by SGM Jorge A. Rivera, USA
Land Warfare Paper 164, September 2024

In Brief

• Following World War II, the United States adopted a containment strategy against Soviet expansionism.

• Realism, liberalism and constructivism are key theories in international relations, each offering different perspectives on global politics and state behavior.

• The United States has historically fluctuated between retrenchment and deep engagement, ultimately playing a leading role in maintaining global peace post-World War II. Free markets and consumerism enhanced U.S. economic power, allowing it to shape international norms and to promote liberal institutions aimed at global peace.

• Adversaries now employ similar soft-power strategies to disseminate anti-American ideologies and to advocate for alternative policy frameworks.

• America’s influence and liberal institutions are being challenged by the impact of China’s soft-power strategies, Iran’s influence in Latin America and Russia’s cyber and informational threats to U.S. national security.

 

Introduction

Following World War II, with an unconditional surrender secured, the United States harbored no appetite for engaging in further conflicts with potential adversaries.¹ However, it was evident that the Soviet Union would challenge the United States for influence in various global regions, particularly in Europe, prompting President Truman to adopt a nonmilitary approach to counteract further communist expansion.² George F. Kennan, in his seminal piece that was first published anonymously (for which reason it would come to be known as the “X-Article”), emphasized the need for a patient yet resolute containment of Russian expansionism as a cornerstone of U.S. policy. This containment strategy primarily called for economic aid, exemplified by initiatives such as the Marshall Plan, and the use of “psychological warfare” that would encompass both overt propaganda and covert operations to counter the spread of Soviet influence.³

America quickly established hegemonic dominance through the rapid exportation of culture and by leveraging influential programs such as The Marshal Plan, USAID and NASA to demonstrate good neighbor policies and scientific excellence. There is an ongoing competition of American influence on the global stage: Near-peer adversaries have escalated their employment of soft-power strategies, posing a direct challenge to U.S. national security. Specifically, China’s soft-power strategies are increasingly impacting American credibility and influence; Iran’s increasing sway in Latin America is shaping societal perspectives; and the threats posed by Russia’s cyber and information activities influence perspectives on American credibility. To understand the dominating theories in international relations, it is imperative to understand that its debates revolve around three ideas: realism, liberalism and constructivism. Our discussion will begin, then, by understanding these terms.  
 

Realism

Often referred to more specifically as “political realism,” realism offers a perspective on international politics that emphasizes its competitive and conflict-driven nature.⁴ Realists perceive the global order through a lens of human self-interest, positing that actors are inherently driven by their egotistical motives. Within this framework, realists pursue objectives such as security, power, prestige and self-autonomy, all within a self-help environment. In a world lacking global governing authority, each nation is responsible for securing its own safety and power and so for becoming self-reliant.

Realism was evident during the Cold War era, which was marked by the arms race between the United States and the Soviet Union.⁵ During this period, the quantity of nuclear weapons held by each superpower was directly linked to their pursuit of security and deterrence, as well as to their influence over other nations in the global arena. Similarly, North Korea’s adoption of the Juche philosophy aligns with the principles of realism. Juche embodies the idea of “holding fast to an independent position, rejecting dependence on others, using one’s intellect, having faith in one’s capabilities, demonstrating the revolutionary spirit of self-reliance, and, thus, taking responsibility for solving one’s challenges independently under all circumstances.”⁶

 

Liberalism

In the context of international relations theory, liberalism evolved into a unique framework. It encompasses various ideas and arguments concerning how institutions, behaviors and economic interconnections can restrain and lessen the potentially aggressive tendencies of states. In contrast to realism, liberalism widens our perspective by introducing additional elements, particularly focused on the role of citizens and international organizations. Notably, liberalism contrasts realism in the field of international relations theory, presenting a more optimistic worldview that is rooted in a different interpretation of historical events.⁷

According to Jeffrey Meiser, a professor of political science at the University of Portland, the liberal international order consists of three key components.⁸ First, it involves building international law and agreements through organizations such as the United Nations, expanding the global system beyond individual states and promoting collective efforts, diplomacy and equal representation. Second, it fosters free trade and capitalism through entities such as the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, establishing an open, market-driven global economy that encourages peaceful relations among states to safeguard trade benefits. Third, it upholds liberal norms favoring cooperation, human rights, democracy and the rule of law.

During War World II, members of the U.S. State Department held the “conviction that an open international trading system was central to American economic and security interests and that such a system was fundamental to the maintenance of peace.”⁹ A great example of liberalism and international organization for collective security was the Bretton Woods Conference, held in July 1944 in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire. It was a landmark international gathering of delegates from 44 Allied nations with the primary aim of designing a new global monetary and financial order—responding to the economic disruptions of World War II and the Great Depression that had preceded it.¹⁰

This international delegation created two key institutions: the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank (officially known as the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development). The purpose of these institutions was to promote international economic stability and development. Under the Bretton Woods system, participating countries agreed to peg their currencies to the U.S. dollar, which, in turn, was tied to gold at a fixed exchange rate.¹¹ The Bretton Woods conference laid the foundation for the post-war economic order, which endured until the early 1970s—at which point the United States abandoned the gold standard, leading to the collapse of the Bretton Woods system. Nevertheless, the IMF and the World Bank continue to play significant roles in the global economy today.¹²  
 

Constructivism

Constructivism is based on the idea that people are constantly changing the rules on which the world order is based, increasing fragility and constant change within the international system.¹³ The lack of a centralized enforcement mechanism means that there is no authority to compel states to adhere to universally accepted standards of behavior. Even with the anarchic nature of the international system, a shared perception from various state actors on world affairs and consequences determines what constitutes appropriate behavior.¹⁴ Constructivism suggests that shared beliefs about the world—including how it operates, the nature of power and who wields it—give rise to shared norms. These norms establish patterns of behavior that align with the expectations and behaviors of other states. Constructivists argue that these shared beliefs and resulting norms serve as the cohesive force that maintains the integrity of the international system.¹⁵

At its core, constructivism emphasizes the interactions among various actors within the system, each seeking to influence the behavior of others. According to the constructivist theory, the shared perceptions that states hold about the world and the potential consequences they might face if other states view them unfavorably are what constrain states’ actions and keep them within the bounds of acceptable conduct.¹⁶

Constructivism explains how soft power that is wielded by adversaries is changing the world order and the rules of the international system and, most important, challenging American influence on the international system. China, Iran and Russia are far less concerned with the world’s perception of them than they are with simply advancing their own nations’ causes.
 

Chinese Soft Power

Chinese strategists have studied and implemented lessons from other great powers that “genuine global powers possess multidimensional strength.”¹⁷ The Chinese understand that lasting power must go beyond the military and industrial capability and that, to hold on to power, nations must cultivate it “across a variety of spheres: the economy, science, technology, education, culture, values, military, governance, diplomacy, and other sectors.”¹⁸ China is using cultural centers and other propaganda tools to change the perspective on how America and the rest of the world see China.

Confucius Institutes

Confucius Institutes are educational centers that are integrated with over one hundred universities across the United States. They offer college courses for credit to American students while offering Chinese language and cultural content. The Chinese government directly manages these institutes through the Hanban, which is an agency that falls under their Ministry of Education. The Hanban provides the workforce, funding and oversight of the content and management within these institutes.¹⁹ Agreements with American institutions provide the Hanban with legal advantages; it can take legal action against any universities that “commit serious offenses, including behavior that ‘damages or tarnishes the reputation of the Confucius Institutes.’”²⁰ In terms of soft power, these institutes “tend to present China in a positive light and to focus on anodyne aspects of Chinese culture. They avoid Chinese political history and human rights abuses, present Taiwan and Tibet as undisputed territories of China, and develop a generation of American students with selective knowledge of a major country.”²¹

Popular Culture

China is pursuing a variety of popular cultural and societal influencing strategies across a variety of media and domains to change popular views of China. China’s accumulation of soft power across literature, art, movies, music, academia, technology and other areas is “not incidental, it is cultivated, and it is carefully thought through [to complement its assertion of hard power].”²² According to Joseph S. Nye, “China believes that it is not going to be a global power . . . unless it can attract. Unless it has soft power.”²³ China’s intent of attraction is to assert itself as a global influence to prove to domestic and external audiences that the Chinese Communist Party and its culture are a legitimate global power. Its biggest competitor and main target is the American brand, which has dominated the world stage since the end of World War II. Subject matter experts Dr. Zachary Davis and Mr. Marshall Monroe describe several examples of cultural competition between China and the United States, specifically in films.²⁴ In 1943, Walt Disney produced a movie called Victory through Air Power; it was a pro-America depiction of civil industry and American military might that was capable of delivering justice to an evil adversary. Additionally, the original movie Red Dawn, first released in 1984, was an anti- Soviet and pro-American movie in which the spirit of a small town in America wins the day. However, in the 2012 remake of Red Dawn, “the filmmakers altered the script to turn an invading Chinese army into North Korean troops.”²⁵

Today, Chinese-funded projects such as The Martian depict Chinese space programs saving an American astronaut after the American space program makes a series of dire mistakes. We see another example of China wielding soft power in the film industry in The MEG, a movie about a submersible seacraft based near China that finds itself in battle with a giant pre-historic shark. In the end, the shark is killed, but the MEG and all of the crew’s equipment is destroyed. Luckily, a passing Chinese vessel rescues the crew. In a final such example, reported by the Washington Post, “During the production of the live-action 2020 Mulan remake, [Disney producers worked with the China Film Group Corporation and went] as far as to get the script approved by the Central Propaganda Department.”²⁶

While sometimes more subtle than this, China’s national rejuvenation strategy sends a clear and constant message that China is here to save the day—especially after America fails.²⁷ This approach not only sets up China as a superior and dependable choice but also directly replaces a failing American image in popular culture. The bottom line: The narrative is conditioning the global audience to believe that China will be there when America fails. “China will be the most complex, the most daunting, and, potentially, the most dangerous of the many foreign challenges the United States will face in the years ahead.”²⁸

Economic Influence

For years, China has taken advantage of international economic institutions as a developing country, but it falls short of taking the responsibilities of a developed country.²⁹ The One Belt, One Road project is a $900 billion infrastructure plan to resurrect the old Silk Road from yesteryear.³⁰ This project will allow China to invest in critical infrastructure and to connect with its neighbors in the West, “most notably Central Asia, the Middle East, and Europe.”³¹ Primarily, China looks to increase trade with its continental neighbors, but ultimately, this also aims to give China key access and control over critical infrastructure, lines of communication and the ability to influence rules, agreements and access.³²

Iran in Latin America

Starting in the 15th century, there was fierce competition among Europeans to acquire land and establish colonies in the Americas. However, by the year 1823, a significant number of Latin American nations successfully achieved their independence from European colonial powers. In the same year, “President James Monroe warned European powers not to interfere in the affairs of the Western Hemisphere.”³³ The issuance of this Monroe Doctrine served as a clear warning to European leaders, cautioning them against any future endeavors to colonize the Western Hemisphere. President Monroe had made it clear that the United States would view these actions as provocations with hostile intent.

Exploration of the current state of Latin America reveals that Iran has developed strategic interests in that region—including diplomatic partnerships, involvement in money laundering activities, and the positioning of its military and terrorist proxies within the region. What is the extent of Iran’s influence in Latin America, and how is that influence potentially threatening to U.S. regional dominance?

Tri-Border Area

A specific region of concern is the Tri-Border Area, which encompasses regions of Argentina, Paraguay and Brazil. The region’s characteristics include porous borders, pervasive corruption, a lack of effective law enforcement and a prevalence of illicit criminal endeavors. General Richardson, Commander, U.S. Southern Command, highlighted that Iran, alongside other threats, exerts substantial pressure on the fragile institutions of the Latin American region.³⁴ This pressure contributes to political instability and drives many political leaders to seek resources and support from various sources, including those considered adversaries by the United States. Corruption and fractured institutions provide opportunities for nefarious activities. Ilan Berman explains, “Latin America has long functioned as a support theater for Iran and its proxies, with money generated through gray- and black-market activities sent back to benefit the Iranian regime or its affiliated groups.”³⁵

Transnational Crimial Organization

Transnational criminal organizations play a pivotal role in this scenario by exploiting opportunities to generate profits, often at the expense of established legal frameworks. These criminal activities create openings for Iran and other actors to gain access and exert influence within Latin America. “Iran uses both formal and informal instruments to expand its influence in Latin America and the Caribbean and prepare for any potential contingencies.”³⁶ More specifically, the Islamic Republic of Iran does this by increasing “its ideological influence in Latin America with the support of terrorist organizations such as Hizballah.”³⁷ Additionally, as foreign policy expert Joseph Humire explains, “At the tactical level, Iran uses its cultural penetration to gain access to prominent individuals within the Islamic and indigenous communities throughout the region.”³⁸ The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, whose primary purpose since 1979 has been to export the Islamic revolution, is just as active in Latin America as it is in the Middle East; it acts through charitable organizations, mosques, diplomatic offices and the ruse of humanitarian aid. In 2020, Iran “expanded economic and security cooperation with Venezuela on fuel transfers, food staples, and military assistance, possibly expanding the Quds Force’s presence in the region,”³⁹ and in 2023, it “completed a naval deployment that circumnavigated the globe and included a port call in Brazil.”⁴⁰ Iran’s influence and access continue to grow deeply into the Western Hemisphere.

Information Operations

Iran, like China, uses television to reach a connected audience and to influence popular culture. General Richardson explains that Tehran uses both official and unofficial media outlets to improve its image and that of Shia Islam while simultaneously reducing Western influence in the region. Their Spanish-language channel, accessible in seventeen countries, actively spreads false information and promotes distrust toward the United States.⁴¹ Specifically, HispanTV is a Spanish-language channel that promotes Iranian-approved propaganda and “the Iranian regime’s antisemitic views, Holocaust revisionism, anti-Israel prejudice, and incitement.”⁴²

Russia's Hybrid Warfare

Just as the Marshall Plan and the Monroe Doctrine were meant to shape the environment and influence international relations, so is Russian hybrid warfare. Russia is busy with a number of cyber and informational activities that are threatening America’s credibility and influence: “According to Eugene Rumer, the Primakov doctrine posits that a unipolar world dominated by the United States is unacceptable to Russia and offers the following principles for Russian foreign policy: Russia should strive toward a multipolar world managed by a concert of major powers that can counterbalance U.S. unilateral power. Russia should insist on its primacy in the post-Soviet space and lead integration in that region. Russia should oppose NATO expansion.”⁴³

Multipolar

NATO is expanding as a response to Russian aggression, yet Russia perceives this expansion as a direct challenge to its sovereignty. Russia’s actions in Estonia, Georgia and Ukraine serve as examples of its proficiency in orchestrating cyber technology, disseminating disinformation, waging psychological warfare and maintaining plausible deniability.⁴⁴ These capabilities are not only focused in Eastern Europe; in fact, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence states that Russia is “particularly focused on improving its ability to target critical infrastructure . . . in the United States as well as in allied and partner countries.”⁴⁵ Russian cyber capabilities supplement its conventional military strategies, highlighting its readiness and ability to confront aggressors, with a disregard for established international norms and laws.

Primacy

After successful operations in Crimea, Estonia and Georgia, Moscow is well-positioned to continue destabilizing operations in Ukraine. Like Iran, Russia has expanded into Latin America, forging alliances in Cuba and Venezuela in arms sales, energy projects and other markets.⁴⁶ “In the Middle East and North Africa, Moscow [used] its involvement in Syria and Libya to increase its clout, undercut U.S. leadership, present itself as an indispensable mediator, and gain military access rights and economic opportunities.”⁴⁷

NATO

While Russia indicates openly that it sees weaknesses in the NATO alliance, it does, nonetheless, view NATO’s expansion and exercises as aggression against Russia’s sovereignty.⁴⁸ Russia remains the primary security concern in Europe, as it persists in its aggressive actions against Ukraine, including military operations, attacks on vital infrastructure and the constant threat of further escalation. The Kremlin’s strategy involves manipulating energy markets and pressuring other nations to reduce their support for Kyiv to outlast Western efforts.⁴⁹ While NATO continues to claim its defensive posture, Russia will continue to challenge U.S. and NATO influence in the region.

Analysis

The United States, since its founding, has gone through cycles of retrenchment and deep engagement. In the 19th century, while criticizing other powers for empire-building, it continued to expand westward, warning the international community to leave the western hemisphere alone. However, in the aftermath of World War II, the United States found it necessary to play a leading role in maintaining global peace.

The pursuit of free markets and consumerism enhanced the economic power of the United States, granting it access to foreign regions and resources, along with the ability to shape international norms within various international organizations. Simultaneously, innovations in technology and culture—including convenience products, artistic expression, technology, music and cinema—became emblematic of the American spirit, with the overarching narrative emphasizing the superiority of freedom. Capitalism, international development efforts and collaborative international initiatives have collectively facilitated the creation of liberal institutions aimed at promoting global peace. Today, adversaries of the United States employ similar soft-power strategies to disseminate anti-American ideologies and to advocate for alternative policy frameworks that are different from the American status quo.

This multifaceted approach encompasses economic institutions, international development initiatives, media dissemination through radio, television and social platforms, political meddling, technological advancements, corporate espionage, information warfare and cyber warfare. These tactics are employed alongside diplomatic and military strategies to influence public perceptions, to gather support and ultimately to replace American ideology with alternative ideologies and policy paradigms.

Conclusion

In recent decades, we have seen the rise of adversarial influence as a replacement for the American status quo. Chinese soft-power strategies have included wielding influence through Confucius Institutes and other cultural and social propaganda in television and popular culture. Additionally, Iran has built in-roads in Latin America by seizing opportunities at the seams of criminal activity, cultural centers and social welfare programs. Russia has also engaged in competition against liberal institutions and international law to build a less permissive environment in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus. Viewing the efforts of these three adversaries collectively highlights what the effects of traditional American influence have been in the past—and how adversaries are now using the same soft-power strategies to compete against that American influence, seeking to provide alternatives on the world stage.

 

Notes▼