Has Soft Power Come to an End?

Anyone following international events and strategic thinking trends will come to the conclusion that capitals such as Washington, Beijing, and Moscow are now leaning heavily on the theories of Carl von Clausewitz, the 18th-century Prussian general and military historian, as well as those of Sun Tzu, the 6th-century BC Chinese military strategist. This trend stands in contrast to the intellectual frameworks developed by strategic thinkers like Joseph Nye, who passed away just a few weeks ago. Nye lamented in his final writings the rupture caused by President Trump with American soft power. Writing in the Financial Times, he noted: “His background in New York real estate gave him a distorted view of power, focusing only on coercion and deals. American soft power will therefore have a hard time during the next four years.”

Joseph Nye, who was once Dean at Harvard University, authored two essential books I always recommend to my students. The first, Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power (1990), explores the ability of the United States to exert global influence through non-coercive means — based on attraction and persuasion rather than blatant force or hard power. The second, titled Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics, elaborates on the advantages of diplomacy and cultural appeal, emphasizing how a nation’s political values, culture, or other forms of influence can achieve cultural dominance. Nye warns, “Although hard power can achieve goals, it can also jeopardize the economic, political, and even cultural aspirations of major powers.” He cautions that if America wishes to remain strong, “Americans must be attentive to their soft power.”

Nye bridged the worlds of theory and practice, which gave his writings remarkable resonance. He was a founding figure of the Harvard Kennedy School — often regarded as a factory for strategic minds and public policy leaders in the U.S. — and held several governmental positions under Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.

At the height of the COVID-19 crisis, Nye penned an article for Project Syndicate titled “Geopolitics After the Pandemic,” in which he observed that long-term projections about the impact of the pandemic remained uncertain. He proposed that there was no single guaranteed scenario through to 2030. Instead, he outlined five potential geopolitical trajectories:

1. The end of the liberal world order.

2. The rise of authoritarian regimes resembling those of the 1930s.

3. A world order dominated by China.

4. The adoption of a global green agenda.

5. A continuation of the current status quo.

Despite the value of these theories and scenarios, they require deeper clarification and adjustments. It is true that the U.S. administration, under President Trump, decided to shut down the U.S. Agency for International Development, withdrew from several international organizations, and largely disregarded values that constitute the core of soft power. But does this mean that American soft power has truly ended? Certainly not.

Soft power persists — often alongside hard and smart power — especially through the limitless, diverse, and evolving products of American civil society. This presence ensures America retains global leadership in areas such as technology, scientific research, cinema, music, the English language, media, food culture, and fashion.

A prime example is Netflix, which as of 2025 boasts over 301.6 million subscribers worldwide. It captivates individuals and governments alike with its dramatic and documentary productions. This kind of success is only possible for countries or companies with a vast cultural industry capable of attracting global consumers. It is a clear manifestation of soft power — one that places the languages and cultures of other countries under immense pressure.

It is true that we are witnessing the continued erosion of the liberal world order and the return of fascism in some parts of the world. But this does not preclude the potential rebirth of liberalism. Major crises sometimes produce unexpected outcomes. The Great Depression, for instance, triggered waves of isolationism, nationalism, and fascism, culminating in World War II. Yet it also led to groundbreaking economic programs in the U.S. known as the New Deal, the rise of America as a global superpower, and ultimately the dismantling of colonial empires.

Finally, even if, contrary to Nye’s prediction, we do not see the emergence of a pragmatic green global agenda amid American isolationism and its withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on climate change, we will likely witness the rise of nationalist rhetoric in many countries — a trend that could dangerously escalate international tensions.