On June 12, 1987, the world changed with six words.
Those words came from Ronald Reagan, who was the United States President at the time. And they took place in front of the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin.
The image of the American president speaking in the shadow of Germany’s most famous landmark should have been glorious and awe-inspiring. It was anything but.
For the Cold War was in full swing. Tensions were high. And a hideous concrete barrier stood between Reagan and the iconic gate.
That barrier, of course, was the Berlin Wall. A heavily fortified edifice that split the city in half and had come to symbolize the divide between the Soviet Union and the West.
Reagan surely knew why the Berlin Wall was there. But he also recognized that it didn’t need to be there. What was built up could always be removed.
And so, he called on his Soviet counterpart – General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev – to do just that.
Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall, he exclaimed. The crowd in front of him cheered voraciously.
The Soviet premier didn’t come down to the Brandenburg Gate with a sledgehammer on that day, or any other. But he surely heard Reagan’s words. The whole world did.
And less than 30 months after Reagan’s speech, the Berlin Wall did indeed fall.
The Soviet Union collapsed. The Cold War ended. And Berlin was at last reunified.
It was a turning point in history — an exuberant, peaceful moment. And it might not have happened that way without Reagan’s words.
Reagan’s tactics that June day in Berlin were a classic example of what’s known as Soft Power.
This term – coined by political scientist Joseph Nye — refers to a nation’s ability to persuade others to do what it wants without force or direct coercion.
Instead of relying on military offensives, economic sanctions, or trade embargoes to influence change, Soft Power practitioners use indirect methods to get what they want.
They might spout off a few well-timed words to turn the tide of public perception. They might lean on the titans of industry within their borders to transform economic markets a continent away. They might rely on entertainment conglomerates at home to model cultural behaviors abroad.
Soft Power has existed for centuries. But few have mastered it as the United States has. Our prowess in this area is so pronounced that it’s practically taken for granted.
Invade Cuba with Starbucks and Coca-Cola, goes one old joke. The Communist regime will fall within a day.
It was going to take more than Coca-Cola to topple the Soviet Union though. So, Reagan —a man who was dubbed The Great Communicator — used his voice instead. He pounced on Gorbachev’s prior platitudes of openness, calling the premier’s bluff by demanding action.
Reagan knew full well that Gorbachev couldn’t take down the Berlin Wall. What lay behind it was simply too ghastly to display.
But now, thanks to Reagan’s words, everyone was wondering what lay behind the curtain. Was the Soviet Bloc truly as fearsome as its nuclear arsenal? Or was it just a house of cards?
It turned out to be the latter. And because of that, a 30-year military stalemate ended without a single shot fired.
Decades have now passed since the Soviet Union fell. And in that time, the world has soured on Soft Power.
What was once an invaluable diplomatic tool is now a mark of exploitation. A symbol of imperialist meddling. A usurping of a sovereign nation’s destiny.
Such views are not without merit. Soft Power has surely been abused plenty over the years.
But leaving well enough alone isn’t exactly a panacea either.
You see, as humans, we have a propensity to emulate behavior. This tendency is why parents have such an impact on young children. It’s why education so frequently takes place in group settings. And it’s why traditions remain resonant through the generations.
Dismantling Soft Power leaves societies without influencers to emulate. And in that vacuum malfeasance can grow.
It’s no wonder that the most isolated nations tend to be the most corrupt, the most dangerous, and the most volatile. It’s hard to thrive in the shadows. Just look at the Soviet Union.
Yes, Soft Power itself is not a cancer. In fact, it can be a force for good.
But only if we use it responsibly.
I don’t work for the government. I didn’t study political science in school. And I’m hardly versed in international affairs.
Yet, I consider myself a practitioner of Soft Power.
For I work in a sizable organization. One with hundreds of employees, scattered across multiple states.
If I want to influence how we go about our business, brute force isn’t an option. I can’t pull rank, and I don’t have a bullhorn large enough to carry across time zones.
Soft Power is my only option for leaving my mark on my organization’s processes. I must rely on influence, rather than edict.
Some may bristle at this scenario. But I love it.
I like impacting change through influence. I like modeling behavior. I like building a coalition to get everyone pulling in the same direction.
And most of all, I love what Soft Power requires of me.
It requires me to be nuanced and well-rounded. It requires me to truly listen to others and to understand their perspectives. And it requires me to work within those parameters to find an agreeable solution.
This is a much better method of resolution than going into a scenario with guns blazing. I’m far more likely to drive enduring change through Soft Power. And I’m far more likely to remain agreeable through the process.
But I needn’t be the only one to reap these benefits.