FROM STATE IMAGE TO NORMATIVE INFLUENCE: THE EVOLUTION OF SOFT POWER STRATEGIES ACROSS REGIONS
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Abstract
The article examines soft power as an instrument of political and legal positioning of states in contemporary international relations with particular attention to regional dimensions. The study aims to analyse the transformation of soft power strategies in different geopolitical contexts and to determine their role in shaping international influence. The research applies comparative, systemic and institutional analysis to examine the mechanisms through which states construct international image and normative influence. The findings demonstrate that soft power has become a key element of foreign policy strategies, particularly under conditions of global competition and digital transformation. The European Union represents a normative model of soft power based on regulatory influence, legal standards and value promotion. The Asia-Pacific region illustrates an adaptive model combining technological leadership, cultural diplomacy and digital communication strategies. The Middle East demonstrates a modernisation-oriented model focused on economic diversification, global branding and international investment attractiveness. The study argues that contemporary soft power is increasingly hybrid in nature, integrating cultural, technological and regulatory instruments. Regional political environments significantly influence the selection and effectiveness of soft power tools. The scientific novelty of the research lies in identifying regional patterns of soft power transformation and in conceptualising soft power as a dynamic instrument of geopolitical competition. The results contribute to the development of theoretical and practical approaches to international political communication and state image formation.
How to Cite
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
soft power; normative power; regional models; political strategy; legal instruments; public diplomacy; international relations
2. Anholt, S. (2010). Competitive identity: The new brand management for nations, cities and regions. Kyiv: Osnovy.
3. Dent, C. M. (2023). Contesting regionalism in East Asia: Institutional innovation in response to geopolitical competition. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 24(3), 367–387. https://doi.org/10.1093/irap/lcad004
4. Dergachov, O. (2018). Formuvannia imidzhu derzhavy u zovnishno-politychnomu dyskursi [in Ukrainian]. Kyiv: NISD.
5. Edelman. (2024). Edelman Trust Barometer 2024: Global report. https://www.edelman.com/trust
6. Farrell, H., & Newman, A. (2020). The Janus face of the Brussels Effect: Data protection and the global reach of EU law. Journal of European Public Policy, 27(11), 1636–1656. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2020.1771396
7. Fisun, O. V. (2019). European Union as a normative system in the global world. Political Life, 3, 14–20. https://doi.org/10.31866/2411-4744.3.2019.176657
8. Gavrylova, N. (2021). Image of the state in international relations: Mechanisms of formation. Humanitarian Bulletin, 12, 75–83.
9. Kim, S. (2011). National image building and Korean public diplomacy. The Korean Observer, 42(3), 507–538.
10. Levytsʹkyy, O. S. (2023). Geopolitical transformation of regions: Between multipolarity and strategy competition. Heopolityka i Ekoheodynamika Rehioniv, 19(1), 8–14. https://doi.org/10.24057/2076-2763-2023-19-1-8-14
11. Lisnychenko, O. (2022). Public diplomacy as a tool of Ukraine’s foreign policy. Scientific Notes of ISHU, 49, 89–94.
12. Manners, I. (2002). Normative power Europe: A contradiction in terms? Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(2), 235–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5965.00353
13. Manzhos, V. (2021). The role of cultural diversity in the formation of Ukraine’s political image. Politychne Zhyttya, 3, 47–52.
14. Maretsʹkyy, Y. S. (2020). Transformation of the Middle East: Vision 2030 strategy and shifts in regional balance of influence. Skhid, 2(166), 50–55. https://doi.org/10.21847/1728-9343.2020.2(166).195337
15. Melissen, J. (Ed.). (2005). The new public diplomacy: Soft power in international relations. Palgrave Macmillan.
16. Melissen, J. (2015). Nova publichna dyplomatiya [in Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Yunivers.
17. Nye, J. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. Kyiv: Osnovy.
18. Pamment, J. (2013). New public diplomacy in the 21st century. Routledge.
19. Shaigorodskyi, Y. (2022). Public diplomacy in the context of hybrid warfare. Philosophy and Political Science in the Context of Modern Culture, 14, 110–117.
20. Sharpatyy, O. V. (2020). Formation of Ukraine’s political image in the context of the information society. Ukrainian Journal of International Law, 3, 45–51.
21. Shevchenko, N. P. (2021). Cultural diplomacy in the system of forming Ukraine’s image. Scientific Papers of the Ukrainian Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies, 2(112), 73–81.
22. Sliusarenko, I. (2020). Formation of a positive image of the state as an element of foreign policy. Actual Problems of International Relations, 139, 27–33.
23. Ulrichsen, K. C. (2016). The Gulf states and the Arab uprisings: Myth and reality. Oxford University Press.
24. Zayani, M. (2015). Networked publics and digital contention. Oxford University Press.
25. Zeng, J. (2020). Artificial intelligence and China’s authoritarian governance. International Affairs, 96(6), 1441–1458.