When we look back at history, it is the large-scale military conflicts that captivate us most. We intuitively relate international conflicts with bloody wars. From the Thirty Years’ War in the 17th century to the two world wars in the 20th century, we tend to believe that military confrontation is the most effective way to maintain the balance of power. From triangular trade in the 17th century to new imperialism in the 19th century, we can witness many cases in which Europeans subjugated the rest of the world to their superior military power. However, after WWII, the number of military conflicts globally declined sharply. During the cold war, the US and the Soviet Union did not get into direct military conflict. Parallel to the declining number of military conflicts is the increasing number of trade wars, including the one between the US and Japan in the 1980s and the current one between the US and China. In both the cold war and the trade wars, soft power, rather than military power, is the key to successful resolution in international conflicts.

What is soft power? It is contrary to hard power—the use of military or economic coercion—and emphasizes on using economic or cultural attraction to reach agreements. According to Joseph Nye, the soft power of a country mainly rests on its culture, political ideology, and foreign policies.

The Cold War was a decades-long rivalry between conflicting political ideologies. The US and the USSR, the two remaining superpowers after WWII, embraced completely different ideologies. In 1947, President Truman established the policy of Containment that aimed to prevent Communism from prevailing outside the Soviet Union’s sphere of influence. On the contrary, the Soviet Union attempted to consolidate its communist ideology in Eastern Europe and spread it around the world. In fact, the Korean War and the Vietnam War were primarily fought because of ideological rivalry—while the Soviet Union tried to preserve communism in Asia, the US sought to curtail it in fear of the domino effect. Meanwhile, the US attracted the European states with its soft power and thus alienated the Soviet Union. To gain favor from Western Europe, the US sent billions of dollars to Western European states through the Marshall Plan. Benefiting greatly from this plan, many European countries supported the US rather than the USSR. Plus, the shared belief in capitalism and democracy ensured that Western Europe stood firmly with the US. Struggling for decades, the US finally won the ideological war. Under Gorbachev’s reforms, Eastern European states broke apart from the USSR and established democratic political systems. This signaled the victory of American ideology.

Thirty years after the cold war, we now have the trade war between the US and China, a soft power conflict between two strong powers. Although the US on the surface tries to bring China to the heel by economic coercion (hard power), the underlying competition between cultural values and foreign policies is more important. In recent years, over 500 Confucius Institutes have been established in more than 140 countries around the globe. These non-profit institutes help spread Chinese language and culture in foreign countries, improving the global recognition of Chinese culture. However, for the US, its position as the dominant culture is threatened by China. Over the past decades, citizens in every region watched Hollywood films and listened to American hip-hops, but all of these may change as Chinese culture becomes more popular. This necessitates the US to take measures against China’s “cultural invasion” around the world. By weakening Chinese economy through the trade war, the US attempted to reduce China’s spending on exporting cultural values.

China’s economic policies that attract many countries (including some allies of the US) are another crucial cause of the trade war. Since 2013, China has been working on its ambitious economic project One Belt, One Road (OBOR). The government has spent nearly 5 trillion dollars building an economic corridor across Asia, Europe, Africa, and America. By the time of its estimated completion in 2049, OBOR is predicted to impact a list of countries that account for 62% of the world’s population and 40% of its economic output. The major aim of this project is to establish an extensive network of infrastructure – including pipelines, railways, and roads – that link China to the rest of the world and meanwhile narrow the infrastructure gap between developing countries and developed countries. Receiving aid from China, many countries along the Belt Road nourish affinity to Chinese government. In contrast, as Trump has pulled out of international treaties such as TPP and Paris Climate Agreement, many countries wavered their faith in American foreign policy and doubted whether the US could still lead the world. Under this circumstance, to secure its international status, the US had to weaken China’s economic power and consequently its attraction to other countries. For this reason, the trade war broke out.

Despite the pursuits of soft power by many states, the importance of military power cannot be neglected. The intense arm race between the US and the USSR was a significant feature of Cold War. The arm race was most evident during Reagan administration. Its rapid nuclear buildup and loose talk of nuclear war frightened Moscow, so the Kremlin broke off arms control negotiations, placed SS-23 nuclear missiles in Czechoslovakia and East Germany, and moved Soviet nuclear submarines closer to the US. It was the superior military power of the US that forced the Soviet Union to back down. Had the US solely relied on its soft power, the USSR might have built up a strong army that could overturn the result of Cold War. Similarly, in terms of the current trade war, we cannot eliminate the probability of military conflicts in South China Sea, and the superior military power gives the US an advantageous position in the negotiation.

If governments solely emphasize hard power, great devastations may occur; if governments only focus on soft power, they cannot protect their borders effectively. Clearly, it is governments’ job to find a balance between hard and soft power. Is it possible to maximize state benefits while minimizing bloody military conflict? Our governments will answer it.