, the guarantee of individual rights and their robust enforcement by the independent judiciary is sine qua non. So is the existence of the rule of law, which postulates equal treatment and enforcement of impersonal rule by impartial and independent bureaucrats.

The country becomes advanced only when it succeeds in harnessing its soft power with hard power. In fact, soft power is more critical for the evolution of a country as an evolved country. For instance, many countries in Europe, starting from Scandinavian countries--- Denmark, Sweden, Finland and Norway, to Austria, Holland and Switzerland, Canada in North America and Australia lack hard power, and yet, are regarded as highly progressive and advanced countries solely on the strength of their soft power. The same can be said about Japan, which is highly developed without hard power. On the other hand, Gulf countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, are rich without soft power and for that reason alone cannot be called advanced countries.

The existence of soft power is critical for the sound health of liberal and deliberative democracy. An authoritarian system, like Russia, is a great military power, but it can never become a democratic and liberal country. Hard power alone cannot make any country a developed one.

The cultural ethos of civilisation is also determinative of soft power. So far, India is concerned, the tradition of pluralism and debates has been the hallmark of Indian civilisation. From ancient times onwards, Indians have debated vigorously, and that has led to Nobel Laureate, Prof. Amartya Sen, to choose the title of his famous book: Argumentative Indian. There have been varieties of ideas and counter-ideas, currents and cross-currents that marked the evolution of Indian civilisation. The arrival of Muslim, almost 1500 years ago, further enriched the soft power through suffusion of music, language, gardening, architect, cuisine and last but not the least, new language which, with cross-fertilisation with local dialects, engendered a beautiful and wholly indigenous language, Urdu, without which Hindustani music just cannot be conceived at all. Democratic politics cannot survive in the absence of soft power.

The democracy rests on the assumption that the public has the right to criticise the government and these rights should not entail any cost. If the citizens and NGO groups, who pan the government, are silenced through legal, but otherwise dubious means by deploying the instrument of tax- raid, cancellation of grant to Universities/NGOs and subjecting them to intimidation through criminal investigation, soft power becomes casualty, and democracy degenerate into “electoral autocracy” where election alone matters and nothing else.

In present times, in both the US and India, criticising the government exposes the individuals/opposition parties / Universities / NGO groups to retribution from the government. The emergence of leaders like Trump in the US, Erdogan in Turkey, Viktor Orban in Hungary and Narendra Modi in India has marked the erosion of soft power. All these leaders attack their opponents and have destroyed the independent functioning of democratic institutions. The most important current event amply brings this to the fore. Even after the ceasefire announced by both India and Pakistan, war is continuing unabated through propaganda, misinformation and deliberate silence. Here is one example that depicts graphically the collapse of soft power in India. There is a government radio channel, Vividbharti, meant mainly for airing songs. The news is aired only three times in a day--- in the morning at 8 a.m., afternoon at 2 p.m. and evening at 9 p.m. – and the rest of the time it is meant for airing songs and music. But these days, even after a week of ceasefire, the unending cycle of news and endless commentaries are being aired, and the airing of music and songs has been almost stopped. This is when the facts are stark and crystal clear. The Pahalgam attack was barbaric and not only the entire nation — cutting across the people of all faiths ---- but also the entire world felt outraged and denounced it. In fact, the people of Kashmir and all political parties observed a complete strike, and the assembly passed a unanimous resolution to condemn the horrific act and complicity of the Pakistan military and its government. It was also clear that the diabolic act was unmistakably sponsored by the Pakistan Military and condign retribution from the Indian Government was a cri de Coeur. Indian Govt, after careful planning, retaliated by launching “Operation sindoor” and succeeded in establishing its superiority over the military might of Pakistan and the entire country---once again cutting across all faiths---- are beholden to the unique valour of our armed forces. But Trump, an ultimate imperium in imperio, was fixated on a dollar deal with Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates and felt Indo-Pak conflict as an irritant. He was equally eager to show that he is not merely a deal-clincher but also a peacemaker and would, perhaps, lobby for the Nobel Peace Prize. It was this calculation that provided an off-ramp in the form of direct and hectic intervention by the Trump administration and behind-the-scenes nudging by Russia, China and Saudi Arabia, and the pressure was exerted on Modi and his Pakistani counterpart to ensure cessation of conflict. I personally feel that Modi acted as a statesman by agreeing to a ceasefire and deserves praise. The war entails a heavy cost for the loser, nay winner too, and therefore peace should not be hostage to the shrilling noise of hawks and bigots. At this stage, Modi was vilified more by Hindutva thugs and goons than by left and liberal intellectuals. The toxic Hindutva is a demon on which the Modi Govt has been riding since 2014 and was, one day, bound to become an albatross around his neck. Modi, after a statesman-like speech, started placating and pacifying Hindutva fanatics, and that explains the ongoing propaganda through TV and Radio channels. The Indian armed forces are too professional and competent to need a prop of hyper- nationalism. Be that as it may, the music, one of the most cardinal components of soft power, is dispensed with to facilitate the propaganda of the government.

The founder of the concept of soft power has kicked the bucket at a time when his seminal concept is in deep crisis with no redemption in sight. The true tribute to the life of Joseph Samuel Nye desiderates that democrats and liberals, world over, to rise to the challenge and retrieve the loss of soft power, whose absence would cripple the democracy.

(Author: Vijay Kumar, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India and Author Of the Recent Book The Theory Of Basic Structure: Saviour Of The Constitution And Democracy)