Methodological genesis of the concept «Soft power» in the system of global regionalism

The concept «power» has a significant status in the system of global regionalism. All concepts of political research originated in different branches of knowledge. Despite the great attention of scientists, the specific definition of this concept and the various approaches of the academic community cause the complexity and inconsistency to study the concept «power» in political science. Geopolitical space in this century is changing and the challenge of the phenomenon is to make an attractive country image. The national idea and mission of it can be concentrated and used by soft power mechanism in practice. «Soft power» has a goal to create motivation for action and make a decision by an object that has a «soft» effect. Therefore, to study indirect impact on the countries’ politics becomes the most burning. This work analyses the methodological genesis of the concept «Soft Power», gives the features of some theories considering the concept «power», including: classical, political, offensive realism, liberalism, democratic peace, the theory of international organizations, etc.


Introduction
The research of «soft power» (SP) impact is one of the debating issues of modern regional studies, which is associated with the growing role to use indirect impact tools on the system of international relations. However, the appeal to form and transform the concept «power» in international relations gets a highly topical issue as it is necessary to study how «soft power» works and impacts the foreign policy of countries nowadays. Currently, Western and domestic scientists have studied «soft power», as a rule, only in definite countries, they have not had it as a subject of a comprehensive analysis to use it in integration processes.
Thus, the significance of a comprehensive, detailed analysis of the concept «soft power» as a phenomenon to apply in aspects of global regionalism makes the relevance of the issue.

Theoretical basis of the study
The desire of countries to use various means to solve foreign policy problems and strengthen their international positions appeared long time ago. The most meaningful tool is power and the way to achieve the desired result by it.
Power has been identified with the military power of a country for thousands of years. It is an indicator of the country's authority and significance on the world stage. Nevertheless, in 1990-2000 there was a rethinking of the phenomenon in the discourse of international relations. In 1990 Joseph Nye, American political scientist and professor at Harvard Institute, for the first time used SP writing «Bound to Lead: the Changing Nature of American Power» [1]. This professor introduced a new term and described it as the ability of a certain subject of international relations to achieve their goals by attracting, and not by coercion. Also, we want to note that in his study Nye gives the experience of using it in terms of a hegemon or a superpower.
Studying genesis of the concept «soft power» promotes the author's research of the theories of classical, political, offensive realism, liberalism, the democratic world, the theory of international organizations; the theory of commercial liberalism, the doctrine of cultural and ideological hegemony of A. Gramsci; issues of «hard» «soft» powers of J. Nye in the system of global regionalism in the 21st century.  [4], and «Three Faces of Power» by Kenneth Boulding [5]. reflect the changing of the concept «power». Also, they study new aspects to apply countries' power.

Historiographical basis of the study
In

Methodology and materials
The research has methodology based on scientific methods and approaches, which let us analyze the mechanisms of soft power tools, as well as their importance in the system of global regionalism. We used the system analysis method to study the theoretical aspects of the genesis of the concept «soft power». The retrospection method helped to research the elements of soft power impact. Also, we used the method of historical analysis to study materials relating to the history of «soft power» in retrospect, which provided more accurate data how it developed and formed.
Thus, we determined the most complete nature of this concept in the system of global regionalism.

Results and discussion
The category «power» plays a meaningful role in international relations. All concepts of political research originated in different branches of knowledge. Despite the great attention of scientists to the concept «power» the specific definition of it and various approaches of the academic community, cause the complexity and contradictory to study the genesis of this phenomenon in political science. Domestic researchers have several variations to translate the English word «power» Such as: «мощь», «власть», «могущество», «влияние» [9]. The traditional way to translate «power» in domestic scientific literature is the term «сила.» At the same time, some theoretical studies of foreign authors often have their own semantic contents, connotations, assessments and approaches to the concept. Thus, in this study, we use all these versions to translate the term «power» as peers.
Robert Alan Dahl, a professor of Yale University, introduced the classical concept of the category «power» into the terminological turnover for political science. Dahl considers «power» to be «the ability of one actor to force the action of the other in a way he would not act in any case» [10]. This definition has been interpreted in the scientific field. Currently, there are several scintific appproaches to detirmine the concept in international relations.
The school of political realism bases on the theories of Thucydides, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Clausewitz, it folows one of such approaches. The theoretical school of realism assumes only the provision on the forcible and anarchist character of the international system of relations. Operation of this system includes the use and strengthening of the country's power potential. But countries are a rational political body that acts due to the national interests. The anarchist character of international relations makes actors enter a zero-sum game, where winning of one of the parties means defeat for the other. In this game «power» is a guarantor of security.
Hans Morgenthau, a professor of Chicago University, made a lot to found and develop the school of classical realism. He determined the patterns of foreign policy by the method of behaviorism, applying it to international relations. Morgenthau uses three basic models of foreign and domestic policy of the state as the basis of classical realism. ««Morgenthau's Triad» includes: power, balance of power and national interest» [2].
The scientist made up the following postulates of «classical realism» in «Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace» [2]: a. «Politics, like society as a whole, is governed by objective laws that are rooted in human nature» [2]. These laws promote the formation of empirical and rational theory, which is a guide for foreign policy actors.
b. National interest is analysed from the position of national power, strength, force. «This principle is a key one in classical realism. The core is states use power to ensure their national interests» [2], it helps to conceptualize foreign policy goals.
c. National interest is dynamic and it is always in the process of transformation and it always changes in nature, scale and closely correlates with political and social environment which also change. National interests are dynamic and must be continuously analysed to monitor the foreign policy and actions of the state. A similar approach applies to the studied concept.
d. «We cannot apply abstract moral principles to politics. Political realism knows about moral principles and thier importance; however, abstract and universal wordings do not let them be applied to the actions of the states and do not identify the policies, unless they are analyzed across specific conditions of time and space» [2]. e. «The moral aspirations of the nation and universal principles are not equivalent. Political realism does not recognize the fact that the national interests and policies of a particular nation may reflect generally accepted norms and principles of morality» [2].
f. Autonomy of international politics. By H. Morgenthau realism establishes the sovereignty of international politics as a discipline.
French researcher Raymond Aron changed the approach to interpreting «power» within the school of classical realism. He criticized the approaches to determine state power presented in the works of H.
Morgenthau, N. Spikeman, R. Schteimetz and others. Aron considered the provision on the measurability of the category «power as the main drawback of their theories.» If it was possible to evaluate the «power» of the state, any military conflict would not make sense, since the result had been already known. Assessment of the actor's power is a subjective category that can be expressed in power potential. However, such an assessment would ultimately be approximate. As the example of this there is the Vietnam War, in which the USA was to win in terms of the potential of «power» This conflict demonstrates the shortcomings of a theoretical assessment of the state's «power» in classical realism.
In order to eliminate the shortcomings, Aron clarified a distinction between such categories as «force» and «power» «authority» and «power» [11]. «Authority» in his opinion, should be involved in the space of processes that appear in the public sphere when managing the state. «Power» and «authority» differ by the field of application. «Authority» refers to domestic politics, while «power» is primarily related to the external activities of the state. Analyzing the differences between «force» and «power» Aron concludes that «force» is a component of «power» R. Aron represented the state's «power» as a «triad»: the space occupied by political units; resources, knowledge, and the population of the state, some of which can be involved in the military apparatus of the actor; capacity for collective action of society [11]. Aron emphasized the significance of the second element of this «triad» and correlated it with the category of «force» of the state.
The discussion of the key concept «power» continued in the works of neo-realistic approach supporters. Neorealism interpretates it in international relations according to basic principles of classical realism. The military component of «power» remains the central category. In addition, it is complemented by socioeconomic factors that play a role to develop the actor's military potential. Based on new ideas, the concept «latent power» of the state appears. The security dilemma remained unchanged and became the central category of neorealist research, but «power» is transformed from the country's main goal to a tool. The attitude to the use of power in neorealism was developed in two main trends: the first one is defensive realism, the second one is offensive realism. Defensive realism representative Kenneth Waltz evaluates potential benefits and risks caused by increasing of the actor's «power». Waltz supposes that a sharp increase of «power» can cause a negative attitude of the world community and cause certain risks for the state. A rationally acting actor will only increase his own «power» in the event of a likelihood of real conflict. Waltz does not share a position on the innate aggressiveness of the great powers. The very structure of international relations forces states to compete with each other. Thus, the strategy to keep a «balance of power» bases on the risk of damage to one's own country.
John Mearsheimer supports offensive realism. His approach lies in the thesis of the great powers' desire to maximize their power due to the anarchist nature of foreign policy. He opposes defensive realism for the following reasons: It is not necessary for all great powers to prioritize the preservation of peace and security. They act in a certain situation based on danger, costs. For many countries, the weakening of competitors is really important, so they will strive to act for their own benefit, and not in the interests of others.
Mearsheimer believes that there is not much power. Countries will always strive for hegemony, strengthening positions and maximizing power.
The strategic miscalculations of the state are not the main reason for the wars, but it is the irresponsible desire to increase and concentrate power in one hand. As Mearsheimer thinks, the theory of neorealism does not provide sufficient explanations on this issue.
Thus, offensive realism is only a structural theory (as well as realism). However, it has a similarity with the classical understanding of realism. As Morgenthau writes, states seek to maximize their power, authority and strengthen their positions. Nevertheless, Mearsheimer considers the very structure of the entire international system as the reason to behave in such a way. Also, the theory is inclined to the unpredictability of globalization. The scientist thinks there is more stability in the unipolar world and hegemon. So, the latest version of political realism justifies the existing American strategy of dominance over other countries.
The representatives of liberalism school interpret two types of «power»: resource and behavioral. The first type is characterized by an arsenal of actor's resources to get certain goals. The behavioural aspect of «power» shows the ability of a country to achieve the desired results.
The identification of new types of the concept «power» promotes a multi-level system of interaction between actors. In 1975, R. Klein offered an «equation for calculating «confirmed power «of the state: P = (C+E+M) * (S +W), where P -expresses the power of the country, C -population and territory, E -economic opportunities, S -the coefficient of national strategy, Wthe will to achieve the goals of the national strategy» [12]. Kline's formula of «national power» contributes to a new scientific research and approaches to the definition of «power.» Joseph Nye and Robert Kohein in thier work «Power and interdependence in the information age» [13] differentiate «power» as «soft» and «hard». The researchers emphasize the growing interdependence of ties between states and the reduction of the military factor in the power balance of forces in the international arena. They also speak about cultural diplomacy in establishing relations with other peoples. The subjects of foreign policy relations, breaking relations, can harm each other. Therefore it is a manifestation of «power» The proposed concept «soft power» is closely related to the following liberal theories of international relations: The basis provision of the democratic world theory is that democracies can be aggressive towards autocracies, but not towards each other. Democracies tend to use «soft power» The reason for this is that democratic countries have the same liberal values. Theory of international organizations has international structures, various funds and organizations contributed to expanded cooperation.
The idea of commercial liberalism theory is to promote the liberalization of trade relations between countries and the growing interdependence of economies.
Economic globalization stimulates cooperation among countries. In the free market system, the liberal economy model is an example for countries and contributes to the expansion of soft power tools.
Consequently, we can see the concept «power» as a tool of international relations in various theories, and schools of political research. Political realism is based on the military potential to realize «power» Liberal tradition analyzes such a category as «power» from cultural and economic aspects.
As a result, having analyzed the theoretical genesis of SP it is necessary to clarify how it is reflected in the system of global regionalism. According to internal and external factors, such as ideology, mentality, standard of living, national values, authority in the international arena, political regime, state development strategy [14] the concept «soft power» affects the solution of foreign policy goals and depends on what strategy the state chooses. Whether it will implement the policy with «hard» or «soft» pressure tools. However, the duration and difficulty of monitoring the process are supposed to know. A numder of «soft power» researchers think that «soft power» effect is unpredictable, and it can develop for a long time. Despite this, there are opportunities to measure «soft power» In 2005, a study by Rand Corporation (RAND CORPORATION) showed that «soft power» is a special method for calculating the power of any country. The authors used the survey to assess the effect of «soft power» Rand respondents had to answer the question: «Which country, besides your own, would you like to live in?» [15].
The most universal ratings for measuring «soft power» are the ratings of country brands, such as: Nation Brands Index (NBI) and Country Brand Index (CBI). Both of these ratings are based on surveys [15]. Its index is calculated according to such criteria as: global image, decency and integration. The results of the studies are different. The final result depends on subjective factors and can have a far from complete, one-sided picture. This means that there is no clear methodology for assessing the effectiveness of "soft power». The author of the concept did not offer any criteria for assessing it. Nye identified only a number of components by which one can judge whether a country has «soft power» or not. For example, these include: life expectancy, the number of Nobel laureates, the environmental factor. J. Mattern. gives an alternative study of attractiveness and «soft power». He proposed to study it in international relations across socio-linguistic analysis. J. Mattern used the theory of communicative action of Yu. Habermas and compared the interaction of countries on the world stage as a verbal fighting, which is revealed during a communicative exchange using the representative power of the state. The idea of this fighting is to impose narrative as the only true source and force to accept it. Thus, for J. Mattern, «soft power» bordered on propaganda in foreign policy. In global regional space the result of so-called nonmilitary and cultural pressure levers is difficult to determine in a statistical measurement. The main disadvantage of «soft power» is the difficulty of controlling it. This mechanism is unstable and takes a long time to achieve the necessary result, it differs from the «hard» action. Studying the effect of «soft power» C. Lane noted the theoretical failure of the concept. Lane called the term «soft power» too abstract. In his opinion the effect of attraction can be attributed only to the field of interpersonal relations, but not in any way to international relations. K. Lane emphasized that «states cannot be equated in any way with people» [16]. In Lane's view, Nye's concept «soft power» consists of two components: 1) «soft power» tools that can form or change public opinion; 2) waiting process, during which the used tools will make opinions in society that can be noticed in the political process of the country. Lane considered such a process of making foreign policy decisions of the state to be disconnected from reality and considered the impact of public opinion on the nature of foreign relations of the state to be minimal.
British researcher Ying Fan has the same opinion. In his article entitled «Soft Power: power of attraction or confusion?» [17] the scientist pointed to the nondevelopment and lack of a clear definition [16].
Antonio Gramsci also writes about non-military levers of influence in his works. Therefore, «soft power» has a purpose to create motivation for action and decision-making by an object that has a «soft» effect. The most important goal is to create an attractive image of an own country for the world. «Soft power» uses the following methods of influence: country's voluntary participation in the foreign policy of subject to influence, adoption of common strategic goals, intensive communication and immigration flows. The most common ways to see «soft power» are: information flows, public diplomacy, political PR, the language of the country and the popularity of it, exchange programs, the education system, tourism, sports, culture» [18].

Conclusion
Thus, we can conclude that the concept «soft power» is the result of theories, as well as the achievements of a large number of researchers. However, the introduction of the term and the theory of «soft power» into scientific circulation belongs to Joseph Nye. The term «soft power» of Nye has gone through several stages of development. At the moment, the study of the paradigm presented by Nye is getting more and more popular. This is obvious by a large number of both foreign and domestic works devoted to the research of «soft power» phenomenon. The issue to use «soft power» has been already included in the government and foreign policy strategies of several countries. The bright example of it is the USA. The concept itself and the directions of «soft power» belong to the state -the subject to apply it. The process to obtain «soft power» by the state is long-term.