US Foreign Policy Shifts from Soft Power to Hard Power Under Trump Administration

A remarkable characteristic of the foreign policy adopted by the Trump administration is not the goal it chooses, but the method it uses to achieve it. Accordingly, America seems to be fully relying on its hard power. It is completely ignoring 'soft power' as my classmate and the late Joseph Nye called it.

Nye defined soft power as 'the power of attraction.' According to this, a country can make other countries imitate it, get close to it, and accept its leadership due to its special characteristics when it wants them to do what it wants. Countries with abundant hard power can get other countries to do their work through force, coercion, aid, or protection.

Countries with abundant soft power have historically been able to exert great influence without threats or attacks. Other countries wanted to be like them. They agreed with the principles they took. Such countries were considered attractive, 'fashionable,' and even successful.

In the opinion of those who consider themselves true realists like me, the importance of hard power has never diminished. On the contrary, effective soft power is rarely achieved without significant hard power. Sometimes, even with a lot of hard power, soft power can be lacking.

Towards the end of his long career, Nye himself began to worry about the decline of America's global appeal.

For example, Vladimir Putin's Russia can be taken as an example. In an ideal situation, any state wants to achieve both these types of power. With abundant soft power, other countries can be easily swayed in the desired direction. Hard power does not need to be used to do so.

Joseph Nye believed that the combination of America's hard and soft power provided immense benefits in its relations with other countries. His belief in soft power was also a reason behind his skepticism towards those who doubted America's future and predicted the fall of American dominance in the coming days.

Towards the end of his long career, Nye himself began to worry about the decline of America's global appeal.

It became increasingly clear during Trump's second term that America was relying solely on hard power. His administration began to force its trading partners into unilateral economic agreements by threatening to increase tariffs. He has also ignored the orders given by the US Supreme Court to stop such actions. He has used military force in more than half a dozen countries.

He is carrying out the killings of individuals labeled as smugglers in the Caribbean and Pacific regions. It is not even known who these people being killed were. There is no certainty whether they were drug traffickers or not. It is also uncertain whether the drug trade will be stopped by their killings.

Abruptly abandoning the path of diplomacy, he initiated an unnecessary war with Iran. He thought that the Iranian regime would collapse immediately and a government of his choice would be formed.

Trump continuously accuses other world leaders of being weak and incompetent. He even ordered Ukrainian President Zelensky to start negotiations with Russia, saying he had 'no cards.' To push the people of Cuba into difficulty, he imposed a blockade to make their government surrender.

He did not stop there. Abruptly abandoning the path of diplomacy, he initiated an unnecessary war with Iran. He thought that the Iranian regime would collapse immediately and a government of his choice would be formed.

While relying excessively on hard power, very little effort has been made to legitimize, justify, or conceal its use as much as possible. Of course, most countries do bad things sometimes. Even major powers do so more often. But when they do, they cover their activities or style with logical or attractive 'covers' of various standards.

However, the Trump administration seems to be even happier when violating established norms and causing trouble for other countries. Whether Trump threatened to erase Iran's civilization or the US Secretary of Defense openly declared disregard for international law and announced that the US military would show its might, their objective is clearly to coerce rather than persuade others to accept their views.

With the stoppage of aid, the lives of millions of people worldwide have been put in jeopardy. America appears arbitrary and indifferent in this matter.

It is clear that they force others to follow their decisions instead of attracting them. Their motto seems to be, 'Once you are strong, you don't have to care about anyone.'

There is a lot behind this level of devotion to hard power. The American institutions and policies that were once considered attractive by other countries have been systematically thrown into disarray. The American international aid agency was abruptly shut down through the initiatives of Elon Musk and 'Doge.'

With the stoppage of aid, the lives of millions of people worldwide have been put in jeopardy. America appears arbitrary and indifferent in this matter. Attempts have been made to shut down the 'Voice of America' network. This has been prevented by rare opposition seen in American courts and parliament. Foreign Minister Marco Rubio has withdrawn America from more than sixty international organizations.

Dozens of diplomatic posts have been left vacant. The US has not been represented at some international summits. Innocent protesters have also been killed due to the violent activities of 'Immigration and Customs Enforcement.' This has exposed America's ugly side to the world. The higher education sector, once considered a grand symbol of American prestige and soft power worldwide, has been attacked indiscriminately.

American campuses and universities are becoming less attractive to students worldwide. Such government actions are not only causing great damage to the academic sector but also reducing the number of foreign students coming to study in America. Those who come to study in America are becoming even more 'pro-American' than when they arrived.

When all these contexts are put together, we can easily understand why China's image is continuously growing positively as America's image declines worldwide.

In the understanding of the US President and all the officials of the administration, the world is divided into two parts. On one side are the strong (winners), and on the other are the weak (losers).

I am not the first person to see the administration deliberately attacking American soft power. But the officials of the administration are not even grasping what is happening. I wonder, are they incapable of understanding even simple things? Do they not know that by relying excessively on hard power and making the use of military force against other countries easy and normal, other countries will be less willing to work with America in the future?

Will they not feel uncomfortable working with an America that is threatening, vengeful, and unpredictable? Do they not understand that 'honey attracts more flies than vinegar'?

Amidst all these situations, my understanding of what is happening is as follows—

First, in the understanding of the US President and all the officials of the administration, the world is divided into two parts. On one side are the strong (winners), and on the other are the weak (losers). For them, compromising with the weak is a sign of failure. This is why they often exhibit aggressive behavior. They react harshly even to minor criticism.

They react harshly and aggressively without any thought even against staunch US allies like Canada or Denmark. Officials like Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth emphasize the need for military might and a 'warrior mentality.' White House advisor Stephen Miller argues that history is driven by the 'hard rule' where the strong rule and everyone supports them.

Such views from individuals holding important and decisive roles in the administration reflect the entire government's perspective. Many working in the Trump administration seem to hold the view that the strong give orders and the weak must obey them. According to this perspective, rules are meant for others to follow, not for oneself.

Second, Trump and his supporters claim to be extremely patriotic. However, they do not like the country they seek to lead. Let's look at one of the slogans of the movement called 'Make America Great Again' or 'MAGA,' which says: 'If you think America needs to be made great again, then you must not consider the current America great.'

Observing all their activities, we can see that from Trump to his ordinary supporters, they praise very few things about America. They dislike most of the media there. They cannot stand popular entertainers. They hate Democrats, who are a larger group than themselves. They have no interest in the principle of the rule of law or checks and balances. They are suspicious of anyone not born in America.

Trump and his colleagues and supporters consider immediate or temporary solutions to any problem as a great achievement.

Some are even suspicious of those born here. There is no respect for science. Universities seem like enemies to them. They deeply believe that the 'deep state' has severely influenced the diplomatic corps, government agencies, and even the US military. Trump himself dislikes the design of the White House building and is engaged in its reconstruction.

He wants to build a grand monument inside it. They may find it difficult to imagine that America has some special and permanent characteristics that can be attractive to others. They may find it difficult to imagine that America is in a very dire situation.

Third, Trump and his colleagues and supporters consider immediate or temporary solutions to any problem as a great achievement. They create a buzz about great success by showcasing things like interim trade agreements and fake peace accords. They seem eager to finalize agreements with other leaders. However, they do not seem to care much about relationships among ordinary people.

The results of relationships among people come a little later but are effective. For them, achievements that come after their term in office are of little interest. There is a sentiment that what is the point of achievements after one leaves power.

For those with such worldviews, soft power would have little importance. They would naturally lean towards hard power, disregarding soft power. However, Americans need to understand something important. The successes America has achieved in foreign policy in the past were achieved by working constructively and generously with other countries, even with former rivals. It also helped correct the image of our own society. The 'Marshall Plan,' NATO, the 'Civil Rights Movement,' the promotion of trade liberalization, and the end of the Cold War and the unification of Germany are examples of such successes. The judicious use of soft power brought such success. However, some of America's foreign policy failures, such as the Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan wars, the overthrow of Gaddafi's regime in Libya, and the current defeat in Iran, are the result of the belief that success is ensured by the force of hard power.

America still possesses attractive qualities today. Even today, governments and people of other countries can see America as a country and an ideal, and distinguish between its leaders' wrongdoings. However, if America's political life continues to become harsher and more corrupt, the situation will not remain the same forever.

If soft power continues to wane and hard power is repeatedly misused, it will become increasingly difficult for the rest of the world to separate America, its ideals, and the wrong behavior of its leaders.

(From Foreign Policy)