Despite its vast literature, scholars and policymakers concerned with soft power are still plagued with numerous uncertainties, such as how soft power can be derived effectively; what attraction specifically entails; or soft power’s domestic dimensions and its expression in foreign policy. This dissertation attempts to analyze the question of how states differ in the communication of their soft power. In order to realize this goal, a comparative study scrutinizing the communicated soft power presence in Kosovo of Turkey and Germany – two key states that have actively been engaged in the Balkan region – has been undertaken. The methods of the research were a combined effort of literature review, field interviews with state officials, analysts, and academics, and webbased content analysis of German and Turkish newspaper and governmental websites. It has found that while there is an overlap of attribute focus between the two states, specifically in terms of “culture and ideational influence”, the literature and field interviews of each country suggest that the communicated soft power ends up vastly different. It appears that Turkey’s soft power communication has been heavily influenced by certain key policy figures. Germany’s soft power, on the other hand, has been much more institutionalized. Given that successful soft power communication requires intangibility/invisibility, Germany’s soft power in Kosovo may also be more stable in the long-term.