Current Affairs

It was very much a trick of the Conservatives in the UK to stop all spending whether the economy needed it or not. But Trump’s tactic or should I say Rubio’s is extraordinary, “Stop all Foreign Aid”. Of course they have the ultimate answer to stop voices being heard and that is to fire the person from their job. But the result is that the US ability to peddle its influence around the world will be coming to an untimely end. Untimely, because like all capital projects there is a soft influence argument and the gift of giving is  a means to a conclusion that does not stop very far from the doorway of the intelligence community.

There are voices out there that will pick up the slack from the voices that have become lost on the budgetary diet of the US Congress and Senate, which have been all powerful on a world stage where they promised to open the chequebook of the Congress or Senate. But what Rubio has done is negate the soft power that allows the US to hold conversations where conversations need to be held. Of course this argument does not fair that well for the US, which has living standards that much better than anywhere else on this planet, but their influence will be maligned by the inability of the US to provide much needed support for the allied powers to the United States.

Over the coming days and weeks, tough conversations are going to be held with those closest to the United States. Decisions are going to be taken which don’t make sense and the intelligence community will be blinded by the absolute refusal of contacts to continue in the field when the US is not providing the revenue to make their own country that little better. But it is allied powers such as the Lebanese army, which is in a hostile environment, and is working to secure a long term agreement with a political elite that will find horse trading with a richer power a means to an end.

It is not really rocket science to suggest that the US is suffering from the conclusion that it has been too generous in the past. But diplomats will be pulling their hair out, especially in places like Africa where US influence was just beginning to make inroads with Joe Biden’s concentration on the continent. Though the world is not yet in a polar fight for influence, the United States has already lost a lot of the battles that would have made sense if there had been a cold war.

Africa is dangerously split by arguments on who can be trusted to help with the development of their economies. Like all continents it is just moving into agreements on technology and how that equates to the world view. AI is the catalyst to all the developments, future wealth and the ability to develop that wealth. But if the US is not going to be a power that develops soft power arguments in Africa, then there has to be realisation that Africa will look elsewhere to develop industry, the next generation of technology, health and how it models government.

For a diplomat to place pressure on a government outside physical force, there is a realisation that the model that has worked for so long has been the development of an allies economy. Whether that is through investment in land reform, clearance of ordinance after a protracted civil war or providing the drugs to fight malaria or HIV, each is a powerful incentive for a government to find an argument to act for US interests. Areas in Africa where there is concern is the Sahel, where Russians are taking up the position of the US and France. But the arguments that development could have continued was an element of soft power that enabled intelligence to provide an insight into the political forces affecting the region.

Insight is going to be that little more difficult to achieve if the United States is going to be insular in the world. Intelligence will dry up and the US will have to be more reliant on allied powers to provide intelligence. The arguments of whether the US will be able to step into zones of interest will be fed into the capital arguments of whether they have influence in a region. But the arguments, which will come from previous players will be maligned by arguments of the loss of soft power.

It is a risky argument that on the one hand you can fund tax cuts in the US with one percent of GDP, but that is the message being pushed by Rubio and Trump at the moment. If the conclusion is that soft power has not provided the US with any advantages then there maybe an argument for an end to soft power options. But teachers teaching the young in schools without the facilities of government, has always been thought of as a noble cause. It is also a way for new voices to be heard and find new markets for the future as well as making friends with those likely to remember the kindness of strangers who taught in these schools. Voices that could bring powerful arguments to the side of an argument that has not proven to be short sighted is in the long term a goal that brings a community onto the side of the teacher, who is representative of soft power.

Britain has lost a lot of influence in the world after the conservative party cut the budget of the Foreign and Commonwealth development office. But the little influence that it still retains is invaluable to the interests of the state, government and intelligence community. Unlike the United States, Britain punches heavily above its weight and the influence of the state promotes the industries, development offices and arguments of whether soft power has a place in the state apparatus.

Soft power is an influence that keeps those closest to the state on your side. And if those closest provide the arguments for economic, intelligence or future capital projects then the argument of soft power has succeeded. China has heavily increased their influence throughout the world with capital projects that have enabled states to develop their resources. The Belt and Road initiative has massively changed the perception of China and nations have looked to China for their future development through projects that China has been able to complete. Though these projects are financed by the states that take part in the project, the influence on the local community has proven significant.

China has in space of twelve years increased its influence on over 150 countries. Though already stated that the Belt and Road is a development project through loan agreements, it has proven to be influential on the member states that are part of the initiative. Though academics argue that the initiative is a debt trap, there has been a realisation that China has developed its relationship significantly within the countries that have been part of the Belt and Road projects.

There is a reason for soft power and the states that have developed their approach to soft power are finding their arguments have more weight when compared to the states that do not wield their influence. Rubio has made a mistake, which will impact the United States fiscally, industrially and in its future attempt to find new resources from developing countries which would have been more responsive if soft power had been part of the US governments remit. The diplomatic and intelligence community must be holding their hands over their heads in shock by the short sightedness of Rubio, but the strategy that is being pushed by the United States will have a malign influence on the ability of the US to control arguments among international bodies in future arguments.