Soft Power

Soft Power: A Modern Instrument of Statecraft

Soft power represents a fundamental shift in the nature of international influence and conflict since the mid-20th century. Moving beyond traditional kinetic warfare and territorial conquest, it embodies a "whole society" approach integrating governmental agencies, the private sector, civil society, and media to shape the political landscape and internal affairs of foreign nations.

The objective is not outright military occupation, but the achievement of "political vassalage" – influencing countries to align with US interests, laws, and economic goals, thereby securing access to resources, markets, and strategic positioning.

The roots of this organised political warfare capacity can be traced back to the post-World War II era. With the establishment of the principle of democratic sovereignty enshrined in international law in 1948, direct military conquest for territorial acquisition became largely forbidden.

The desire for influence and advantage, however, persisted, necessitating new mechanisms. This led to the formalisation of an apparatus designed to conduct "dirty tricks" abroad, working covertly to infiltrate and co-opt universities, unions, media, politicians, and judicial systems in other countries. This created what is described as a "USA Truman Show" in foreign nations, where the US government orchestrates elements of the local reality, often without the populace's knowledge.

Key Instruments and Tactics:

The soft power apparatus employs a diverse array of tools and strategies:

• Funding and Control of Foreign Media:  Agencies like USAID and the State Department fund and control media outlets in foreign countries. This is often done through programs labelled "Independent Media" or "Media Sustainability".The term "independent" is portrayed as a euphemism; these outlets are not independent from their US government funders but are only considered "independent" from foreign governments deemed adversaries. They receive hundreds of millions of dollars annually, reach vast audiences, and train thousands of journalists. Crucially, these media outlets reportedly submit their work plans for review and approval to the State Department.
• Mercenary Media and Targeted Journalism:  Funding is directed towards organisations that conduct investigative journalism, framed as "Strengthening Transparency and Accountability".These groups are explicitly used to produce "hitpieces" and dig up dirt on political opponents of the US foreign policy establishment in target regions. This serves as "capacity building" for assets useful to the US. The information uncovered is then reportedly used by local prosecutors to initiate arrests, sometimes resulting in hundreds of detentions.This media and legal pressure is also a mechanism to force policy changes in foreign governments. One such organisation, reportedly receiving half its funding from USAID and the State Department, has veto power over its staff hiring and claims to have generated billions in fines and assets seized and caused numerous policy changes and resignations, including heads of state, through its reporting.
• Censorship and Information Control:  The development and deployment of "Weapons of Mass deletion" are highlighted. These involve sophisticated AI and natural language processing tools, initially developed for counterterrorism, that can scan vast online data to map narrative networks and identify content or political movements for suppression.This technological capacity is coupled with an "ecosystem of personnel" acting as intermediaries between government bodies and tech companies.Efforts include pressuring major social media platforms (Facebook, Twitter/X, YouTube, TikTok, Reddit, Twitch) to eliminate financial incentives for undesirable content. This involves working with foreign governments to regulate ad networks, specifically targeting US social media and news entities.Organisations like the Global Disinformation Index and NewsGuard create ratings to get news sites blacklisted by advertisers, a strategy coordinated from the White House to financially "re-engineer" the news industry and potentially bankrupt publishers opposing state messaging.

- Astroturfing and Covert Mobilisation: 

USAID and other entities reportedly fund and train networks to organise protests and social media campaigns, sometimes referred to as "smart mobs" or "rental riots". The ZunZuneo project in Cuba is cited as a prime example where USAID created a covert social network using humanitarian funds, laundering money through shell companies.

The platform initially offered non-political content to build a user base while collecting data on political tendencies. The plan was to introduce political messages once a critical mass was achieved to instigate protests, mirroring tactics used in other countries.

These operations can involve inflaming social tensions, such as racial friction among workers, and then offering alternative employment funded by US taxpayers to those who go on strike, thereby destabilising regions and providing leverage in diplomatic negotiations.

• Use of Culture and Arts as Statecraft:  Cultural figures, musicians, and artists are engaged as instruments of statecraft. This includes sponsoring protest music, like rap in Cuba, and programs training international artists in activism and democracy mobilisation. These efforts aim to influence specific demographics or exploit "cleavage points" within societies.
• Influence on Judicial and Legal Systems:  A significant aspect involves funding and influencing the judicial systems, courts, and prosecutors in foreign countries under the guise of "judicial reform" or "anti-corruption". This is described as poaching and financially supporting networks around judges and the legal system globally.The objective is to "rig the scales of justice" in favour of foreign policy interests. This influence is linked to the use of mercenary media to generate arrests and indictments against political opponents.

The "Whole Society" Doctrine:

The execution of soft power operations adheres to a "whole society" doctrine, involving seamless coordination between various actors.

This includes government agencies (State Department, USAID, DoD, CIA, FBI, DHS, NSF, ODNI), private sector companies (tech platforms, advertisers), civil society organisations (NGOs, universities, think tanks like Atlantic Council, NED, Freedom House, OCCRP, Internews, Graphika, Global Disinformation Index, NewsGuard, PolitiFact), and media outlets. This integrated approach ensures that influence operations are comprehensive and reach across various sectors of a foreign society.

Domestic Blowback and the Smith-Mundt Act:

A critical concern highlighted is the "bleed over" or blowback of these foreign influence tactics into US domestic life. The methods developed for destabilising societies abroad are perceived as contributing to division and instability within the US.

Historically, the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 was intended to serve as a firewall, authorising propaganda and influence activities abroad but preventing them from being directed at the domestic US population.

The purpose was to prevent the deception of US citizens by information manufactured for foreign audiences. This protection, which reportedly existed for 70 years, was lost about a decade ago with the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act during the Obama administration.

This "modernization" is described as having removed the domestic firewall, leading to a "Smith-Mundt problem for funding and operations". This means the apparatus designed for foreign influence can now impact domestic affairs, not only through propaganda but also by funding groups that interact with US domestic prosecutors or media. This weaponisation of the foreign policy apparatus against domestic citizens is seen as a fundamental assault on the premise for its existence.

The methods used to pressure tech companies into censorship and financially target dissenting media developed for foreign contexts are now reportedly applied domestically, impacting US citizens and platforms. For instance, US-funded organisations work with foreign governments, like the EU, to pass laws and regulations aimed at censoring US social media websites and news entities, effectively circumventing US First Amendment protections through foreign pressure.

Motivation, Dilemma, and Call for Reform:

From the perspective of the soft power apparatus, the justification for these activities is the protection of US national interests, including economic prosperity, access to resources, countering adversaries, and promoting democracy. It is argued that without this capacity, the US might struggle to maintain its global position and associated economic benefits.

However, the sources argue that while acknowledging the potential benefits, the apparatus has become morally corrupted, particularly with the domestic blowback and the use of tactics like politically motivated arrests and widespread censorship. There is a strong call for reform. This includes creating new legislative firewalls, similar to the original Smith-Mundt Act, to unequivocally prevent foreign influence operations from affecting the domestic sphere.

Proposed reforms also include introducing criminal or civil penalties for violations and holding agencies and sponsored NGOs accountable for breaching the domestic firewall. The goal is to make the system more transparent, accountable, and aligned with stated democratic values, while preventing the harmful tactics developed for overseas operations from being applied domestically.

In conclusion, soft power, as depicted in the sources, is a sophisticated, multi-faceted instrument of modern statecraft that has evolved significantly since World War II.

While intended to project US influence abroad and protect national interests, its integration with domestic institutions, the alleged removal of historical firewalls like the Smith-Mundt Act, and the use of pervasive manipulation tactics raise significant concerns about its impact on both foreign sovereignty and domestic liberties. The call for reform aims to disentangle the domestic sphere from this foreign-facing apparatus and introduce accountability for its operations.