Sharpening America’s soft power

Power in contemporary international affairs is probably best thought of as the ability of one state to influence the actions of another. It is inherently intangible and reliant on perception. Lately, authoritarians around the world have increasingly aimed to “pierce, penetrate, or perforate the political and informational environment” of the United States with so-called “sharp power.” So why isn’t President Trump utilizing his unique skill set and counter-punching on the country’s behalf?

President Donald Trump steps from Air Force One. December 9, 2017. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

Scholars of international affairs have long debated measures, definitional types, and the relative importance of power. What has changed in the 21st century is how states actually exercise their power. Despite evidence of decline — and premature obituaries notwithstanding — America continues to hold the preponderance of power according to significant measures such as military budgets and GDP (please spare me the statistical minutiae). So let’s talk about how the United States is using its immense power.

In addition to traditional discussions of soft, hard, and smart power, scholars now speak of “sharp power” — best understood as the authoritarian answer to traditional soft power. Instead of using attraction, it seeks to divide, question truth, and censor perspectives. It is often deployed in media influence (RT to Americans and CCTV to the Chinese diaspora), social media advertising and troll campaigns (Russian disinformation in the 2016 election), institutes that advance political messages under the guise of cultural outreach (China’s Confucius Institutes), and lavish foreign trips for lawmakers and “local elites” capable of convincing those at home that authoritarian rule is actually “not that bad” or an “alternative form of democracy.”

America should be adaptable in countering both that pernicious message and the tactics used to advance it. These sharp power tools, like any others, can be defended against and then used against the originator. However, to defend and counter-punch without compromising American values, President Trump and Congress first need to be realistic about the authoritarian threat.

President Trump fancies himself a restorer of American greatness. He should first have confidence in the existing US political institutions and norms that have traditionally made America a great power. He should stop with the conspiracy theories and rash tweeting and start being a leader. The president should show the world the strength of the United States with his behavior and demonstrate integrity. Americans will defend, support, and respect that.

Second, the best defense against authoritarian sharp power is a good offense. Policymakers should accept that there is nothing wrong or democratically inconsistent in aggressively “sharpening” our soft power advantages and using them pointedly. Why don’t we create institutes in China and Russia that contain assertively annoying free speech zones? More importantly, why don’t we invest heavily in using the internet and social media to amplify universal narratives of freedom, rule of law, and free markets? Why don’t we prioritize these efforts as national security imperatives? Faced with American hard power, authoritarians around the world increasingly budget for assertively destructive messaging.

In one simplistic question, why don’t we punch back, Mr. President? America’s soft power could be a lot sharper, and it can be done without being authoritarian. America cannot afford complacency in the realm of power projection and perception.