This article reveals the essence, structure, advantages, features and disadvantages of the "soft power" policy. Within the framework of certain philosophical concepts, "soft power" can manifest itself in the policies of states. This is the promotion of the culture of your country, drawing up an attractive image. Currently, we are witnessing the spread of symbolic images that "seduce" and "captivate" objects with their "soft power". How can one characterize and fit in one phrase the essence of the concept and what was the motive for the formation of the political term itself? It can be emphasized that the use of force to resolve conflicts between countries eventually turned into non-violent competition, as well as the use of non-military methods to resolve conflicts. At the same time, a country leading a “soft policy” has the ability to receive support in international relations while attracting other countries by demonstrating its cultural and moral values, including the effectiveness of political institutions. Despite the wide international recognition of the concept of "soft power" both by the subjects of international relations and by scientists who widely discuss it, it has been criticized or questioned. On the one hand, some American neo-conservatives or "realists" (from Robert Kagan to Niall Ferguson) continue to defend the idea that military action and economic action remain the only truly effective means of influencing the course of the world. Thus, soft power will be marginal at best and ineffective at worst. On the other hand, several sociologists have defended the idea that the concept of "soft power" was purely theoretical and that it was especially difficult to demonstrate it or even measure its effectiveness through quantitative analysis, although several attempts and indices have also been developed in this direction.