There are those who call hard power as the use of a "carrot and stick" approach wherein the political entity with the greater military might impose on the weaker entity in order to make the weaker entity follow its will (Pallaver, 2011). Examples of "carrots" are powerful inducements such as the reduction of trade barriers, or the offer of an alliance or the promise of military protection. Examples of "sticks" are the utilization of coercive diplomacy, the threat of military intervention and the imposition of economic sanctions (Pallaver, 2011). The most common form of hard power being exercised is military intervention. There have been many examples of such acts throughout centuries. An example of a hard power exercising military forces can be the invasion of Iraq by the US in 2003 over the concern of Iraq's alleged possession of weapons of mass destruction (UCLA International Institute, 2014). Nonetheless, military force is not the only coercive measure that a hard power can exercise. The use of economic pressure can also result in similar ways. One example of the use of economic pressure was when the US sanctioned an embargo on Iran. In 1995, the Iran Sanctions Act was enforced to respond to Iran's nuclear program and also its supposed funding of organizations such as the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (public diplomacy, 2013). The sanctions were created to limit the US' investment in Iran's oil fields. Hence, by hindering the growth of petroleum - a key branch of Iran's economy- the US hoped to avert Iran from engaging in precarious activities. .
Correspondingly, "soft power" was presented as an opposing tactic to "hard power." As opposed to the idea of hard power, soft power is a nation's ability to take a more liberal approach. It is believed that soft power does not consider vehemence to be the primary way to influence other nations.
