The era of American soft power is over. In a shocking speech at the Munich Security Conference in Germany, the vice-president of the United States of America, J.D. Vance, excoriated European leaders for their supposed abandonment of democratic values and free speech, all because the undemocratic far-Right remains politically excluded in Germany. And just a few weeks later, in another jaw-dropping turn in foreign policy, Vance and the US president, Donald Trump, both dressed down the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, on live television, which sent European leaders scrambling as they finally saw the writing on the wall: the US is turning its back on Europe’s security and handing unprecedented power to Russia.
Trump and his team have made it clear that the US will abandon its decades-long commitment to wielding soft power in favour of hard power — that is, brandishing America’s military and economic strength to force other nations into submission. In doing so, Trump has fundamentally misunderstood the nature of global influence.
The term, “soft power”, coined by the political theorist, Joseph Nye, at the end of the Cold War, rests on credibility, leading by example, and the cultural appeal of a nation. Soft power, Nye argued, “lies in the power to attract and persuade”, whereas hard power depends on coercion. It is not the threat of force, but the allure of American values, institutions, and alliances that has historically given the US its global edge.
Historically, the US’s soft power has been a formidable force in shaping global affairs. The Marshall Plan not only rebuilt war-torn Europe but also solidified American influence by fostering economic growth and democratic stability. During the Cold War, cultural diplomacy — through Hollywood, jazz, and educational exchanges — helped counter Soviet propaganda, offering an aspirational vision of American freedom and prosperity (whether that was ever true, perhaps, is a different story).
What Trump fails to grasp is that soft power is not weak at all. It is, in many cases, far more potent than the coercive force he wishes to wield. What he has cast aside is not just a diplomatic tool but a strategic asset of immense value. Nye was wrong about many things — particularly in his belief that soft power alone could deter extremist recruitment — but he was right in identifying it as the glue that holds together multilateral solutions to the world’s most pressing challenges: trade, climate change, and, above all, global stability.
Consider the Middle East. The America-led liberal order, with all its flaws, relied on a combination of hard and soft power to exert influence. Today, the region is fractured. While soft power succeeded in shaping governments and economies, military intervention left behind humanitarian crises in places like Afghanistan, sowing the seeds of future instability.
Meanwhile, a new contest looms: the rise of China.
As the US drifts toward a trade war — if not outright conflict — with Beijing, it should be leveraging its alliances and influence. Instead, Trump has courted autocrats, from Russia’s Vladimir Putin to Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, under the mistaken belief that personal strongman diplomacy will secure America’s future. This is a fundamental miscalculation. The world is not a zero-sum game, though Trump sees it as one. He justifies this worldview by citing his background in business, but his actual business record — marred by bankruptcies and failed ventures — suggests otherwise. His true expertise lies in branding, in crafting a narrative of winners and losers, much like in a reality television show.
Meanwhile, China is playing the long game. While Trump retreats from multilateral institutions, China has expanded its global influence through strategic investments, particularly in Africa and Asia, via the Belt and Road Initiative. Unlike the US, Beijing is not just using hard power — it is combining economic incentives, media outreach, and cultural diplomacy to reshape global narratives. Its ability to shape international norms, even in democratic societies, is growing, while Washington’s credibility erodes.
Ironically, while Trump appears to be abandoning soft power, he has become one of its most significant exporters. He has spread a new form of soft power — one that does not unite but divides. His brand of institutional scepticism has emboldened illiberal movements across the world, from the Alternative for Germany, whose recent surge was loudly backed by figures like Elon Musk and J.D. Vance, to far-Right factions in France and Italy. This is soft power in reverse, not used to strengthen alliances but to erode them.
Trump recently declared that “the EU was made to screw us.” In reality, the post-war peace and economic cooperation that America helped foster in Europe created a stable, prosperous ally in Europe. The European Union has been one of Washington’s most reliable partners, proving its value repeatedly. But if the US chooses to retreat, Europe must step up.
Indeed, Europe still wields enormous soft power and is now actively building hard power as well. In Germany, the Center-Right Christian Democratic Union has won the election and wasted no time in prioritising defence. Even before taking office, the chancellor-elect, Friedrich Merz, has already pushed to reform the nation’s restrictive debt brake to facilitate military investment — a remarkable shift for a country long hesitant to rearm.
The challenge for Europe, however, is unity. Without a clear vision for collective defence and diplomatic leadership, the EU risks failing to fill the void left by the US, allowing China and Russia to expand their influence unchecked. But Trump’s meddling in Europe and his bombastic implementation of widespread tariffs seem to be pushing Europe closer together rather than further apart.
India, too, faces a choice. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has modelled aspects of his leadership on Trump’s populist playbook, but his grip is slipping. India’s growing tech industry could help fill Europe’s tech industry needs and counter the US’s tech supremacy. India now has an opportunity to align itself with Europe’s democratic vision. Its strong diaspora and rich cultural history, too, are great assets. Historically, India has pursued a policy of non-alignment between great powers. But in an era of growing geopolitical tension, it could redefine its role by tilting toward the European model of economic and political cooperation.
The post-American world will not be shaped by brute force alone. The question is whether Europe and emerging powers like India can take up the mantle of soft power before the global order fractures beyond repair. Trump has turned his back on it, but the world cannot afford to.
Carol Schaeffer is a journalist based in Berlin, Germany, and is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council in Washington D.C.
