With Trump and his cheer squad back in the office, the White House resembles a high school with bullying, name-calling, and a lot of bickering over trivial matters. As the new Trump administration tightens its grip on the government, it is treating diplomacy as personal theater. America is trading its soft power and lasting influence on the world for a few snickers from the MAGA bleachers.
Power comes in multiple forms: strength, wealth, or attraction. The first two are called “hard power,” while attraction is considered to be “soft power.” Soft power depends on a country’s culture, its values, and diplomacy. While many favor hard power over soft power, over the long term, soft power often prevails.
But let’s not pretend soft power is all warm fuzzies. It has been the backbone of empires for many centuries. Spain might have conquered the New World in the 16th century on the back of its Spanish steel, but it was the appeal of a shared Christian religion that stabilized its rule. Or Britain in the 19th century. Its naval supremacy was complemented by the cultural ethos of commerce, language, Shakespeare, and even Cricket. And after World War II, the United States picked up the baton.
America had nuclear bombs, sure, but also jazz, jeans, democracy, and the Marshall Plan of 1948. Until Donald Trump. He became the first American president to brush off the idea of soft power and double down on hard power. But the problem is, you can’t punch someone into loving you. And without that global goodwill, even the biggest superpower can start feeling awfully small.
A Turn Towards Hard Power
One of the first actions that Trump took when he returned to office was withdrawing from multilateral organizations like the Paris climate agreement and the World Health Organization, while cutting funding to NATO and the UN. Trump’s blatant attempt to coerce democratic allies such as Denmark or Canada weakens trust in the U.S. among all our allies. His threats to Panama reawaken fears of American imperialism throughout Latin America.
Trump’s skepticism towards allies like NATO has led to demands that allies must increase their military spending to 5% of their national income. European and Asian allies, alarmed by the uncertainty of American support, are increasing their defence and looking for greater autonomy. Even smaller nations are aligning themselves with China and other BRICS nations while preparing to defend their interests.
In the Middle East, Trump’s administration has revived a “peace through strength” doctrine, increasing military engagement, launching airstrikes, and redesignating groups as terrorist organizations to justify the use of force. This shift signals a broader trend: alliances are being redefined less as communities of shared values and more as transactional security pacts, where hard power is the primary currency.
Fall of USAID and Humanitarian Aid
The act of giving money to help other nations develop, or Foreign Aid, is one of America’s greatest inventions. It started after World War II, when the US gave Europe $13 billion in foreign aid under the Marshall Plan. The plan was so successful that the US decided to apply the idea on a global scale. Then, in 1961, under the leadership of President Kennedy, several programs were consolidated into USAID to help Africa recover from colonial rule.
After the Cold War, the USAID, in concert with the World Bank, UN, and WHO, began a mission to improve the lives of most of humanity. Due to their combined efforts, the world’s population living under extreme poverty dropped from 53% to just 9% in less than 70 years. USAID was a pioneer in eradicating smallpox and polio, bringing an end to diseases that had haunted humanity for centuries.
Then came DOGE and Elon Musk with his big chainsaw. Musk was quick to label the USAID as “evil” and a “nest of radical-left Marxists who hate America.” The manchild with the chainsaw called USAID a “criminal organization,” and announced that it’s “time for it to die.” DOGE moved swiftly. The website was shut down, 10,000 employees were fired in a single day, and the budget was slashed by $40 billion, which helped more than 100 nations worldwide.
The remainder of the agency was transferred to the State Department, where Marco Rubio slashed 83% of its global aid programs, reducing 6,200 of them to about 1000. In Asia, the cut has forced food programs to be cut by half, having adverse consequences for millions of Rohingya struggling in refugee camps. In Africa, the estimates suggest that USAID’s departure can increase the likelihood of tuberculosis by 30%, while severely affecting 25 million AIDS patients. According to some estimates, more than 1.6 million people can die within a year without the USAID.
But should Americans care about people dying in Africa, Asia, or Latin America? New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof answered this question: The end of USAID “means that the United States loses soft power and China gains.” With just a budget of 0.48% of the GDP, USAID was the main leverage for US ambassadors while negotiating with the developing nations.
The dismantling of USAID represents a knockout punch to the US’s soft power at a time when great competition has emerged from China and other BRICS countries.
Read More: Elon Musk Thinks He’s Never Done Harm—Here Are 3 Times He Absolutely Did
The End of the World’s Classroom
For decades, the US has been called the “World’s Classroom,” with its universities attracting more international students than any other country. Under Trump, the US embassies were ordered to halt F-1 and J-1 visa applications to implement “ideological and social media” vetting. Secretary Rubio has also threatened to revoke visas for Chinese students for apparently no credible reason.
The absurdity of it went far beyond what we have seen in American history. Some student visas were revoked for minor infractions, like getting a speeding ticket or fishing without a license. Some were more politically motivated, like for pro-Palestinian activism, as mild as writing an opinion piece. US Citizenship and Immigration Services has also announced the end of Optional Practical Training (OPT). OPT allowed international students to work in the US for one to three years after graduation. Ending OPT would disrupt major industries like finance and tech, which depend heavily on high-skilled workers. Studies have also shown that OPT workers do not reduce opportunities for citizens.
The intention is clear: Discourage any foreign students from choosing the US for their studies.
The Trump administration also killed the Fulbright Program, the crown jewel of American soft power. In February, the State Department cut off stipends for thousands of US and international Fulbright scholars, with most only receiving an abrupt email notification. Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” also plans to cut 93% of educational exchange programs to give tax cuts to his billionaire buddies.
For decades, education exchange has been a cornerstone of US foreign policy by creating goodwill, mutual understanding, and long-term diplomatic ties by bringing international students to the U.S. and sending Americans abroad. Educational exchanges allow foreigners to experience American culture, values, and institutions firsthand, often leading to more favorable attitudes toward the US. Alumni of these programs frequently become advocates for American ideals in their home countries, helping to bridge divides and promote cooperation.
As the U.S. retreats from its role as the “World’s Classroom,” China is stepping in to fill the gap. China is expanding its own scholarship and exchange initiatives, attracting students from Southeast Asia, Africa, and beyond. These efforts allow China to cultivate goodwill, promote its language and culture, and build influence with future foreign leaders who might have once studied in the US. Some studies also show that more students are considering study destinations in Europe, Australia, and Canada, further eroding America’s traditional dominance in global education.
Read More: How Trump’s War on Harvard University Spells the End of U.S. Academic Diplomacy