Soft power is usually defined by attraction. A country becomes influential because others admire its culture, history, education, values, technology, or way of life. That remains true. As Joseph Nye originally conceived it, soft power was never about military force or economic pressure. It was about shaping preferences through attraction and persuasion rather than coercion or payment.

In today’s international environment, however, attraction is only part of the story. Countries are judged not merely by how appealing they appear, but also by whether they are perceived as reliable, consistent, and credible. Soft power, in other words, is no longer just about being admired. It is increasingly about being trusted.

This adds an important dimension to the discussion. A country can remain highly visible while becoming less trusted. It may continue to dominate global attention even as it loses the credibility that gives influence its staying power. Visibility makes a country familiar. Trust makes its influence durable.

The United States illustrates this dynamic more clearly than any other nation. It still possesses extraordinary soft power assets: Hollywood, elite universities, globally recognized brands, scientific innovation, Silicon Valley, and an unmatched cultural reach. The 2026 Global Soft Power Index by Brand Finance continues to rank the United States first overall, citing enduring strengths in arts and entertainment, global brands, science, technology, and space exploration. Yet the same report records the steepest decline in soft power among all 193 nation brands, with decreases across almost every soft power metric except familiarity.

This is the central paradox of contemporary soft power. A country can remain familiar and influential while experiencing reputational decline if international audiences no longer believe its actions align with the image it projects. Brand Finance describes a widening disconnect between America’s globally familiar image and the direction of its domestic politics. It also identifies declines in measures such as reputation, trust, relations with other countries, political stability, safety and security, human rights, and the rule of law.

None of this suggests that American soft power has disappeared. It plainly has not. Rather, it suggests that attraction alone becomes less resilient when reliability is called into question. A country’s films, universities, companies, and technological achievements may continue to inspire admiration, even as its political credibility erodes if allies and foreign publics begin to doubt its consistency.

Recent polling reinforces this point. A 2026 Pew Research Center survey conducted across 36 countries found that the share of respondents who regard the United States as a reliable partner has fallen sharply in many places since 2022. In Canada, for example, 83 percent described the United States as a reliable partner in 2022, compared with just 35 percent in 2026. Pew also found declining confidence in whether the United States contributes to peace and stability and whether it takes other countries’ interests into account when making foreign policy decisions. These findings illustrate why trust has become central to soft power. Foreign publics may continue to admire aspects of a country, but if they question its reliability, its capacity to persuade is likely to weaken.

China’s rise in the Global Soft Power Index points in the same direction from the opposite perspective. According to Brand Finance, China has consolidated its position in second place in the 2026 rankings and now scores higher than the United States on 19 of the 35 nation-brand attributes. The report also notes that China has surpassed the United States in reputation for the first time, with gains driven by perceptions of long-term credibility, reliability, and policy consistency. Its profile is further strengthened by strengths in business and trade, education, science, and the perception that it can deliver tangible benefits. Whether one views China positively or critically, its rise suggests that soft power is becoming increasingly tied not only to attraction but also to perceived competence, credibility, and reliability.

This is not simply an American or Chinese story. The broader international environment has elevated the importance of trust for all major powers. A report by the British Council on trust, public diplomacy, and soft power argues that trust is inseparable from soft power. It emphasizes that trust is built gradually but can be lost quickly, that meaningful trust-building requires cooperation, and that governments alone cannot manufacture it. As the report notes, trust can serve either as a facilitator of influence or, when absent, as a significant constraint.

Another distinction is equally important. Attraction is often associated with communication. It is shaped by how governments present themselves and promote their image abroad. Trust, by contrast, is earned through actions, experience, and sustained behavior. A country may project a compelling narrative, but that narrative becomes persuasive only when it is reinforced by consistent conduct. A state can portray itself as open while adopting restrictive policies. It can champion stability while experiencing political turbulence. It can speak the language of cooperation while acting in ways that leave partners more cautious.

This is what distinguishes trust from image. Trust depends on whether a country is seen to honor its commitments, respect international rules, act predictably, listen to its partners, and maintain consistency between its stated values and its behavior.

This does not mean that trust always reflects shared values, nor does it imply that every country earns trust in the same way. Different audiences place their confidence in different states for different reasons. Some prioritize predictability, while others value development outcomes, institutional quality, economic opportunity, or cultural familiarity. Yet despite these differences, the underlying pattern remains consistent: a country’s influence is more likely to endure when others believe it can deliver on what it promises and embody what it represents.

None of this diminishes the importance of attraction. Culture, education, values, innovation, and lifestyle remain indispensable sources of international influence. But China’s recent trajectory suggests that attraction is more likely to translate into lasting influence when it is reinforced by credibility. Conversely, the data on the United States indicate that when trust erodes, even the strongest soft power assets become more vulnerable to reputational decline.

Taken together, these developments suggest that soft power is evolving. In today’s international environment, admiration is most effective when it is reinforced by credibility. States are judged not only by how attractive or visible they appear, but also by whether their actions make that image believable over time. Soft power, therefore, increasingly depends not only on being seen, but also on being trusted.