Soft Power Is Bullshit! How Shared Interests, Not Values, Shape International Relations

Ilan Manor & Guy J. Golan

American Behavioral Scientist2026https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642251407781article
AJG 1ABDC B
Weight
0.50

Abstract

Since its introduction in 1990, the Soft Power paradigm impacted how states secure their interests and obtain their foreign policy goals. In this article, we assert that the world is undergoing a process of profound structural change that will culminate in a modern-day Triumvirate as global power will be held by three giants—China, India, and the USA. In such a world, the relative power of individual states will diminish, leading to new forms of collective bargaining, which we term Strategic Alliances. Collectively, Alliance members may alter the behavior of a Giant. To introduce the theoretical foundations of Strategic Alliances, we use the case studies of the Abraham Accords and China-Pakistan ties. Key to our work is the realization that the Soft Power paradigm can no longer account for how states obtain foreign policy goals. In a world of Giants, the role of norms and values is being supplanted by shared interests and shared threats, while states with opposing sets of ideals are joining to secure their interests. The concept of Strategic Alliances can help policymakers understand and navigate this new world. Specifically, policymakers can seek to position their state as a beneficial member of different Strategic Alliances.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642251407781

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{ilan2026,
  title        = {{Soft Power Is Bullshit! How Shared Interests, Not Values, Shape International Relations}},
  author       = {Ilan Manor & Guy J. Golan},
  journal      = {American Behavioral Scientist},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642251407781},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Soft Power Is Bullshit! How Shared Interests, Not Values, Shape International Relations

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.