Hard Power is Still King

Even in the field of international relations, where consensus is notoriously hard to find, it is impossible to deny the fact that states have become increasingly interdependent—or mutually reliant on one another—in recent decades. While this statement provokes little division amongst scholars, their uniformity of thought quickly disintegrates when it comes to analyzing how such interdependence has transformed the ways in which states can influence others or, in simpler terms, exercise power. But it gets more complicated; power comes in different forms: hard and soft. The former is coercive, often executed through military threats and based on tangible resources such as the army. In contrast, the latter is persuasive, derived from attraction and emulation, and grounded on intangible resources such as culture. Because of increasing economic interdependence, it has become more popular to assert that soft power is growing in importance. However, this essay contends that it is precisely because of interdependence that hard military power has maintained its supremacy on the world stage.

Perhaps most crucial to this contention is understanding the globalized world’s fragility; it is only as strong as the resources upon which it depends. Above all, it is most certainly not strong enough to act as a safeguard against militarization as these resources—its very lifeblood—become ever more scarce. Chinese-American trade relations are a perfect example of this reality. One of China’s largest exports is processed petrochemical products, the free trade of which benefits countries like the United States who reciprocate with the promise of specialized, capital-intensive goods. The logical exploitation of each country’s respective comparative advantages has both contributed to economic growth and fostered relative peace between the two world powers. 

However, China’s ability to sustain bilateral trade patterns will assuredly become increasingly limited in the coming decades as the supply of crude oil continues to dwindle. Both countries will still need oil, so they will likely use their military might to obtain the small amount left. This is perhaps why, as trade relations have recently weakened, the U.S. has deployed more troops to the region, and China has increased its military budget and development programs. 

Of course, some would argue that this newfound independence will be the dawn of a new age of soft power and cooperation; but, this theory finds itself in splendid isolation from the harsh realities of the current political sphere. The most important truth is that Earth simply doesn’t enjoy the privilege of perpetually abundant resources. Oil reserves, for example, are projected to be entirely depleted by 2070. While this age of globalization has been made possible by countries trading their abundant resources, their increasing scarcity is sure to cause the disintegration of these complex systems and partnerships. Once economies lose their interdependence, the probability of military conflict being used to solve problems increases drastically. Even for those whose theory views economic interdependence as a peacekeeper, this would be hard to deny.

Even if the fallacy of endless resources were to be entertained, it would be impossible to overlook the crucial role hard power plays in maintaining the open lanes of global commerce of those very resources. Interdependence would be both meaningless and unsustainable without the security and preservation provided by military policing. For instance, the Seventh Fleet, a division of the American navy active in Asia, has done as much for the Asia-Pacific region’s economic stability as the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) or the World Trade Organization (WTO). Its policing of international waters ensures fair play in the market. Just recently, the fleet responded to China sinking Vietnamese fishing boats and protected those from Indonesia along with Malaysian oil tankers, a powerful example of hard power sustaining interdependence—and peace. Those who argue that this form of monitoring should be done by intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) rather than states need only look to the records to see the naivety of their argument. Since securing admission to the WTO, China has employed predatory trading practices such as dumping, discriminatory tariffs, and forced technology transfers, all while repeatedly flouting complaints and regulations imposed by the organization. It appears as though the only means by which trade can be kept fair and reciprocal is through the independent militaries of countries like the United States. Residual concerns about the coercive use of force can significantly impact a state’s behavior even if the probability is low. American hard power in regulatory policing is truly what keeps the soft power of interdependence meaningful in global politics.

In sum, it is clear that interdependence and globalization have failed to usher in the mythical future of soft power dominance about which many fantasize. Instead, they have prolonged the reign of military hard power. To believe otherwise is to succumb to a fantastic delusion in which resources are infinite, and rogue states can be trusted to act honorably. That is not to say that “soft” interdependence can’t have benefits; on the contrary, it has merely created new issues for coercive hard power to solve in pursuit of their realization. In the end, these issues are what continue to make hard power king on the world stage.