New forms of soft power hardening

Over Christmas, threats of nuclear war between Pakistan and Israel were the headlines in many of those regional newspapers as the Pakistan defence minister, Khawaja Muhammad Asif, turned to Twitter after believing a fake news story about Israel. This is just the latest in a tumultuous time for the truth; with real world consequences. As the year comes to a close, a look back on 2016 reveals the continued growth of new soft power, hardening into a real influence. The original term soft power, first introduced by Harvard Professor Nye in 1990, was loosely used by political scientists to describe a country exerting its influence on another without exercising actual physical, or hard power. The term soft-cyber power is a newer extension of the original term I coined for a class that I am teaching, and this reflects the changes over the past several decades, to include powerful extensions of soft power: social media and online influencing, including hacking, misinformation (both fake and false news) and other undermining digital actions displacing legitimate information and systems. In this day and age, these influences might come from anywhere: industry, governments, political/activist groups or individuals. What this means is that what was once mostly the domain of states has now converged to become much more all-encompassing. One of the first causalities of this form of influence is the truth: nonfactual ‘facts’ are now being manufactured. As Francis Fukuyama recently penned that 2016 was the year where we are heading into a ‘post-fact world’ as social media has given platforms where there were none before. On top of that hackers can now do damage without leaving their bedroom. Andy Warhol once stated that everyone would be famous for 15 minutes, but not even he could see the power of the individual in today’s world. Just one example of this was when I recently clicked onto a YouTube “documentary” about Africa and was at first trying to remember if I’d seen it before because the opening scenes looked familiar. Shortly after the start, it was apparent that the picture quality was dubious (though, still surprisingly good considering various origins of the video footage) and that entire ‘movie’ was made up of different scenes, in other words, copied from different sources and pieced together without any recognition of the original sources nor context. In academia this might constitute plagiarism and if so would lead to censure and possible expulsion for a student (getting fired for any faculty who were to be guilty of it). However, with technology that is readily available to anyone who wants to, there are opportunities to create anything that they might desire. As I continued watching, the narrator was attacking the president of Rwanda, with misinformation. Soon it became clear that the condescending narration was an attack on Bill and Hillary Clinton: with manufactured ‘facts’ and by smearing the reputation of the entire nation of Rwanda (among others). Looking into some of the reasons and motivations behind utilizing soft-cyber power to spread misinformation and undermine legitimate news, there are several possible concepts. One of the main reasons is that with this technology to create and then broadcast any political agenda, anyone has access to potential wide distribution. Anybody with a laptop who is willing to put in the time and effort, can easily distribute an un-vetted and biased viewpoint to the world (examples include the terrorist ‘Islamic State’). Given the tools, it is no surprise that imperialism, racism, and inferiority complexes tend to rear their ugly heads as those who would otherwise be unable to voice their opinions in a transparent public forum now have a voice. These inferiority complexes are also alive and well within the geopolitical leadership of former colonial masters. For this country the French are the main antagonists, as it is they who are losing the most as a strong and independent Rwanda no longer kowtows neither linguistically nor commercially to the Franco-Europeans (with the loss of the French language a blow to the traditional soft power) . Traditionally, soft power was mainly the domain being state sponsored; with soft-cyber power it is not only individuals or corporate interests that are involved, but a magnified state sponsorship. Recently, the White House accused Russia of meddling in the just-concluded American electoral process. Considering that manipulation of information and public opinion can occur in America, with a long tradition of free and open journalism, the risk is high that it will occur in African nations, as opportunities present themselves to those with self-serving (including profit) agendas. Undoubtedly there are more and more people who want to be “experts” without having to bother to go through the rigorous academic training that authentic experts, who spend decades and considerable resources to hone their knowledge and skills. It is now possible to be (in) famous for 15 minutes by simply uploading or posting something online. This means that the extensive propagation of ideas (both positive and negative) that a couple of decades ago would have been impossible without the expenditure of a lot of resources, can be replicated relatively quickly after utilizing the accessible, inexpensive or free software. Therefore, those with greater resources (such as a major country like Russia) are exponentially stronger than before. At the same time formerly voiceless individuals can also access enough resources to end up participating in soft-cyber power. Motivations are varied, from the individuals wanting a feeling of empowerment to nation-states furthering geopolitical goals. Underlying the attacks on formerly suppressed peoples can be construed as feelings of cultural superiority, especially former colonies. After all, it is easy to feel superior, finger point and shake heads when groups remain in poverty and in a constant state of war. While a flawed narrative of untruths is not just a disservice to thinking people everywhere; it is downright dangerous. Unfortunately, the platforms that are available for meddling with different forms and extensions of soft power that continue to be developed, regardless of motivations. While it is now more difficult for vested interests to utilize traditional hard power to intervene, like was done with Patrice Lumumba in 1961, soft power becomes increasingly simplified. Untruths and meddling need to be vigorously guarded against, particularly in the upcoming election year in Rwanda. The writer is a Canadian scholar who has conducted regular visits to Rwanda and has given talks at the University of Rwanda and at the Kigali Independent University.

Opinions

New forms of soft power hardening