The alliance has grappled with diverging internal views over whether NATO should be an instrument of "hard" combat missions—generally the U.S. view—or the preference among some in Europe for "soft" power, like "humanitarian, development, peacekeeping, and talking tasks," as Gates put it.

Economic resources can produce soft-power behavior as well as hard military power. A successful economic model not only finances the military resources needed for the exercise of hard power, but it can also attract others to emulate its example.

As international borders become more porous, nations must use soft power to build networks and institutions to respond to shared threats. In this sense, power becomes a positive-sum game. It is no longer sufficient to think exclusively of wielding power over others. We must instead think of using power to accomplish goals with others.

The assassination of bin Laden was a watershed moment; Obama decided to realize the international role of authority that the US has assumed since World War II.

Over the past decade, China’s economic and military might have grown impressively. But that has frightened its neighbors into looking for allies to balance rising Chinese hard power.

Contending forces—be they from the ruling class or activists organizing from below—make strategic choices based on the quantity and type of the resources they have at their disposal.

Hard power has been used often in the context of national security by a number of states, if the aims have not been achieved it is primarily because of their inability to employ all elements of national power.

It’s time for the South Korean Army to develop “soft power” ― the ability to attract and persuade rather than force, a defense experts said Tuesday. In a security forum in Seoul, retired Gen. Lee Hee-won, a special advisor to the President for defense and security affairs, called for building a “smart” Army to better adapt to changes.