Book

How Does the Soft Power of Nations Erode?

Dr. Saud Katib

Publication Date: July 14, 2026 23:20 KSA

The controversy surrounding some practices of U.S. President Donald Trump during the FIFA World Cup was not merely a sports or protocol debate; it brought back a deeper question about the image of the United States in the eyes of the world, especially as it coincided with articles and analyses in prestigious newspapers and magazines, some of which carried striking titles such as 'The End of American Soft Power' and 'The World Cup Paradox,' suggesting that what is happening might not be just a transient political debate but an indicator of the erosion of one of the most important sources of American influence. Despite differing opinions on the extent of responsibility of a particular administration for this decline, the more important question remains: Can the soft power of nations collapse? The answer is yes... but it does not collapse the way economies collapse or armies are defeated. Soft power does not fall suddenly; it erodes silently when a state begins to lose its appeal and its ability to persuade, even if it retains its military and economic superiority. For the United States, it is hard to say it has lost its soft power. It still hosts the best universities, its companies lead the technology and artificial intelligence revolution, and it possesses the most influential media and entertainment industry in the world. But these assets alone are not enough because soft power is not measured by what a state possesses, but by how others feel about it. American soft power was built over decades on the image of the United States as a country of institutions, independent media and education, a trustworthy ally, a defender of the international order, and an environment that attracts talent from all over the world. However, this image has been subjected to successive tests in recent years due to internal political polarization, skepticism about some alliances, tensions with a number of international institutions, tightening of immigration policies, and increased reliance on military force and economic sanctions. Here lies the paradox: hard power can impose behavior, but it cannot impose admiration. Soft power, on the other hand, makes others adopt your positions because they trust you, not because they fear you. Perhaps the most important lesson from the American experience is that soft power is not a permanent guaranteed asset but a project that requires continuous maintenance. Trust builds slowly but can decline quickly if political messages become contradictory, the status of institutions declines, or allies feel the relationship is no longer based on the partnership they were used to. This does not mean that American soft power is over; such a judgment seems premature. The United States still possesses elements of attraction that almost no other country has. But even the world's largest soft power is not immune to erosion if it does not manage its image well and maintain consistency between its policies and the values it presents itself with. As for the lesson that other countries should learn, it is that soft power is not built through media campaigns, slogans, or hosting major events alone, but through education, innovation, culture, respect for institutions, honoring commitments, quality of relationships with allies, and the ability to earn trust before winning positions. Experiences have shown that hard power may give states quick influence, but it does not necessarily give them sustainable standing. Soft power, on the other hand, is slower to build but lasts longer and has more impact. Therefore, the real question is not whether American soft power is declining, but whether states realize that maintaining their attractiveness has become part of their national security. In a world where impressions form as quickly as information travels, losing trust may be more dangerous than losing power, because armies can protect borders, but only behavior protects reputation.

Articles