Conceptual Approaches to the Definition of Power in IR Theory

Current state of international relations (IR) is characterized by number of experts as «The New Cold War». In such circumstances exploring ways of reacting on threats and challenges are bringing to the fore. Thereby states, having the needed potential and possibilities, search for the new sophisticated leverages in order to reach necessary political results. The analysis of informational concepts development shows that the importance of power category as a key political resource of any country in its different demonstrations stays the key method of state-to-state communication. In this article author considers the evolution of theoretical approaches for determination of the role of power in accordance with certain political situation in particular historical context. The review of this concept evoltuion in the works of Russian and foreign scientists shows that the representatives of main schools of IR theory have differently assessed and determined the boundaries of using military power and coercive actions, i.e. hard power – on the one hand – and soft power on the other hand, which is defined by professor Joseph Nye as «the ability to attract and co-opt, rather than by coercion» [Nye 2004]. These studies had let to the conclusion about the importance of both of power types in current confrontational international environment. Thus, reservation or sometimes even growing of country's military budget shows its devotion to “hard power”, while spending for “soft power” is also stays its significant item of expenditure. Along with this, author judges that both “soft” and “hard” power concepts have definitional ambiguity, that can pose difficulties while exploring the issue.

1. Alekseeva T. (2016). «Mjagkaja sila» v teorii i praktike mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij [Soft power in theory and practice of international relations]. Politicheskoe prostranstvo i social'noe vremya: identichnost' i povsednevnost' v strukture zhiznennogo mira: tezisy XHKH Harakskogo foruma 26 – 30 maya 2016 g., g. Yalta. Eds. T.A. Senjushkina, A.V. Baranov, P. 5-21. URL: http://c-eho.info/diskussiya/item/2575myagkaya-sila-v-teorii-i-praktike-mezhdunarodnykh-otnoshenij (accessed 29.08.2017).

2. Armitage R., Nye J. (2007). CSIS Commission on Smart Power: A Smarter, More Secure America // Report of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. 2007. URL: https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/legacy_files/files/media/csis/pubs/071106_csissmartpowerreport.pdf (accessed 27.04.2017).

3. Averkov V., Bogaturov A. (2009). Istorija mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij (1945-2008): konspekt lekcij: uchebnoe posobie dlja vuzov [History of International Relations (1945-2008). Summary of lectures:

4. manual for graduate students]. Moscow: MGIMO-Universitet, 520 p.

5. Bogaturov A. (2010). Sovremennye global'nye problemy [Contemporary Global Problems]. Moscow: Aspect Press. 349 p.

6. Bogaturov A. (1997). Velikie derzhavy na Tihom okeane. Istorija i teorija mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij v Vostochnoj Azii posle Vtoroj mirovoj vojny (1945-1995) [The Great powers at the Pacific ocean. History and theory of international relations in East Asia after World War II]. Moscow: Konvert-MONF. 352 p.

7. Braterskiy M. (2014). Ehkonomicheskaya moshch' v mire «zhestkoj» i «myagkoj sily» [Economic power in the world of hard and soft power]. Aktual'nye problemy Evropy. 2014. No. 3. P. 59-96.

8. Davydov J. (2004). Ponjatie zhestkoj» i «mjagkoj» sily v teorii mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij [The concept of hard and soft power in theory of international relations]. Mezhdunarodnye processy. Vol. 2. No. 4. P. 69-80.

9. Fenenko A. (2015). Sovremennaja istorija mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij: 1991-2015: Uchebnoe posobie [Modent history of international relations: 1991-2015]. Moscow: Aspect Press. P.9.

10. Fenenko A. (2016). Real'nost' i mify «mjagkoj sily» [Reality and myths of soft power]. Materials of Russian Council on Foreign Affairs. 27.01.2016. URL: http://russiancouncil.ru/analytics-and-comments/ analytics/realnost-i-mify-myagkoy-sily/ (accessed 16.03.2016).

11. Ferguson N. (2003). Think Again: Power. Foreign Policy. No.134. P.18 – 22. [Электронный ресурс] URL:

12. http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2003/01/01/think_again_power (accessed: 14.05.2016) Ferguson N. (2004). Colossus: The Price of America's Empire. New York: Penguin Press. 416 p.

13. Gallarotti G. (2010). Cosmopolitan Power in International Relations: A Synthesis of Realism, Neoliberalism, and Constructivism. New York: Cambridge University Press. P.13.

14. Gallarotti G. (2011). Soft Power: What it is, Why it’s Important, and the Conditions Under Which it Can Be Effectively Used. Journal of Political Power. Vol. 4. Issue 1. P.25-47.

15. Gusakov A. (2011). «Zhestkaja» i «mjagkaja» sila kak instrumenty vneshnej politiki SshA [Hard and soft power as tools of american foreing policy]. Pyatigorsk, Vestnik Instituta strategicheskih issledovanij PGLUv: sbornik nauchnyh trudov. Vol. 1. P. 15-17. URL: http://old.pglu.ru/science/researches/nii panin/vestnik/v1/Gusakov_A_V.pdf

16. Huning W. (1993). Culture as National Soft Power: Soft Power. Journal of Fudan University. No. 3. P. 23–28.

17. Karaganov S.A., Bordachev T.V. (2013). Liki sily. Intellektual'naja jelita Rossii i mira o glavnom voprose mirovoj politiki [Faces of power. Intellectual elite of Russia and the world on main topic of international politics]. Moscow: Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija – International relations. 252 p.

18. Keohane R. (1986). Neorealism and its Critics. Neorealism and the Study of World Politics. New York: Columbia University Press. P.12.

19. Keohane R. (1986). Realism, Neorealism and the Study of World Politics. Neorealism and Its Critics, ed. Robert O. Keohane. New York: Columbia University Press. P. 11-12.

20. Keohane R., Nye J. (1971). Transnational Relations and World Politics: An Introduction. International Organization. New York: International Organization. Vol. 25. No. 3. P. 329-349.

21. Kissinger H. (1994). Russian and American Interests Юfter the Cold War. Rethinking Russia’s National Interests. Ed. by Stephen Sestanovich. Washington: Center for Strategic and International Studies. P. 1-3.

22. Kissinger H. (2001). The White House Years, New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks. 1521 p.

23. Kosachev K. (2013). Mjagkaja sila i zhestkaja sila – ne summa, no proizvedenie [Soft and hard power – not a total, but a product]. Indeks Bezopasnosti. Vol .19. No. 4. P.14.

24. Mellisen J. (2005). Wielding Soft Power: The New Public Diplomacy. Clingendael Diplomacy Papers No. 2. P.6.

25. Morgenthau H. (1967). Politics among Nations. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies. 419 p.

26. Nye J. (1990). Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power. New York: Basic Books. 336 p.

27. Nye J. (2004). Mjagkaja sila i amerikano-evropejskie otnoshenija [Soft power and american-european relations]. Moscow: Svobodnaja mysl' – XXI. P.15. URL: http://www.situation.ru/app/j_art_1165.htm.(дата обращения – 17.04.2018).

28. Nye J. (2004). Soft power: The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs. P.1–23.

29. Nye J. (2007). Notes for a soft-power research agenda. Power in World Politics. Ed. by F. Berenskoetter, M. J. Williams. New York: Routledge. Taylor & Francis Group. P. 163-164.

30. Nye J. (2009). Smart power. New Perspectives Quaterly. Vol.26. Issue 2. P. 7-9.

31. Nye J. (2011). The future of power. New York: Public Affairs. P.320.

32. Parshin P. (2014). Dva ponimanija «mjagkoj sily»: Predpossylki, korreljaty i sledstvija [Two perceptions of sort power: premises, correlates and effects]. Vestnik MGIMO Universiteta. Vol. 2 (35). P. 14-21.

33. Rosenau J. (1997). Along the Domestic-Foreign Frontier: Exploring Governance in a Turbulent World. New York: Cambridge University Press. 467 p.

34. Sicherman H. (1997). The Revenge of Geopolitics. Orbis. Vol. 41. No. 1. P. 12-13.

35. Taylor A.J.P. (1954). The Struggle For Mastery In Europe: 1848-1918. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 638 p.

36. Torkunov A., Mal'gin A. (2012). Sovremennye mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija. Uchebnoe posobie [Modern international relations. Text edition]. Moscow: Aspect Press. 688 p.

37. Tuch H. (1990). Communicating With the World: US Public Diplomacy Overseas. New York: St. Martin’s Press. 224 p.

38. Wang H. & Lu Y.-C. (2008). The Conception of Soft Power and its Policy Implications: a comparative study of China and Taiwan. Journal of Contemporary China. Vol. 17. Issue 56. P. 425-447.