ABSTRACT
In Nye's formulation, what soft power absolutely excludes is threatening someone-whether with military force, or economic sanctions, or any other kind of hardball tactics. Equally puzzling is his surprise that some states, especially the most autocratic, turn out to be more effective at manipulating public perception, cleverer at wielding soft power, and more agile in adapting to changing circumstances than are democracies. As a result, far from exploring the various "carrots" that might be used in a potentially dangerous situation, he advises against them, alongside instruments of hard power, in favor of his preferred "soft power of attraction." To recapitulate, the fatal flaw of the "attractive soft power" concept consists in its unduly limited range, since it leaves out a huge range of nonlethal weapons that certainly cannot be considered "hard." But another problem is the concept's hopeless circularity: soft power attracts because it is attractive.
