Countries have several tools to expand their influence:

1. Coerce other countries with threats. This certainly works, but it creates enemies.
2. Induce countries with payments.
3. Attract and co-opt other countries to want what we want.

The first two approaches fall under “hard power,” while the third approach falls under “soft power” (a term coined by political scientist Joseph Nye Jr.in the 1980s). This article does a good job of explaining soft power and its limits.

To put it simply: hard power relies on coercion and soft power relies on seduction. Both are important. Hard power may be necessary for short-term outcomes, but it often works best when balanced with soft power to foster long-term relationships and shared values (what Nye refers to as “smart power.”)

Some examples of how the US has benefitted from soft power in the past:

• The US and Russia competed for world dominance in the cold war. While the arms race intensified, both sides also worked hard to sell their ideologies internationally and to create allies. The US wielded soft power via cultural initiatives (Hollywood films, pop culture), media and broadcasting (voice of America, radio free Europe), educational and scientific exchanges, and sports (both countries placed heavy emphasis on performance at the Olympics).
• When the US went to war against Iraq, our allies provided various levels of support (even those who were against the war).
• The US has a reputation for being politically and economically stable. This allows us to promote American products and to encourage foreign investment. The US dollar is the dominant international currency, enabling the US to better influence international economic policy.
• Positive interactions build trust, which allows the US to create treaties and allies.

Soft power is cultivated by three resources:

• An attractive culture.
• Consistent political values at home and abroad.
• Legitimate foreign policies containing moral authority.

Soft power and the Trump presidency

Donald Trump’s “America first” policy has taken a hard turn towards hard power (the only power that he understands), which diminishes our long-term ability to grow or maintain soft power.

Cultural

The world’s opinion of US culture was already mixed before Trump was elected, but whereas people generally saw Americans as friendly and reasonable (and perhaps a little arrogant), their opinions of us are dropping because:

• We are stupid and/or dishonest. Many are willing to believe Trump’s preposterous lies over the obvious truth. For example, many Americans still believe that Covid was a hoax by the Democrats.
• We are racist and cruel. Many express racist views and ignore basic human rights to embrace authoritarianism (and the inherent cruelty that it entails). Human empathy is labeled “woke”.
• We are siding with Russia. They don’t understand our anti-Ukraine/pro-Russia rhetoric.

Our culture has lost some of it’s luster (although it should be noted that India, Israel, Nigeria embrace our new direction).

Political values

The US always attempted to be a paragon of democracy, human rights, and stability. This appealed to most people.

The main values/goals of the Trump presidency are:

• Authoritarianism – he is limitless and should govern indefinitely with no limitations. Democracy has run it’s course. He can drastically cancel large portions of the government and remake the country in his own image.
• Loyalty – but only to him. Competency is not important and often frowned upon. Those who protest him are terrorists – call in the military!
• Immigration – make them all disappear at any cost (ideally with extra cruelty).
• Plutocracy – provide the ultra-wealthy with tax cuts and leadership positions, while cutting funding for safety nets and benefits for the average American. Opportunity is not for everyone.

None of these values are attractive or seductive to the average human.

Foreign policy

Deals

Trump lives for the “deal”, but his deal-making abilities are hampered because:

• For Trump no deal is final – he can and will change his mind at anytime. Also, all previous “deals” become void when he takes office (including deals that he made himself).
• He is untrustworthy. James Baker said the following regarding governmental deal-making: “The worst thing you can do, in my opinion, is to get caught in a lie. Then it’s almost all over, because the other guy thinks to himself, Boy, I can’t trust anything this fellow says.” As Trump always lies, nobody trusts anything that he says.

When deals are reached:

• Trump’s own policies can disrupt them. For example, South Korea agreed to invest $12.6 billion in a Georgia Hyundai factory (the largest such project in the State’s history), only to have 300 Korean workers arrested by ICE and detained for one week. This has seriously strained diplomatic relations with South Korea.
• Any deal can only be seen as temporary.

Allies

Trumps intentionally causes fear internationally such that the US is no longer seen as a strong ally.

• He has made many contradictory and inflammatory statements about NATO – it is unclear if Trump would stand behind Article 5.
• When Trump told president Zelensky in the oval office that he “held no cards”, it signaled to the world that everybody is entirely on their own.

War

Trump wants to be seen as very strong. To this end, he recently renamed the Department of Defense to the Department of War. Hegsworth elaborated: “We’re going on the offense, not just the defense. Maximums lethality, not tepid legality. Violent effect, not politically correct.”

• Two weeks before the start of the second term, Trump threatened military action against Denmark (a NATO country). They (and much of Europe) took the threat very seriously.
• In March of 2025, president Trump threatened to annex Canada if they did not agree to voluntarily become the 51^st state. It is likely that US/Canadian relations would take decades to restore (if we even attempt to restore them).
• Trump has ordered military strikes against various boats in international water without any proof that the boats were smuggling drugs. In at least one case, Columbia verified that the attack was against an ordinary fisherman. These attacks likely violate international law.
• Trump has recently threatened to attack both Venezuela and Colombia.

None of this is endearing us internationally.

The Art of the Decline

Confidence in U.S. leadership has plunged. This Atlantic article offers an interesting perspective.

Consider these statistics by pew research (based on data from Spring 2025):

And by way of comparison:

This leaves a leadership vacuum that China would like to fill. China is investing billions in regions like the Caribbean to build roads and digital networks. In Southeast Asia, its consistent economic engagement is contrasted with what is seen as an inconsistent and reactive U.S. approach. In Feb 2025, China overtook the UK to become the nation with the 2^nd highest soft power ranking (US was still leading China at that time).

China is much more consistent and reliable that the US. Whereas every US policy can drastically change every 4 years, China can invest in longer term strategies. The fact that they are authoritarian is partially balanced by the fact that the US is becoming authoritarian.

While it is unlikely that a single country’s currency will replace the US dollar in the near future, many alliances (e.g. EU, BRICS) are reducing their reliance on the US dollar.

For those unfamiliar with BRICS, it’s an intergovernmental organization of ten countries: Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates. In 2024, BRICS accounted for 39.2% of the global GDP, whereas the G7 only accounted for 28.9%. By 2030, the IMF projects the G7 share will decline to 26.3% and BRICS will rise to 41.8%. Forty additional countries are reported to be interested in joining BRICS.

To summarize, China is making alliances with the goal of becoming the world’s leading economy. The US is breaking alliances and purposely abandoning friends. Conventional trade theory holds that tariffs cause economic inefficiencies and potential financial instability. Some allies have reacted by pursuing trade deals that exclude the U.S., potentially marginalizing U.S. influence in global trade.

Our trade is down, products cost more due to the tariffs, and many people’s opinions of Americans have drastically shifted against us. Now is the time to make friends rather lose them. The world will be slow to forgive what we are becoming (ask a Canadian when they will again buy American), and we may never be seen as the stable nation that we once were.