Soft Power and Great-Power Competition: Shifting Sands in the Balance of Power Between the United States and China

This article interrogates the role of soft power in the evolving balance between the United States and China, arguing that attraction, credibility and narrative dominance shape material outcomes by enabling coalitions, setting standards and legitimising security choices. The abstract surveys instruments—education, media, technology ecosystems, cultural industries, development cooperation—and explains how they translate into influence across the Indo-Pacific and Global South. It contends that the US retains significant advantages in higher education, research, cultural exports and alliance networks, while China has leveraged infrastructure finance, manufacturing integration and state-led media to expand reach. Yet both face constraints: US polarisation and perceived inconsistency; China’s governance model and trust deficits. For smaller states such as Bangladesh, the competition creates both opportunity and exposure. The article proposes a hedging strategy: diversify partnerships, align with universal public goods (health security, climate finance, digital connectivity), and protect policy autonomy through transparent standards. It concludes that soft power is not a beauty contest but a capacity to convene, persuade and co-produce solutions—an arena where middle and smaller powers can exercise agency.

The body develops a three-level analysis. At the systemic level, it examines norm entrepreneurship: data governance, AI ethics, supply-chain security and climate action as arenas where rule-setting confers long-term advantage. It contrasts the US network of universities, venture capital and open science with China’s scale, industrial policy and south–south cooperation platforms. At the regional level, it tracks narratives around the Indo-Pacific, BRI, IPEF and digital silk routes, showing how infrastructure, standards and content platforms shape preferences. At the national level, it evaluates audience reception: youth mobility, scholarship flows, streaming media, diaspora ties and technology adoption. The article then turns to Bangladesh. It recommends leveraging scholarships and research partnerships without overdependence on any one patron; building domestic content industries to tell Bangladesh’s story; and adopting transparent procurement and data policies to avoid technological lock-in. It also urges investment in English and regional language science communication to improve global research visibility. A policy toolkit is offered: cultural seasons co-curated with partners, open data for innovation, sovereign digital identity safeguards, and climate diplomacy that convenes cross-bloc coalitions. The conclusion states that in a contested information environment, credibility is the ultimate soft-power currency. By anchoring external partnerships in domestic legitimacy and inclusive development, Bangladesh can navigate great-power competition while advancing its own strategic priorities.