{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014581734458940905, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0030698388334612432, 'mean_word_length': 5.122065727699531, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Culture & Cognition in a Complex Megaorganization: Implications for Military Leadership

Abstract : How can America better win the hearts and minds of people from such distant civilizations and traditions as Mghanistan since the use of traditional military force as hard power has not worked? Nye (2008) argued that the crisis in the Middle East points to the ineffectiveness of hard power and thus, other elements of power should be employed. Nye offered that global situations require a judicious combination of hard power that attempts to coerce and soft power that seeks to persuade. This integration becomes effectively SMARr power designed to achieve strategic goals and interests. While the U.S. expends significant time, efforts and resources on the coercive elements of national power to keep its military without peer, the nation has tended to pay less attention to the softer elements of national power, which require awareness of cultural aspects in order to have successful combat operations and for the conduct of subsequent nation-building activities. We contend that cognitive influence on culture as part of soft power is another tool the military can develop to advance national security interests. This paper expands the notion of soft power into the realm of international relations.