Development due to Soft Power, or the Lack of it:

Whether Promotion of Soft Powers Preserves or Erodes Development?

By Kushagra Yadav* & Kanhai Parikh, Penultimate Year Students, BA. LLB. (Hons.) at Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar, India.

ABSTRACT

The role of culture in the development of individuals and societies has been acknowledged by scholars and policymakers. In the era of soft power, cultural means of state play important roles in the development of human capital and socio-political development. However, the promotion of soft power can also erode the cultural identity of marginalized communities. This paper explores how the interaction between development through culture and soft power works, with a focus on how culture contributes to development beyond the lens of economic growth and social cohesion. It also analyses how measures of promoting soft borders impact the notion of ‘cultural development’, and whether these measures preserve such development or through misappropriation erode cultural progress. The paper examines evidence from India and around the world to answer these questions. The study finds that while the propagation of soft power is essential for a country's diplomatic relations, the approach and content of such propagation need to be scrutinized. In India, where a vast majority of ethnic groups are present, the propagation of soft power through a homogenizing approach erodes the individual identity of these groups, creating dissent and sharp divisions in the long run. The paper argues that soft power has the scope to impact development in a way that makes a country homogenous and destroys any variations of culture. Hence, the policy must ensure that the promotion of soft power does not undermine the cultural integrity of marginalized communities. In conclusion, the paper recommends an inclusive approach and safeguards to promote development to soft power that promotes the subaltern communities without derogating their identities.

Keywords- Soft Power, Cultural Development, Inclusivity, Political Values etc.

I. INTRODUCTION

Indian soft power diplomacy has taken off to witness a greater level of importance under the current regime, where some of these have been policy calls through which India has showcased its ‘cultural’ richness. The increased importance of Yoga, the international millets day and propagation of Buddhism are a few examples, however, while propagation of these culturally significant practices is a diplomatic feat it can also be a cultural turmoil due to the tendencies of misappropriation. Last year by raking the awards in the 95th Academy Award on two entirely distinct entries, [1] India’s soft power had hit a milestone. Whether India is able to capitalise on the socio-economic benefits of these achievements with its capabilities through intelligent diplomacy is a moot question of common parlance, however, another issue to be flagged with the existence of such resources is whether and if at all India is doing enough to preserve culture and the promote accurate imagological representation of such diverse cultures. The point to be noted again in the above example (which is present throughout in a nation like India) is that both these entries that bagged the awards are two very distinct entries showcasing two very distinct communities.[2] Here the point of how inclusive a nation can get for the purpose of the socio-economic benefits derived out of better soft power is to be questioned.

Whether a nation is willing and able to promote the subaltern communities under this pretext or on the contrary further subjugate these communities through cultural appropriation and/or derogation of identities. Such cultural impacts also impact overall development of human capital or socio-political development. It must be understood that cultural means of state play important roles in the development of individuals and communities. The importance of the notion of culture and development becomes more important with the increasing importance of soft borders in the polarised world.

So, for the purpose of determining how the interaction between development through culture and soft power works one needs to initially focus on how culture contributes to development and moreover look at development beyond the lens of economic growth and social cohesion. Secondly, what is to be analysed is that how Culture in itself forces individuals and societies into social and economic conditions and practices that fit in the traditional outlook of development too. Thereby it is presented that culture too has a notion of economic and social development.

Moreover, relating culture to soft power, it is to be tested how measures of promoting soft borders impact on the aforesaid notion of ‘cultural development’. Lastly, does these measures actually preserve such development or through misappropriation erodes cultural progress has to be checked in context of evidences from India and around the world.

II. CULTURE AS A MEANS FOR DEVELOPMENT

To define culture, it cannot be restricted just to the anthropological inheritance or the heritage of a community or a society, it moreover includes the knowledge and skills and any other capabilities acquired by an individual from the society.[3] Moreover culture has been seen as complex set of patterns that flow from knowledge, traditional values and social norms.[4] Thereby, this is where the subject matters like organisational culture flow from. The positive outlook of these patterns should be real development.

The primary conception of culture as a means for development can be seen from social, economic and political paradigms. Cultures shape our surrounding to fit in the society and even regulates the society to some extent. An example of the west that showcases cultures that value individualism and emphasize the importance of developing independence and confident social abilities, taking the social initiative in situations is considered a significant indicator of social maturity.[5] A similar example of social regulation was present in the Hinduism, Jain, Sikh and Buddhist philosophy of ‘karma’ which although presents the concept of causality, which suggests that actions have consequences. It implies that if someone takes the appropriate actions, they will experience positive outcomes, while if they take inappropriate actions, negative outcomes will follow. This concept is fundamental to many areas of human understanding, from moral philosophy to scientific inquiry such as it has to be seen as a tool enforcing deterrence in early society.

Secondly, cultural along with its precepts of diversity has to been seen as an essential to political and social development. Cultural uniformity can give rise to political immorality[6] as populism can appeal to set of similar values and emotion. The Cohesion Paradigm thereby requires a multiculturalist approach.

Thirdly, culture is both a tool of gaining economic sustenance and through the soft power it results in socio-economic growth. Moreover, the cultural and historical context develop an overall sense of economic restructuring. Japan being a brilliant example with its post-war growth. The long folk mentions of “seppuku”, ritual suicide by disendowment i.e., dying in battle being an honour presented the sense of fighting till death during the war.[7] Tracing behaviourally it has to be seen as the intensity of dedication to the state, which somewhat translates into the post-war economic development through their modern day ‘hustle culture.’

Additionally, Sustainable Development Goals comprise of aspects of both environmental, economic, social and political goals that aim for inclusive development. The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) stressed the need of respecting and appreciating cultural diversity in 2020 using a human rights-based approach. This strategy is crucial for building a climate that encourages the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).[8] In conclusion, advancing cultural diversity is not only a moral required, but also a crucial step in the direction of attaining global sustainable development.

III. SOFT POWER, AN INSTRUMENT OF COHESION OR COERCION?

Culture is not only an important element in the development paradigms but is of prime importance in international relations and diplomacy. Robert Nye, extensively wrote on the issue of soft and hard power exerted by states on each other. Soft power depends on “co-opting” rather than coercion through military strength.[9]

According to Nye, a country's soft power is based on three distinct factors: its culture, its political values, and its foreign policies. First, a country's culture can be a powerful source of attraction to others if it is appealing and captivating. This includes aspects such as art, music, cinema, literature, and cuisine, which can all contribute to the perception of a country's soft power.

Secondly, a country's political values play an essential role in determining its soft power. When a country upholds its political values and principles at home and abroad, it can enhance its moral authority and attract others towards its way of thinking. This includes values such as democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.

Finally, a country's foreign policies can also significantly impact its soft power. When other nations view a country's foreign policies as legitimate and rooted in moral authority, it can further enhance its soft power. This includes factors such as a country's ability to resolve conflicts peacefully, its contributions to global development, and its leadership in promoting global cooperation.

Conclusively, Joseph Nye's theory suggests that a country's soft power is not limited to just one factor, but rather a combination of its culture, political values, and foreign policies. By cultivating these resources, a country can enhance its global influence and attractiveness to others.[10]

Thereby, three distinct choices that are to be met here,

1. Primarily, what attracts public curiosity, focus or meets essential needs of public. (Identification)

2. Secondly, it has to achieve popularity inside the nation (Preservation)

3. Thirdly, it has to be promoted without derogation to capture public opinion across borders. (Promotion)

These can be seen as three stages –

A big pothole in the promotion of soft power is not what just culturally prevalent but also, what aligns with political values prevalent of the state too. Since foreign policy missions are out of the scope of the debate at hand, if the cultural missions in recent times in India and abroad have been closely aligned to an ideological agenda of the majority.

This is a significant pothole for the subaltern communities who seek to preserve their identities and culture. The American perception towards consumerism and capitalism in various regions had similar repercussions on its Red Indian community often leading to the exploitation of their lands and resources. Historically, Native American lands have been seized, and their resources have been extracted and exploited by corporations and government entities, leading to the displacement of Indigenous peoples and their communities. Historically, Native American lands have been seized, and their resources have been extracted and exploited by corporations and government entities, leading to the displacement of Indigenous peoples and their communities.[11]

One of the most significant impacts of capitalism on Native American communities is the loss of land and natural resources. The privatization of land and resources has often led to their exploitation, resulting in environmental degradation and the loss of traditional cultural practices that are closely tied to the land.[12] Capitalist economic policies have also contributed to the marginalization of Native American communities. Economic development projects, such as the construction of pipelines or mining operations, have often been approved without the free, prior, and informed consent of Indigenous communities, leading to the violation of their rights and the destruction of their lands and cultural heritage.[13]

Additionally, capitalism has led to the commodification of Native American cultural practices and objects, such as sacred artifacts and traditional knowledge.[14] This commodification has resulted in the appropriation of Native American culture and the exploitation of their traditions for profit, further contributing to the marginalization of their communities.

Therefore, the preservation of capitalism has had a significant impact on Native American communities, often leading to the exploitation of their lands, resources, and cultural heritage. It is essential to recognize the ongoing effects of capitalism on Indigenous peoples and work towards implementing policies that respect their rights, sovereignty, and cultural heritage.

The preservation for soft power has repercussions falling on such subaltern communities. The same being the case when and if India tries to replace China as a hub of natural resources, in the garb of international reputation of the provider, it needs to stay wary of further exploiting the Advasi Communities in region, with concerns and cries already towards handing the forests back to them as they know the best for the forests.

IV. ANOTHER CONCERN OF SOFT POWER WITH POLITICAL VALUES

It has to be recognised that promoting soft borders can help in multiple socio-economic and political advantages such as soft power can attract foreign investment by projecting a country's cultural and economic strengths to the world. For example, India's use of soft power has led to increased interest in its yoga and ayurveda industries, which has resulted in an influx of foreign investment.[15] If such benefits can trickle down and help the culture to be widely and accurately known it can help promote industry and experts from niche and marginalised cultures.

However, here is the advent of another concern of how selective preservation of cultures prevents multiple cultural agendas from sprouting out.

The Inclusivity Paradigm

The 21st century has seen the emergence of a new concept known as "inclusive development," which has since been included in various scholarly and policy texts. It can be traced back to a variety of ideas that are grounded in a variety of fields.[16] We would find inclusive development to focus on social well-being and protecting the ecosystem services provided by nature through redefining political priorities. While some people see inclusive development as simply combining social aspects with economic growth through political approaches, we see it as emphasizing both social and economic growth.[17]

The inclusivity theory must be well-studied and researched in the current global context. Not only does its contemporary and classic interpretation need to be studied and reworked with the growing global conscience it also needs to start including inclusivity in newer contexts where climate crisis, propagation of soft power and the rise of nationalistic tendencies tend to erode the distinct identities that people hold.

Each region in the world will have a different culture or tradition. This holds especially true in the context of India. The Indian sub-continent is vast and richly diverse in that every 100 meters, a new dialect is spoken, and every district has its belief systems and traditions.

In New India, the current government is trying to project to the world and its citizens that there exists a significant flaw. It needs to consider our diversity in the smallest of districts and towns. The current government policy, where it is trying to propagate its soft power through the idea of Hinduism and Vasudeva Kutambhakam, excludes the small pockets of diversity present in every State and every district of India.

India does not have a laid-out soft power doctrine where the State is trying to promote a particular ideology; instead, it is subject to interpretation by every new government. Historically, India has adopted a "we welcome all, we work with all" soft power approach, where the country acts as a mediator, advisor, and neutral third party in conflicts to help de-escalate them. This is evidenced by India leading the Non - Proliferation Movement.

In the current political scenario, India, since 2014, has been going forward with an aggressive plan for its foreign policy. The Indian Foreign Policy wants to show that it is stern and will take the first initiative regarding threats to national security. Another area where Indian Foreign Policy has progressed is its use of soft power and exporting Indian ideas to the outside world. Examples include yoga, ayurveda, and "namaste" during covid. Another facet that has emerged with this flex of India's cultural roots as soft power is alarming generalizations spreading worldwide about what Indian culture is like.

Currently, India is portrayed accurately as a nation moving towards a majority religion dominance, slowly and steadily becoming more intolerant and oppression towards minorities and pockets of society that do not agree with the majoritarian narrative.

The current propagation of Indian culture is reasonably inaccurate and not inclusive in its approach. The perception that is currently spreading paints the whole country with a single brush. It neutralizes the culture more than what can be accepted and is accurate.

Indian culture, as previously mentioned, is diverse and rich in its root and is very diverse in the subcultures that exist within it. Ve y simple example would be how Hindi Imposition is increasing towards the Southern States and how the Central government is unable to or unwilling to recognize that it cannot paint all of India with the same brush dipped in saffron paint.

During the propagation of Indian culture, the way it is currently being done works towards increasing the publicity of the culture throughout the world, but due to the harsh and almost aggressive method of doing so, this is seeping into the local Indian narrative as well.

It can be seen in the oppressive bans and crusades that continually keep happening in the name of saving the culture. The current narrative of wanting to paint all communities as a nuclear family instead of cousins is also decreasing the tolerance inside India. With a continuous increase in reporting of communal crimes and intolerance, this strategy is slowly backfiring. The intolerance seen throughout the country is being reported more and more, and an increased critique is also being published towards this method of generalization of the culture by the framers of the current policy.

Tribal cultures are another example of this. The heartland of India has a very different perspective and way of interpreting culture than tribals do. The consumption of cow or buffalo meat is a prevalent and day-to-day phenomenon in multiple states of the country, but with the current narrative, it is being ostracised. The consumption of certain meats is being made into a taboo and is even being criminalized in certain states. This trend is growing at an alarming rate, and even if it is not being criminalized, local vigilante groups are cracking down on the consumption and sale of this meat. Doing this, whole cultures and districts are denied some primary food sources.

All of these are examples of how wanting to turn India into a country with a completely homogenous culture is harming India at its core. By making sure that the whole world perceives India as a place with one culture, the current policy framework is influencing the narrative outside India and within. It denies the existence of subcultures that do not fall within the majority's narrative. Since this has been happening consistently and with almost corporate efficiency, it is making Indians feel like their values and traditions passed on for ages are not accepted anymore and are invalidating the feeling of being Indian.

Another significant problem that arises from the propagation of culture in such a brutal way is that it is also trying to mix two very different concepts. The idea of being Indian and being an "ideal" Hindu is mixed, threatening the rights of every person who does not comply with the narrative that the policy framers want.

As every student has been taught since the first grade, a core tenet of India has been unity in diversity. This very core principle makes such an amalgamation of cultures into a nation that is being questioned. The current narrative in the country, which promotes the acceptability of only one variant of Indian culture being acceptable, is increasing hate crimes and and vigilante squads, all of which justify their actions to protect the culture or the nation.

Choosing how to practice one's culture is an inherent right of every person. By c classifying the way the ideal Indian practices their culture and propagating that aggressively outside of India and making it the current soft power doctrine, the policy framers are diminishing the cultural validity of millions of people and ostracizing them by force, law, or simply a shame.

In conclusion, the propagation of soft power can also have severe consequences inside a country. This is what is happening in India at the moment. India is not a country where a homogenous culture can be promoted. We must keep in mind the diversity that exists in India and respect it.

Can Capabilities Work?

Culture as a means to development is also a driving force for the developing capabilities. The benefits if they trickle to the indigenous population are a good impetus to incentivise “self-promotion and preservation” of cultures and identities. If the all communities, without any preferential biases, are given equal opportunity to present their folks, music, skills and expertise etc., there is enough evidence of global recognition and upliftment for many spheres of population. The example is in Korea where art has substantial influence that it event exerts on the global scale through music, dramas and films. The authorities recognise the popularity and inducts it in diplomatic missions, here it’s a rather push to what gains attention than pushing what is politically valued in order for it to get attention subsequently. The cause-and-effect relationship in such a model is opposite to what pushing selecting agendas do.

Coming back to the Elephant Charmer, India's success in promoting its culture and capabilities, suggests that it is the state’s responsibility to provide equal opportunities for all cultures to be showcased and recognized. When this happens, it can serve as an impetus for incentivizing self-promotion and preservation of cultures and identities. Ultimately, this can lead to the development of capabilities and the recognition of diverse cultures and identities on a global scale India has already proved its point of being globally publicised by “capabilities”. It’s upon the state to give an equal footing to all cultures at hand.

V. SOCIETAL COMPENSATION – A WAY FORWARD?

Lastly, coming back to the issue of subaltern communities being at the mercy of the political values the state wishes to implement soft borders though. Certain solutions to this can be pondered through one of the basic tenets of development economics which is the presence of Kaldor-Hicks Compensation Criteria. It suggests that a policy or project is economically efficient through social welfare, that is, if the gains to the winners exceed the losses to the losers, and if the winners could compensate the losers to make them better off while still being better off themselves.[18]

The biggest pitfall is that any cultural erosion or appropriation is certainly hard if not impossible to economically or mathematically derive. However, social measures in such case for the most affect communities can be brought in place. In such situations policy action is needed not for economic compensation but policy frameworks for affirmative action for cultural preservation for the costs these communities bear for the socio-economic growth of the nation including higher investments and tourism. Thereby, agreeing to the Kaldor-Hicks Model the state being the beneficiary must also compensate the cultures that bear such costs.

Models for such affirmative already exists albeit not in context of soft power but in context of socio-cultural preservation of minority. One example very close to home is of the Article 29[19] and Article 30[20] of the Indian Constitution that provides safeguards for running and establishing minority educational institutions with options of monetary and non-monetary aids from the state. Similar safeguards can help preserve cultural identities that further helps in cultural development of society.

This can create a virtuous cycle as these safeguards can help these cultures mature and sprout into helping India penetrate more soft borders through them.

Virtuous Cycle through “Societal Compensation”

VI. CONCLUSION

In conclusion, it can be said that while the propagation of soft power is essential for a country's diplomatic relations as a whole. But what is being propagated and the method in which is done is essential to scrutinise. In European countries the approach that has been taken by the Indian government can be successful as minority tribal or ethnic groups are not as great in number but in India due to the vast majority of ethnic groups present it erodes the individual identity of these groups. In the short term this strategy may seem lucrative as it supposedly brings together the nation but it creates dissent between people who take this doctrine as their own and those who wish to preserve their own cultural integrity or even simply not conform. Furthermore, this approach in the long run is bound to create sharp divisions in a country like India and is likely to create an "us and them" mentality which has the scope to become a chasm. Soft Power fully has the scope to impact development in a way that makes a country homogenous and destroys any variations of a culture.

REFERENCES

1. Acharya, S. (2018). Soft power and foreign policy: India's search for a global role. Oxford University Press.

2. Ajani, Oludele & Adeniyi, Adeoluwa & Oyekola, Isaac. (2021). Culture and Development. 10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_981-1.

3. Chen, Xinyin & Chung, Janet & Lechcier-Kimel, Rachel & French, Doran. (2011). Culture and Social Development. 10.1002/9781444390933.ch8.

4. Constitution of India. (1949). Retrieved March 31, 2023, from https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/COI.pdf

5. Coulthard, G. S. (2014). Red skin, white masks: Rejecting the colonial politics of recognition. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

6. Gupta, Joyeeta & Pouw, Nicky & Ros-Tonen, Mirjam. (2015). Towards an Elaborated Theory of Inclusive Development. European Journal of Development Research. 27. 10.1057/ejdr.2015.30.

7. Hicks, J. (1939). The social cost of monopoly power. Economic Journal, 49(196).

8. Hurst, G. C. (1990). Death, Honor, and Loyality: The Bushidō Ideal. Philosophy East and West, 40(4), https://doi.org/10.2307/1399355.

9. Inclusive development: a multi-disciplinary approach. (2017, March 17). Inclusive Development: A Multi-disciplinary Approach - ScienceDirect. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2016.11.013

10. Kauanui, J. K. (2016). Hawaiian blood: Colonialism and the politics of sovereignty and indigeneity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

11. LaDuke, W. (2016). All our relations: Native struggles for land and life. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

12. Nye, Joseph S. (1990). Bound to Lead: the changing nature of American power. New York: Basic Books.

13. Nye, Joseph S. (2011). The Future of Power. New York: Public Affairs. ISBN 9781586488925.

14. Rathje, S. (2009). The definition of culture: an application-oriented overhaul. interculture journal: Online-Zeitschrift für interkulturelle Studien, 8(8), 35-58. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-455417.

15. Tauli-Corpuz, V. (2016). Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples: The impact of free trade and investment agreements on indigenous peoples’ rights. United Nations General Assembly, A/HRC/33/42.

16. Tylor, E. B. (1924). Primitive culture (7th ed.). Brentano's. https://doi.org/10.1037/13482-000

17. United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (2020) The future we want: the roleof culture. Culture for Sustainable Development. http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/culture-and-development/the-future-we-want-the-role-of-culture/culture-enables-and-drives-development/

*******

[1] BBC News. (2023, March 13). The Elephant Whisperers: Indian short documentary is best at Oscars 2023. BBC News https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-64935394

[2] BBC News. (2023, March 13). RRR at Oscars 2023: Why India's Naatu Naatu song wowed the jury. BBC News https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-64899481

[3] Tylor, E. B. (1924). Primitive culture (7th ed.). Brentano's. https://doi.org/10.1037/13482-000

[4] Ajani, Oludele & Adeniyi, Adeoluwa & Oyekola, Isaac. (2021). Culture and Development. 10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_981-1. (p. 2).

[5] Chen, Xinyin & Chung, Janet & Lechcier-Kimel, Rachel & French, Doran. (2011). Culture and Social Development. 10.1002/9781444390933.ch8. (p. 5).

[6] Rathje, S. (2009). The definition of culture: an application-oriented overhaul. interculture journal: Online-Zeitschrift für interkulturelle Studien, 8(8), 35-58. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-455417

[7] Hurst, G. C. (1990). Death, Honor, and Loyality: The Bushidō Ideal. Philosophy East and West, 40(4), (p. 511–527). https://doi.org/10.2307/1399355

[8] United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (2020) The future we want: the roleof culture. Culture for Sustainable Development. http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/culture-and-development/the-future-we-want-the-role-of-culture/culture-enables-and-drives-development/

[9] Nye, Joseph S. (1990). Bound to Lead: the changing nature of American power. New York: Basic Books, (p. 166-167).

[10] Nye, Joseph S. (2011). The Future of Power. New York: Public Affairs. ISBN 9781586488925, 84.

[11] Tauli-Corpuz, V. (2016). Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples: The impact of free trade and investment agreements on indigenous peoples’ rights. United Nations General Assembly, A/HRC/33/42. (p. 4-5).

[12] Coulthard, G. S. (2014). Red skin, white masks: Rejecting the colonial politics of recognition. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. (p. 68-74).

[13] Kauanui, J. K. (2016). Hawaiian blood: Colonialism and the politics of sovereignty and indigeneity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. (p. 14-17)

[14] LaDuke, W. (2016). All our relations: Native struggles for land and life. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. (p. 3-25).

[15] Acharya, S. (2018). Soft power and foreign policy: India's search for a global role. Oxford University Press (p. 56).

[16] Inclusive development: a multi-disciplinary approach. (2017, March 17). Inclusive Development: A Multi-disciplinary Approach - ScienceDirect. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2016.11.013

[17] Gupta, Joyeeta & Pouw, Nicky & Ros-Tonen, Mirjam. (2015). Towards an Elaborated Theory of Inclusive Development. European Journal of Development Research. 27. 541-559. 10.1057/ejdr.2015.30.

[18] Hicks, J. (1939). The social cost of monopoly power. Economic Journal, 49(196), p. 696-712.

[19] Constitution of India. (1949). Article 29 Retrieved March 31, 2023, from https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/COI.pdf (p. 30).

[20] Constitution of India. (1950). Article 30 Retrieved March 31, 2023, from https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/COI.pdf (p. 30).