“The United States’ Hard Lesson in Soft Power”

The United States’ Hard Lesson in Soft Power

The United States current foreign policy posture is a substantial departure from that of previous administrations, which is likely to its detriment.[i]  Certain shifts in foreign policy based upon ideology are typical upon an administration change.  However, the Trump administration’s shifts are more akin to a departure from paradigmatic constructs that have typically transcended ideology.[ii]  As a result of this departure, the United States is suffering losses to the critical power dynamics of “hard power” and “soft power.”[iii]  Hard power refers to a nation’s use of military force, sanctions, or economic action to exert a degree of control over an entity.[iv]  Conversely, soft power refers to a nation’s ability to induce action based upon various factors, such as: diplomacy, reputation, culture, or ideological appeal.[v]  The United States’ most significant loss has been the depletion of its soft power, which is particularly concerning as it is inordinately valuable, finite, and difficult to accrue.[vi]  As a result, the United States’ current posture has longstanding soft power implications, which ultimately harm its international standing and influence beyond the duration of the foreign policy posture.

The Trump administration’s diplomatic posture has adversely affected the United States’ soft power.  Specifically, the Trump administration is operating without critical State Department positions filled, and in some instances has yet to even nominate individuals for confirmation.[vii]  Moreover, the Trump administration’s State Department has experienced a substantial departure of career diplomats, and significant turnover at the top of its hierarchy – most notably with President Trump’s removal of Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, in early 2018.[viii]  As a result, the United States’ typical level of diplomacy has been absent, which has created a void that other nations may capitalize upon.[ix]  Consequently, the United States is ceding soft power to other entities with its absence.

The United States has also suffered soft power losses due to the Trump administration’s substantive diplomatic actions.  For example, the United States adopted a more aggressive stance in the United Nations, which has prompted criticism throughout the international community.[x]  Similarly, the President has engaged allies abrasively at meetings and summits.[xi]  The totality of the President’s precise conduct is unknown, but public statements made at such events, as well as ally reactions, are indicative of an issue.[xii]  For example, the President addressed North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) members on two occasions, in which he criticized member commitments and failed to affirm the United States’ support for its collective defense article, which prompted inordinate concern amongst allies.[xiii]  In the aftermath of the NATO Summit, Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel, stated that Europe could no longer rely upon allies with certainty, which was widely interpreted as a poignant criticism of the United States.[xiv]  President Trump later committed to NATO’s collective defense article, but the episode undermined the faith critical allies had in the United States.[xv]  Thus, the United States lost soft power due to the diplomatic failure.

Relatedly, some United States’ recent diplomatic actions have unnecessarily harmed allies, which has created concern amongst allies when conducting diplomacy with the United States.  One example is that President Trump shared national security intelligence that was the product of a clandestine Israeli operation with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak.[xvi]  The intelligence revealed looming terror plots by al-Qaeda that utilized explosive devices concealed in laptops, which Israel considered sufficiently critical to warrant sharing with the United States.[xvii]  President Trump shared the particular details of the intelligence with Minister Lavrov and Ambassador Kislyak, who subsequently reported to Russia.[xviii]  As Russia maintains a close relationship with Iran, which is a hostile adversary of Israel, it is believed the intelligence was relayed to Iran, which may have then been able to identify and eliminate the Israeli sources.[xix]  As a result of this diplomatic oversight, allies are concerned whether information shared with the United States may be improperly relayed to others.[xx]  Thus, the United States’ reputation for dependability and trustworthiness has diminished – and may struggle to recover, which is detrimental to the United States’ soft power.

The United States similarly suffered soft power blowback due to its diplomatic efforts, or lack thereof, in the recent United States-Canada-China arrest-extradition politicization scenario.[xxi]  The United States’ initial diplomatic action in this scenario was an informal request to Canada to arrest a Chinese national, Meng Wanzhou.[xxii]  Canada complied with the request and charged Wanzhou with bank fraud, while the United States’ prosecution loomed in the background.[xxiii]  The United States initially declined to comment on the development, then denied involvement as it never filed a formal request, and then President Trump implied that he could use it to leverage the event in trade negotiations with China.[xxiv]  As a result of the lattermost action, President Trump undermined United States diplomacy, as the statement undermined the rule of law and diplomacy.  Moreover, China detained Canadian nationals as retaliation, which the United States has not addressed.[xxv]  As a result, the United States has appeared to eschew traditional diplomacy and abandoned an ally to suffer consequences alone, which arose from a joint action with the United States.  Accordingly, this lack of diplomatic action and unity undermined the United States’ reputation for dependability and trustworthiness, which adversely affects its soft power.

The United States diplomatic and policy approach to international agreements has resulted in substantial soft power blowback.  One prevalent example is the United States’ approach to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or “Iran Nuclear Deal.”[xxvi]  In 2015, the United Nations’ Security Council and Iran reached an agreement on limitations for Iran’s nuclear energy program.[xxvii]  The Obama Administration committed the United States to the Iran Nuclear Deal in a State Department memorandum, but did not approach it as an executive agreement nor treaty.[xxviii]  In 2018, the Trump Administration reneged on the United States commitment to the Iran Nuclear Deal, as the agreement was not subject to congressional approval, and imposed sanctions on Iran.[xxix]  The other parties to the Iran Nuclear Deal criticized this approach and lamented the United States lack of commitment.[xxx]  As a result, the United States’ reputation for dependability, trustworthiness, and commitment was undermined, which is detrimental to its soft power.

The United States suffered from similar reputational, and thus soft power, losses with its approach to the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).[xxxi] Specifically, the United States initiated the re-negotiation due to perceived frustrations with its fairness, which undermined the international community’s view of America’s commitment to agreements.[xxxii]  Thereafter, the United States continued to inflict reputational harm with its negotiation tactics.[xxxiii]  Specifically, the United States hardly negotiated throughout the process, but rather maintained high demands, such as the removal of the agreement’s dispute resolution mechanisms.[xxxiv]  As a result, the entire re-negotiation process was largely stagnant, which was exacerbated by the United State use of tariffs to attempt to compel acquiescence to trade terms.[xxxv]  The state of affairs prompted Canada and Mexico to shift priorities to other trade agreements that omit the United States; openly question whether the United States could be relied upon to fulfill their commitment; and engage the United States’ individual member states on the issue of trade.[xxxvi]  Accordingly, the United States approached trade negotiations with allies in a manner that further alienated allies, avoided bona fide diplomacy, demonstrated an unwillingness to adhere to its obligations, and displayed a lack of good faith action.  Eventually, the United States, Canada, and Mexico agreed to a revised version of NAFTA, which is now known as the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement, after the United States relented on its high demands, but the reputational harm was already done.[xxxvii]    Therefore, the United States’ soft power has diminished, which subsequently limits the United States’ ability to maintain or develop critical international interests.

The United States’ soft power depletion can also be attributed to a series of presidential miscues that created diplomatic or foreign policy issues.  One notable example is President Trump characterized African nations in a derogatory manner, which prompted social and diplomatic consequences.[xxxviii]  Another notable example is President Trump failed to condemn, or even acknowledge, Saudi Arabia Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman’s involvement in the killing of Jamal Khashoggi – despite confirmation from the United States’ intelligence community.[xxxix]  As a result, the United States’ appeared willing to sacrifice fundamental ideals due to tentative geopolitical considerations.  Consequently, the United States’ reputation for dependability and commitment to principles was tarnished, which diminished its soft power.  Accordingly, the United States’ capacity to facilitate the favorable resolution of international issues was reduced.

The preceding analysis is derived from merely a sample of the United States’ recent foreign policy actions and miscues.  The examples used are not outliers or otherwise an aberration from the recent norm, but rather apt representations of the United States’ current foreign policy woes.  This upheaval of the United States’ longstanding approach to foreign policy has endangered the United States’ soft power, and likely carries consequences that extend beyond the current foreign policy posture.  However, only the passage of time can reveal whether the soft power decline will remain a sustained issue.

 

[i] Natasha Bach, Under President Trump, the U.S.’s ‘Soft Power’ is Waning, Fortune, 2018, http://fortune.com/2018/07/13/us-soft-power-ranking-fourth-place/; Daniel L. Byman, Recovering from the Trump foreign policy, Brookings Institute, 2018, https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/06/18/recovering-from-the-trump-foreign-policy/; Hal Brands, Not Even Trump Can Obliterate America’s Soft Power, Bloomberg, 2018, https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-01-18/not-even-trump-can-obliterate-america-s-soft-power.

[ii] Id.

[iii] Joseph S. Nye, Jr., Soft Power, Foreign Policy, 153-71 (1990).

[iv] Id.

[v] Id.

[vi] Id.

[vii] Doyle McManus, Almost Half the Top Jobs in Trump’s State Department Are Still Empty, The Atlantic, 2018, https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/11/state-department-empty-ambassador-to-australi/574831/.

[viii] Tracy Lee, Influential Diplomat Steps Down Amid Large-Scale Exodus at State Department, Newsweek, 2018, https://www.newsweek.com/state-department-trump-tillerson-white-house-797365; Nicole Gaouette, Kaitlan Collins, & Dan Merica, Trump fires Tillerson, taps Pompeo as next Secretary of State, CNN, https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/13/politics/rex-tillerson-secretary-of-state/index.html.

[ix] Id.; see generally David Nakamura & Carol Morello, ‘To what end?’: Trump’s disruptive diplomacy inspires fears over U.S. standing abroad, The Washington Post, 2018, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/to-what-end-trumps-disruptive-diplomacy-inspires-fears-over-us-standing-abroad/2018/07/17/b6ec6b48-892b-11e8-a345-a1bf7847b375_story.html?utm_term=.eeac252e895d.

[x] See Nick Bryant, Nikki Haley: Aggressive envoy who shook up United Nations, BBC News, 2018, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45805343.

[xi] Jarrett Blanc, Here’s Why World Leaders Are Laughing at Trump, Politico, 2018, https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/09/25/donald-trump-un-speech-laughing-unga-iran-220620; Zachary Cohen, Michelle Kosinski, & Barbara Starr, Trump’s barrage of attacks ‘beyond belief,’ reeling NATO diplomats say, CNN, 2018, https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/11/politics/trump-nato-diplomats-reaction/index.html.

[xii] Id.; Eileen Sullivan, Trump Questions the Core of NATO: Mutual Defense, Including Montenegro, The New York Times, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/18/world/europe/trump-nato-self-defense-montenegro.html.

[xiii] Id.

[xiv] Damien Sharkov, Angela Merkel: Europe Can No Longer Rely Upon U.S. Protection, Newsweek, 2018, https://www.newsweek.com/europe-cannot-fully-rely-us-protection-anymore-says-germanys-merkel-919410; Henry Farrell, Thanks to Trump, Germany says it can’t rely on the United States.  What does that mean?, The Washington Post, 2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/05/28/thanks-to-trump-germany-says-it-cant-rely-on-america-what-does-that-mean/?utm_term=.25ea43174c4b.

[xv] Id.; Alastair Macdonald, Trump says committed to NATO as allies up spending, Reuters, 2018, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nato-summit-trump-commitment/trump-says-committed-to-nato-as-allies-up-spending-idUSKBN1K21C8.

[xvi] Howard Blum, What Trump Really Told Kislyak After Comey Was Canned, Vanity Fair, 2017, https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/11/trump-intel-slip; Adam Goldman, Eric Schmitt, & Peter Baker, Israel Said to be Source of Secret Intelligence Trump Gave to Russians, The New York Times, 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/world/middleeast/israel-trump-classified-intelligence-russia.html.

[xvii] Id.

[xviii] Id.

[xix] Id.

[xx] Id.

[xxi] In a row between China and America, Canada gets trampled, The Economist, 2018,   http://www.economist.com/the-americas/2018/12/22/in-a-row-between-china-and-america-canada-gets-trampled.

[xxii] Id.

[xxiii] Id.

[xxiv] Id.; Julia Gordon, Sijia Jiang, & Anna Mehler Paperny, Trump intervention comment may be gift to Huawei CFO, Reuters, 2018, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-huawei-tech-meng/trump-intervention-comment-may-be-gift-to-huawei-cfo-idUSKBN1OC07J.

[xxv] Id.; Steven Lee Myers & Dan Bilefsky, Second Canadian Arrested in China, Escalating Diplomatic Feud, The New York Times, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/12/world/asia/michael-spavor-canadian-detained-china.html.

[xxvi] Mark Landler, Trump Abandons Nuclear Deal He Long Scorned, The New York Times, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/08/world/middleeast/trump-iran-nuclear-deal.

[xxvii] Id.; Michael R. Gordon & David E. Sanger, Deal Reached on Iran Nuclear Program; Limits on Fuel Would Lessen With Time, The New York Times, 2015, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/15/world/middleeast/iran-nuclear-deal-is-reached-after-long-negotiations.html?module=inline.

[xxviii] Id.; Landler, supra note xxvi.

[xxix] Id.

[xxx] Id.; James McAuley, After Trump says U.S. will withdraw from Iran Deal, allies say they’ll try to save it, The Washington Post, 2018, https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/backers-of-iran-nuclear-deal-wage-last-ditch-blitz-seeking-to-sway-trump/2018/05/08/9b15e3f0-523e-11e8-a6d4-ca1d035642ce_story.html?utm_term=.e7b70ab84197.

[xxxi] Catherine Porter, For Canada and U.S., ‘That Relationship Is Gone’ After Bitter NAFTA Talks, The New York Times, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/03/world/canada/trudeau-trump-nafta.html.

[xxxii] Id.

[xxxiii] Id.

[xxxiv] Allison Martell & Julie Gordon, Dispute resolution in focus as NAFTA talks drag, Reuters, 2018, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-trade-nafta-dispute-explainer/dispute-resolution-in-focus-as-nafta-talks-drag-idUSKCN1LG2XZ.

[xxxv] Id.; Katie Lobosco, Trump faces mounting pressure to lift tariffs on Canada, Mexico, CNN, 2018, https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/20/politics/steel-aluminum-tariffs-usmca/index.html.

[xxxvi] Id.; John Paul Tasker, Trudeau urges governors to stand with Canada on trade while agreeing to ‘modernize’ NAFTA, CBC, 2017, https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-speech-governors-meeting-pence-1.4205000.

[xxxvii] Id.; see Bill Chappell, USMCA: Trump Signs New Trade Agreement With Mexico And Canada To Replace NAFTA, NPR, 2018, https://www.npr.org/2018/11/30/672150010/usmca-trump-signs-new-trade-agreement-with-mexico-and-canada.

[xxxviii] Julie Hirschfield Davis, Sheryl Gay Stohlberg, & Thomas Kaplan, Trump Alarms Lawmakers With Disparaging Words for Haiti and Africa, The New York Times, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/11/us/politics/trump-shithole-countries.html.

[xxxix] Eric Schmitt & Nicholas Fandos, Saudi Prince ‘Complicit’ in Khashoggi’s Murder, Senators Say After C.I.A. Briefing, The New York Times, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/04/us/politics/cia-senate-khashoggi-.html?emc=edit_na_20181204&nl=breaking-news&nlid=53042306ing-news&ref=headline.