how things have changed
Sunday’s news
Semafor.com publishes a series of daily newsletters, each offering a measured snapshot of topics often missed by other sources, tracking hour by hour. Each type of publication serves a purpose, but I find myself frequently saying “ah, ha” to the information this particular measured reporting offers.
Several entries in yesterday afternoon’s Semafor Flagship illustrated how dramatically the world is shifting.
Over the bulk of the eighty years since the end of the Cold War, the world could count on American assistance, often called soft power because it wasn’t bombs or bullets, to help alleviate desperate conditions caused by conflict or natural disasters. We offered food, medical assistance, humanitarian relief, or technical aid, partially out of altruism and, in part, because this act, at a relatively low cost compared with the conflict it raised, raised our esteem in the eyes of others. One hardly considered the Soviets the model of help on anything, for example.
I was at a multinational military education conference in Brunei in November 2013 when a typhoon devastated the Philippines. Countries literally tisked tisked that Beijing was showing no intention of joining Washington in moving to help millions affected. We all knew that Beijing was angry about a dispute with the Philippine government over land features in the South China Sea, but people were trying to survive. Surely, the whispers asked, Beijing would order the PLAN to provide humanitarian help? They did not.
The United States garnered much thanks a decade earlier when we rushed supplies and technical help to the areas pulverized by the tsunami that devastated so much of the Indian Ocean in December 2004. Beijing and most of the rest of the world lacked the unique capacity we had to address immediate needs, allowing us to stand as a beacon for people-to-people interaction that a child in Krabi on the Kra Peninsula of Thailand would recall for life. We did it to help, but we also demonstrated immense power to confront human need as we waged war in Southwest Asia and the Middle East.
Semafor noted that Asia today faces growing signs of a food crisis stemming from disruptions to fertilizer shipments through the Strait of Hormuz. “Disruptions quickly escalate downstream”, according to the piece, with the modern 911 system of calling the U.S. Agency for International Development now closed. The deep dark dirty secret was that USAID coordinated assistance that no other country can offer. Nations around the world, particularly in Asia, fear food will not be available should this vital fertilizer (and, of course, petroleum) remain disrupted.
Additionally, the respect for U.S. leadership is declining vis-à-vis our major challenger. According to Gallup polling, respect for China’s leadership now surpasses that for the United States slightly for the first time. China’s reputation has hovered near 30% since 2010, until climbing back to 35% in 2024.
American leadership over the same time fell from just below 50% in 2009 to just above 30% following 2024. We prize how much our commitment to helping the world redounds to reputational support for our programs and our vision of humanity.
Views of leadership are a snapshot in time, of course. But the trend of Americans no longer being seen as leading efforts to improve the lot of humanity is somewhat shocking to a nation so long touted as indispensable in helping others. The 2026 budget for assistance is $50 billion—or 0.74%—focused on spurring investment in the United States, out of an overall spending package of $6.746 trillion, as opposed to 1.4% of the budget in 2012.
All of this comes amid the backdrop of Easter morning’s online post saying.
“Tuesday will be Power Plant Day and Bridge Day, all wrapped in one, in Iran. There will be nothing like it!!! Open the Fuckin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you will be living in Hell—JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah. President DONALD J. TRUMP”
I suspect our leadership numbers may not rise soon in polling following this conflict, regardless of our successes at rescuing Americans or defeating the Iranians. Millions of Americans will not care or see any implications, but the consequences of such a decline in how others see us compared with our peers will matter down the line in an intertwined globe. The aid we provided was a form of strength no one else could offer.
Actions create consequences, even if they don’t appear for a generation or two. Last week marked the 78th anniversary of President Truman launching the Marshall Plan, which crystallized our global leadership through decades of generosity to Europe. Will this set of circumstances have the same effects?
I welcome your thoughts on this column. Perhaps you think these items are completely unrelated and irrelevant. If so, please chime in as I don’t have all of the answers.
I appreciate those who read this column once or repeatedly. I especially thank the subscribers whose support allows me to read so many options I would not otherwise be able to access. The subscription levels are $55 annually or $8 monthly.
The tulips are passing, but still offer a glorious reminder of how beautiful life can be.
Be well and be safe. FIN
Guest Blogger, “Three Foreign Aid Mythbusters”, nationalpriorities.org, 17 June 2015, retrieved at https://www.nationalpriorities.org/blog/2015/06/17/three-foreign-aid-mythbusters/
Simon Fraser, “Consequences and Implications for International Development Assistance Sector from the Closure of USAID”, globalpolicyjournal.com, 20 March 2025, retrieved at https://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/blog/20/03/2025/consequences-and-implications-international-development-assistance-sector-closure
Eleanor Pringle, “‘This cannot be sustainable’: The U.S. borrowed $50 billion per week for the past five months, the CBO says”, Fortune.com, 10 March 2026, retrieved at https://fortune.com/2026/03/10/treasury-debt-borrowing-five-months-deficit-warning/
“Semafor Flagship”, Semafor.com, 5 April 2026, “Trump’s latest threats”, “Food crisis warnings”, and “Dwindling US soft power”