Who Gets Targeted with Soft Power? Evidence from Henry Kissinger’s International Seminar
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 6411228 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Adam Scharpf (0000-0001-6665-9025, autor correspondente) |
| Ano | 2025 |
| Volume | 77 |
| Fascículo | 3 |
| Páginas | 604-649 |
| Data de publicação | 2025-07-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sim |
| Open Access | Não |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | World Politics (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 0043-8871 • E-ISSN: 1086-3338 |
| Editora | Project MUSE (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1353/wp.2025.a964466 |
| OpenAlex | W4412038270 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Referências citadas | 34 |
Many states, nongovernmental organizations, and philanthropists use soft power to achieve their political goals. However, we know little about which countries these actors target. The author argues that given the large number of potential targets and the high costs of conducting influence campaigns abroad, soft power entrepreneurs strategically direct their efforts toward those countries in which their campaigns have the best chance of making a difference. The author expects that campaigns predominantly target liberal democracies, since the free exchange of ideas and opinions is likely to generate the intended admiration and attraction. To test this argument, the author draws on hand-coded attendance data from one of the most prestigious exchange programs during the Cold War: Henry Kissinger’s International Seminar (1952–1968). Results from numerous tests reveal that liberal democratic countries were more heavily targeted by Kissinger’s program than were nonliberal countries. Together, the article shows how (non)state actors strategically influence foreign intellectuals to forge international alliances
Economics · International trade · Physics · Political science · Power (physics · Soft power · Thermodynamics · International Development and Aid · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Law · Political Conflict and Governance
Regime types and regime change
Visiting the hegemon
Does Soft Power Matter? A Comparative Analysis of Student Exchange Programs 1980â2006
International Military Education and Training
Political institutions and academic freedom
The Alma Mater effect
Public Diplomacy and Soft Power
Rising Powers and Grassroots Image Management
Exporting Influence
In Search of Soft Power
Schools of Thought
Does Sportswashing Work? First Insights from the 2022 World Cup in Qatar
Does Warfare Matter? Severity, Duration, and Outcomes of Civil Wars
Estimating Dynamic State Preferences from United Nations Voting Data
Who Democratizes? Western-educated Leaders and Regime Transitions
Transgovernmental Networks as an Apprenticeship in Democracy? Socialization into Democratic Governance through Cross-national Activities
The Diplomatic Core
Wither Elites? The Role of Elite Credibility and Knowledge in Public Perceptions of Foreign Policy
Why Governments Have Their Troops Trained Abroad
Is China a Status Quo or Revisionist State? Leadership Travel as an Empirical Indicator of Foreign Policy Priorities1
Neoliberal Economists and Capital Account Liberalization in Emerging Markets
Democracy, autocracy and the news
Elites in the Making and Breaking of Foreign Policy
Sometimes Less Is More
Foreign Aid and Soft Power
Identifying Ideologues
Are Western-Educated Leaders Less Prone to Initiate Militarized Disputes
Questioning More
US professional military education and democratization abroad
Soft Power
Estimating one-sided-killings from a robust measurement model of human rights
When human capital threatens the Capitol
Does Public Diplomacy Sway Foreign Public Opinion? Identifying the Effect of High-Level Visits
How the Chinese Government Fabricates Social Media Posts for Strategic Distraction, Not Engaged Argument
| Velocidade de citação | historical |
|---|---|
| Altamente citado | Não |