Commenting on U.S.'"smart power"

With President Barack Obama entering the White House, the curtain of the "great reform drama" in U.S. foreign policy has raised. Then, Hillary Rodham Clinton, the new secretary of state, has undoubtedly come to the limelight to be the most conspicuous, outstanding figure among those players "ascending the stage".

"Smart power", as a new-fangled concept sprinkled through Hillary's confirmation hearing in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on January 13 has drawn worldwide attention. The word "smart" heralds in a vivid, concentrated way an incoming change of U.S. foreign policy.

Hillary Clinton has now formally set forth the "smart power" concept, which was first proposed and later enriched by Harvard intellectual Joseph Nye Jr. and some other ace American scholars. With the introduction of smart power, she was designed apparently to direct at new conservative foreign policies of President George W. Bush's aggressive unilateral strategy, which one-sidedly stresses the "hard power". In recent years, the Bush strategy has not only inflicted heavy losses to the U.S.' hard power but let its image slide down drastically worldwide. So, the nation's foreign policy has come to a dead end and the situation has to change.

On the definition of "smart power", she was quoted as saying that "we must use what has been called smart power, the full range of tools at our disposal – diplomatic, economic, military, political, legal and cultural – picking the right tool or combination of fools for each situation", so as to resume the U.S.' global leading position.

In the years to come, the United States will not only unite with its friends but also engage its adversaries; it will not only maintain and fortify the existing allies, but also conduct new cooperation. In short, "smart power" is neither hard nor soft, but to shift onto the synergetic integration of hard power with soft power from the excessive use of hard power or force.

It can be envisaged that the U.S., which is to resort increasingly more to "smart power", will appear with a goodwill and bona fides and possibly focus more of its attention to seeking moral support and, tactically to increasing its communications and coordination with all parties, big powers in particular. Such changes are now not so novel as a matter of course, since the Bush administration already made some similar changes during its second term of office.

The change of the U.S. from a very haughty, arrogant global power to one with a greater aspiration for cooperation deserves an endorsement of the international community anyway. At the same time, however, we should also acknowledge that what future changes the US foreign policy will bring about is precisely not the strategic goal but ways to attain it. The U.S. has not and will not alter the general orientation of spreading or disseminating its American-style democracy and freedom and defending its global interests. This is where our special heed should be given while trying to get to know the concept of "smart power"

To China, this new concept has given rise to an additional amount of skepticism: What kind of the U.S.' China policy is contained in the "smart power"? Or how the new administration's policy towards China would differ from the preceding Bush government?

Overall, the new US government will also go on extending the existing policies toward China on some key issues, but there are expected to be some changes with the application of "smart power". What merits particular attention is that the U.S. will attach more importance to its cooperation and coordination with China on such global issues as climate change, energy, the war on terrorism and joint efforts to cope with global financial crisis; the U.S. will look forward even more to promoting bilateral cooperation for the settlement of multilateral issues in a bid to safeguard its global interests.

To be frank, China and the U.S. should further enhance their coordination on the resolution of global issues, so as to help create a still bigger space with more win-win opportunities and facilitate their mutual trust. On the other hand, the U.S. will set forth more demands on China by inferring to it as a "responsible global responsibilities" and the "responsible stakeholder". On her remarks about the U.S.' China policies to the Senate Reform Committee, Hillary said "China is a critically important actor in a changing global landscape."

As "smart power" represents merely a strategic adjustment, the thorny issues that often created troubles for China, such as those regarding Taiwan and Tibet, the arms sale to Taiwan and the human rights, will not vanish once and for all. Whether Sino-US relations will continue to retain a sound momentum for stable growth, the crux of the matter is whether the two nations will respect each other's core interests and give them due consideration.