Most people can probably remember the moment when they first realised the seductive power and global pervasiveness of American culture.

The recent conclusion of negotiations on a free trade agreement (FTA) between the United States and South Korea was heralded in domestic and international media as an important step forward for both nation-states’ economies.

Like a revolving door, India has hosted every major world leader in the past six months. All United Nations Security Council permanent members or BRIC countries of emerging economies have had their leaders visit India, the world's second fastest-growing major economy after China.

Distinguished American journal Foreign Policy publishes every year the names of the top 100 intellectuals from various fields who have made a global impact.

After the 2010 elections, it’s not exactly news that Obama has lost America. But in a less public referendum, he also lost the world. Obama’s cocktail party tour of the world’s capitals may look impressive on a map, but is irrelevant on a policy level.

Some observers perceive a change over the past year or so in the priority given to hard power and soft power in Chinese foreign policy. Has there really been a change? From a Chinese perspective, the short answer to this question is that there is both continuity and change.

The Canadian case brings many of these issues, and in particular the aspect of unfulfilled possibilities, into stark relief. Notwithstanding its humiliating electoral defeat at the UN, Canada retains a significant comparative advantage vis-a-vis the global competition in terms of soft power.

Renowned Australian investment banker and philanthropist Philip Wollen Wednesday said that Indian entrepreneurs can cash in on the soft power of the country to reach out to the global markets.