Smart Power?

Not trying to start a fight here, but I'd be a lot happier with a prescise definition equating to general description of activities to judge what is actually being talked about.

...because I am still a bit confused. I do applaud the attempt to recognise that doing stupid things is .... well stupid. These would be being offensive to people undeserving of it, or just behaving badly or even killing people that do not need killing.

Do you really need to explicitly recognise this? Training? Education? Maybe we do, but it has to be prefaced with "You have been stupid because...."

I emphasize that because conflict is often based in large part on misunderstanding and ignorance, and that because innocents are harmed in such flare-ups of "unnecessary violence", there is a direct burden of peacemaking on those of us who can recognize both the vicious cycle and effective injection points at a much lower and more practical level than traditional statecraft.
I dispute that as a useful assertion. It's one possible view, and it is highly context specific. Conflict in not often based in large part on misunderstanding and ignorance. Sometimes it is.
Smart power or even soft power cannot function unless "hard power" is the predominant element in play.

Being fair (not kind. Kind = weak) to the population, rewarding and/or inciting good behaviour, and even offering limited social benefits is mind-numbing common sense - and that is good. All for it, but how does this qualify as "Smart Power?" Why not call "Military Local Government," or even "Local Government."