Soft power and diplomatic influence are nice to have, but tangible military strength is a must for serious nations that wish to endure.
For years, many Western leaders have taken a ‘words over weapons’ approach to foreign policy.
There was a sense that if only the right combination of rhetoric could be applied at the right moment, ruthless regimes like Russia and Iran could be appeased.
On its own, this approach would have been only mildly negative. After all, there’s nothing wrong with negotiating if there is an opportunity to avoid war or find a reasonable middle ground.
However, they paired this approach with a neglectful approach to hard power and the erosion of national resolve.
What is hard power, and why does it matter?
When we discuss hard power, we refer to factors such as military production, equipment availability, the quality of equipment, and overall military capabilities. Basically, when talking doesn’t work and military action becomes necessary, hard power determines whether you can defend yourself and/or weaken your enemy in a confrontation.
By contrast, soft power refers to a country’s cultural influence, diplomatic skills, and reputation. For example, even as the United Kingdom’s hard power has declined relative to the rest of the world, it retains immense soft power through the institution of the Crown, the values and governance structures it has spread throughout much of the world, the English language, and a powerful cultural sector.
On its own, however, soft power isn’t enough. A key reason the United Kingdom remains influential in global affairs is that it retains aspects of hard power, including a well-equipped navy and nuclear weapons. The same is true of France, another nation with significant soft power that it buttresses with hard power.
Even those nations, however, have barely done enough in terms of military spending, with relative production capacity and overall military strength having declined in recent decades.
Canada’s era of naivety
In the last few decades, Canada has been dangerously naive. We went all in on ‘soft power’ while completely neglecting hard power.
Our army, navy, and air force are all ill-equipped and far too small.
We produce very little of what our armed forces need, and we lack capabilities (such as independent rocket launch) that most peer nations possess.
We assumed these capabilities simply weren’t necessary, and that we could coast on our reputation in a peaceful world.
That assumption was wrong.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, China’s rapid military buildup, and Iran’s propagation of terror are all examples of what happens when authoritarian regimes feel emboldened.
Israel strikes Iran
With Iran getting closer to being able to build a nuclear weapon, Israel has concluded that such a threat cannot be ignored. The IDF has begun Operation Rising Lion, designed to destroy Iran’s nuclear program and attrit its missile capabilities. The end goal may be even broader, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu telling the Iranian People that Israel has weakened the regime and thus provided an opportunity for Iranians to free themselves from the oppressive theocratic dictatorship.
Israel has utilized drones (placed near Iranian missile launching sites and launched when the operation began, advanced fighter jets, refuelling aircraft, infiltration operations (the Iranian military and governance structure appears highly compromised by Israel’s Mossad), and air defences in the operation.
So far, the operation appears highly successful, with much of Iran’s missile launching capability and air defences wiped out, the military leadership structure decimated, key nuclear sites damaged, and Iran’s retaliation so far relatively limited in strategic scope.
What Israel is demonstrating is the importance of investing in military strength to generate hard power.
As noted by The Times of Israel, the country is currently spending 8.8% of GDP on national defence, a rise of 65% from the year before:
“As Israel continued its offensive in Gaza, its military expenditure surged by 65 percent to $46.5 billion in 2024, of which $5.7 billion was spent in December alone. SIPRI noted that this represented “the steepest annual increase since the Six Day War in 1967.” It accounted for 8.8% of GDP, and marked a steady rise that has seen the share balloon by 135%, from 5.4% of GDP in 2015.
Israel is among the top 15 countries in the world for military expenditure, accounting for 1.7%. The three largest are the US (37%,) China (12%) and Russia (5.5%). Together, the 15 nations account for 80% of expenditure around the world.”
To get a sense of how significant this figure is, if Canada spent 8.8% of GDP on national defence our defence budget would be over $200 billion, a sum that would exceed every nation except the U.S. and China.
And this is where national resolve matters.
Canada must boost national resolve alongside increased military spending
Israel knows it cannot afford to truly lose a war. It can afford to be stymied in achieving strategic objectives, but it cannot truly lose a conflict, because losing means the end of Israel. This, combined with the fact that Israel is a democratic state, creates an interesting motivational asymmetry. If the Israeli government is defeated in a war, it means Israel itself has been defeated, since Israelis chose their government democratically. If the Iranian government is defeated in a war, it means the regime, not the Iranian People, has been defeated, since the regime lacks democratic legitimacy. Iranians also know that losing their regime doesn’t mean losing their lives; rather, it means more freedom and more prosperity.
Israel is thus more motivated, a motivation buttressed by the memory of the Holocaust, Hamas’ horrific October 7th, 2023, attack and the repeated instances of Israel being targeted for destruction by its neighbours.
This gives Israel an immense national resolve that transcends political parties, religious adherence divides, and ideological differences. This resolve leads to a strong military because it creates national popular support for strategic independence, resilience, and hard power.
We are seeing a much-reduced version of this in Canada, as increasing global chaos and annexationist rhetoric from the U.S. President have increased Canadian national resolve, which then quickly led to a promise to hit the 2% NATO target.
But this cannot be a fleeting moment. Israel doesn’t show resolve for a while, and then lets its military erode. Instead, Israel’s baseline resolve remains elevated, and its military is always a priority, leading to enduring strength.
While Canada may not face the same immediate existential threats as Israel, the world is rapidly becoming more dangerous, and our resolve cannot be a temporary shift that fades with time. Instead, it must become the new normal, and it must be built upon, so it can feed into durable public support for rearmament.
Such a shift in the Canadian mindset would mean that, if the moment comes when we have to defend ourselves directly (perhaps from a Russian incursion in the Arctic), we can respond with real military strength, rather than words and pleas for help from others.
The lesson is clear: While soft power and cultural influence remain nice to have, this is an era of hard power, and Canada must rapidly internalize this reality and act upon it. In doing so, we can learn much from Israel’s brilliant and courageous actions in defence of its people and the broader civilized world.
Spencer Fernando
Image – Twitter (IDF)
If this piece left you clearer than it found you, that's the point. I write for readers who want to think past the week, to see the longer pattern beneath the daily story, and to come away steadier rather than more agitated.
That longer view gets built somewhere. On Patreon, essay by essay, I'm constructing The Long Work, a body of analysis meant to outlast the news cycle that prompted it. The readers there make it possible. No subsidies, no strings. The work answers to them.
$8/month to read it as it's built, and to have a hand in building it.