With it now being a matter of months until the independence where Scotland will decide its future , it’s worth looking at Scotland’s softer side and asking the question: In terms of soft power, would an independent Scotland thrive or nosedive?

 

The term ‘soft power’ was coined by Harvard University’s Joseph Nye in 1990, who defined it as “the ability to get what you want through attraction rather than through coercion”.

 

Basically, it’s the ability a country has to make friends and influence people around the world through its culture, education, language and values. It’s the things which makes a country more attractive to tourists, investors, thriving industries and foreign students.

 

Soft power is a key tool in 21st century foreign affairs and diplomacy, but the exact measurement of its effect can be hard to calculate as it’s somewhat intangible by its very nature. Its benefits, however, are much more transparent.

 

A country’s ‘brand’ is a major tenet of its soft power. For example, think of Sweden and you will probably think of Ikea: this is a classic example of soft power. The things that make a nation approachable, friendly and soft around the edges are key to its standing in the world in the 21st century, as it ultimately leads to it being more attractive to do business with, and will make people want to travel and live there.

 

At the moment, Scotland is in a unique position where it can use both the Scottish as well as the British national brands.

 

‘Brand Britain’ is a solid one and the UK is recognised as one of the world’s soft power superstars. Through a combination of its strong diplomatic ties around the world, the NHS, the BBC, its reputation for being a hub for the arts, and the English language itself, the UK is up there with the best of them in terms of soft power.

 

Last year, Monocle magazine, in conjunction with the Institute for Government, conducted a global ranking of soft power which measured over 50 different metrics, and the UK came out on top. Based on this, it’s hard to argue that Scotland isn’t benefiting by using the British national brand, but it’s not all roses.

 

Making the argument for Britain’s soft power in a recent speech, former prime minister John Major sounded a bit silly when he cited One Direction as a reason for Scotland choosing to remain part of the union, saying the boy band are a British export which helps the UK’s image and gives it an enviable standing across the world.

 

You’ve got to wonder: if this is the argument that senior figures are making, and with continued austerity in Westminster resulting in significant cuts to public spending, is Britain on a soft power slippery slope?

 

What if Scotland ends up voting for independence on September 18? What would an independent Scotland’s soft power look like?

In terms of Scotland’s ‘brand’, it punches well above its weight for a country of its size, and is regularly ranked in the top 20 in terms of best regarded nations in the world, alongside the likes of Finland, Denmark and Norway, who are the darlings of soft power.

 

Scotland has a soft power portfolio that could rival these Scandinavian nations, and really, any nation of its size.

 

As the home of cashmere and whisky, it has luxury exports that are world-renowned, and in both cases, they have the ‘Made In Scotland’ tag which carries a lot of heft around the globe. Prestigious universities like Glasgow and St. Andrews, means it can attract students from all over, and with the Edinburgh Festival, it has a top tier arts festival which is recognised worldwide as one of the best of its kind. Even though its football teams haven’t covered themselves in glory in the past few years, there are athletes like Andy Murray representing Scotland to millions of people around the world, and with this summer’s Commonwealth games in Glasgow, ‘brand Scotland’ will only be enhanced to millions more.

 

Which is great and all, but power, both hard and soft, is only a tool and what really matters is what you do with it.

 

Robin McAlpine, director of the Jimmy Reid Foundation, a left-wing think tank and advocacy group, spoke about Scotland’s soft power, and the concept of the country’s ‘brand’ itself. He said:

 

“There is no question that Scotland has an incredibly strong and positive international cultural heritage; tartan, whisky and bagpipes are well known, well understood and, despite some eyebrow raising, broadly liked.

 

“What Scotland needs to do post-independence is strengthen the internationally-facing elements of our politics and our culture. Scotland needs to press the avant garde elements of our culture and not just the historical elements. We're a world leader in visual arts, music, literature and science and we should be known for that.”

 

He also touched on what Scotland can do to strengthen its soft power, going forward:

 

“The important thing is not what exports we're known for now, significant though oil, textiles, whisky and food undoubtedly are. The question is what we export next. Can Scotland become a world leader in hydrogen battery manufacture? Or advance materials production? Or eco-icebreakers to open up the northern trade route? Indeed, can design drive Scotland forward in the way it has driven companies like Apple or Ikea?

 

“We always forget about the export of ideas and that is somewhere else Scotland can map out a territory all of its own. Scotland has always contributed to the world’s ideas and there is no more noble export.”

 

Given all of this, why isn’t the Yes campaign hammering home the soft power argument harder? There’s absolutely no reason to think that Scotland couldn’t prosper in soft power terms as an independent country, and with soft power being the currency of 21st century diplomacy, it could be one of the main factors in its success or failure.