US must turn to soft power

As the 20th anniversary of 9/11 nears, Joe Biden has declared that US-led anti-terror efforts must continue post-Afghanistan. However, Washington would be wise to deploy a much “smarter” campaign.

There is now a window of opportunity for this to happen with the president’s speech in which he declared that the Afghan exit ends “an era of major US military operations to remake other countries.” Despite the mistakes made under the Biden and Trump administrations, there is no question that the heavy US presence in not just Afghanistan but also other nations such as Iraq antagonised many across the world, especially in Muslim-majority countries.

This is one factor that has driven the pockets of anti-Americanism that predated the presidencies of both Biden and Donald Trump. In countries such as Turkey, Jordan and Pakistan, opinion polls show that positive sentiment toward the US has fallen off a cliff in the past two decades.

In this context, it is increasingly clear that there has been a key weakness in the US approach to the global campaign against terrorism — it has been dominated by counter terrorism and security, while there has been underinvestment in soft power instruments such as foreign aid.

To be sure, even this unbalanced strategy has secured some key successes, and the US homeland has not suffered a major terrorist attack for 20 years. But an overwhelming emphasis on hard power has fueled significant controversy, alienating many across the world.

This approach was lauded by Donald Trump during his presidency. He regularly claimed one of the triumphs of his term of office was “carpet bombing Daesh into oblivion,” despite the fact that the terror group and its offshoots continue to operate around the world, including Afghanistan.

Biden would do well to reflect on this, and on his period as vice-president in Barack Obama’s administration,when these issues where last seriously debated. At that time, senior US policymakers highlighted the need for a paradigm shift that might well have come to fruition in a Hillary Clinton presidency, since as she championed a policy of “smart power” — shifting the balance between hard and soft power in favor of the latter.

The reason these issues are so important is that the outcome of the anti-terrorism campaign is related to a battle between moderates and extremists in Islamic civilization. Unless this is better recognized and addressed, with the soft power elements of the campaign dialed up significantly, the US-led international strategy will continue to face setbacks.

The soft power roadmap is relatively clear. Seizing the moment requires the US and international partners to give much higher priority to activities such as public diplomacy, sustainable development, economic assistance, and exchange programs.

One of the potential manifestations of this is the extra weight the Biden team is seeking to give USAID. From its creation in the early 1960s, this international agency has steadily lost influence within the US government,and control over its own agenda and budget. Moreover, while Trump frequently boasted about US generosity, he repeatedly tried to cut foreign aid spending. Biden should reverse this outlook. As he has correctly noted, building soft power is an expensive, demanding and complex generational project, and one that the government cannot achieve alone. Non-governmental players from the private sector, NGOs and faith communities are also key for success.

It is the Cold War that perhaps provides the best comparison with what may now needed in the campaign against terrorism. As in the Western struggle with the Soviet Union, which was ultimately won by US-led international containment, cultural vigor and strategic patience, the challenges posed by the campaign against terrorism need a much smarter balance between hard and soft power, with resources to match.

Numerous US officials have highlighted the gross mismatch between the current budgets of the Pentagon and other US international programs. Washington spends about 500 times more on its military than it does on the international broadcasting and exchanges that proved so successful during the Cold War.

Of course, a holistic international plan to tackle violent extremism will inevitably have a military and counter-terrorism component. However, soft power needs to become a much bigger part of the overall mix.

After Afghanistan, Biden must now address this weakness in the campaign against terrorism. Moreover, he must also build bipartisan support for a sustained commitment from subsequent administrations in what must be a generational commitment to maximise the prospects of success.

• Andrew Hammond is an Associate at LSE IDEAS at the London School of Economics