soft power

What defines the power that a country holds? Some nations are able to exert more influence than others and these countries emerge as global superpowers that shape the social and economic status of our globalized world. A powerful military and a large spending power are what superpowers are able to flaunt, so how are other nations able stand their ground against these powerful hands.

Singapore plays the diplomacy card, or more broadly speaking, we utilise soft power. Soft power takes the form of persuasion, be it through diplomacy, business deals, the use of the media, or any other spheres of influence. Singapore maintains diplomatic relations with 189 countries. She is part of ASEAN, the Commonwealth, the UN and the Non-allied movement. Singapore remains on the side of international law, and does not take sides during conflict between two nations. This is a big reason why Singapore was chosen to host the meeting between the United States and North Korea. In this way, Singapore maintains near global diplomacy, resulting in the Singapore passport being one of the most powerful in the world. For a small nation with little national resources, diplomacy seems to be the only way we can keep afloat as a nation state. As the Minister of Foreign Affairs once said, “History is replete with examples of failed small states. Our founding Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew always reminded us repeatedly that we have to take the world as it is, and not as we wish it to be.” It is a setback that we cannot change or overcome, but Singapore’s foreign policy insist that we do not sit back when it counts. Singapore does not solely rely on diplomacy to ensure peace. The government spends the most on our defence, developing military technology and employing compulsory national service for all Singaporean men.

It is important that governments utilise a balance of soft and hard power in their foreign and domestic policy. Domestically, governments serve to please the people in exchange for power and most of the time this is better achieved with soft power rather than hard. Different governments have different approaches to foreign policy, some prefer the amicable diplomatic stance while other promise fire and fury. It is difficult to say which is a better approach, and the masses support can waver on whims based on the media, so it is better to let future historians decide which route had been the best.