Future of Soft Power: 2026 National Capability Ratings

Future of Soft Power: 2026 National Capability Ratings
Soft Power: 2026 National Capability Ratings
QUICK TAKE ยท AI Summary
  • ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ Singapore and ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญ Switzerland share first position, each reaching the Capability Frontier (Tier 1) across all three Soft Capability domains: Human Capital, Information & Influence and Governance & Integrity.
  • ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Denmark, ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ช Estonia, ๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฎ Finland, ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Israel and ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ช Sweden share third position, each holding Tier 1 in two of three Soft Capability domains and Tier 2 in the third.
  • ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ด Norway and ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ the United States share eighth position, each holding Tier 1 in two Soft Capability domains but with a Tier 3 gap in the third.

This article presents a domain-based assessment of soft power, evaluated across multiple foundational pillars such as culture, diplomacy, education, information and influence, and people-to-people connectivity. Rather than relying on composite indices, countries are assessed using Pareto tiering, which preserves the structure and balance of soft-power systems without collapsing them into a single score. Countries are placed into domain-specific tiers, and relative ordering is derived using a competition-style ranking that reflects the concentration of higher-tier capabilities rather than marginal differences.

The core analytical device is a single matrix chart showing countries as rows, soft-power domains as columns, tier placement in each cell, and rank applied only where profiles differ. This structure reveals not only who leads in soft power, but how influence is constructedโ€”exposing asymmetry, structural ceilings, and regional variation. Applied globally and across regional groupings, the framework demonstrates that soft-power leadership is scarce, while meaningful differentiation persists well below the frontier.

Figure X. Top 20 Nations: 2026 Soft Capability Ratings

National Capability Hard Capability Soft Capability Econ Capability Frontiers
# Nation CT SI NS HC II GI FS PI TI T1 T2 T3
1๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ SingaporeT4T1T4T1T1T1T1T1T17--
1๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญ SwitzerlandT2T1T5T1T1T1T2T1T162-
3๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ฐ DenmarkT5T2T5T2T1T1T2T2T225-
3๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ช EstoniaT7T3T5T1T2T1T3T2T1322
3๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฎ FinlandT4T1T5T2T1T1T3T2T3322
3๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑ IsraelT2T2T1T1T2T1T3T1T1531
3๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ช SwedenT2T1T4T2T1T1T1T1T253-
8๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ด NorwayT4T1T4T3T1T1T2T3T3313
8๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United StatesT1T1T1T1T1T3T1T1T18-1
10๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท South KoreaT2T1T3T2T1T2T2T1T1441
11๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ NetherlandsT2T1T4T3T1T2T2T2T2251
12๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ช UAET5T1T4T4T1T2T2T2T224-
13๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต JapanT3T1T3T4T1T3T2T2T2233
14๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช GermanyT2T2T4T4T1T4T1T3T3222
15๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ AustraliaT5T3T4T4T2T3T3T4T4-13
15๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ ChinaT2T1T2T3T2T4T3T2T2152
15๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡บ LuxembourgT7T3T7T4T2T3T4T4T5-12
18๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฟ New ZealandT7T4T6T5T3T2T4T5T5-11
19๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United KingdomT4T3T3T4T2T4T1T4T4112
20๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท FranceT3T2T2T4T2T5T1T3T3133

Contents

  • Introduction
  • National Soft Power Assessments
  • Regional Soft Power Profiles
  • National Case Studies
  • Scenarios and Sensitivity Analysis
  • Data and Definitions

Introduction

Soft power is assessed across multiple irreducible domains, including:

  • Cultural Reach and Creative Influence
  • Diplomatic Networks and Global Engagement
  • Education, Research, and Talent Attraction
  • Information, Media, and Narrative Influence
  • People-to-People Exchange and Global Communities

Each domain is evaluated independently. No aggregation, weighting, or averaging is applied across domains.

Rather than producing a single index, each country is assigned a tier within each soft-power domain based on Pareto dominance. This preserves the multidimensional nature of influence and avoids allowing excellence in one areaโ€”such as cultural exports or media reachโ€”to mask weakness in others, such as diplomacy or educational pull.

Overall rank is derived, not calculated.

Countries are ordered by the concentration of higher-tier placements across domains, beginning with Tier 1, then Tier 2, then Tier 3. Countries with identical domain-tier profiles share the same rank, and competition ranking is applied (e.g. 1, 1, 3, 4). Rank never determines tier placement, and tiers are not scoresโ€”they are structural categories that describe how national soft power is built and sustained.

Posn Country Human Capital Information & Influence Governance Integrity
1๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ SingaporeTier 1Tier 1Tier 1
2๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญ SwitzerlandTier 1Tier 1Tier 1
3๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ฐ DenmarkTier 2Tier 1Tier 1
4๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ช EstoniaTier 1Tier 2Tier 1
5๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฎ FinlandTier 2Tier 1Tier 1
6๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑ IsraelTier 1Tier 2Tier 1
7๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ช SwedenTier 2Tier 1Tier 1
8๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ด NorwayTier 3Tier 1Tier 1
9๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United StatesTier 1Tier 1Tier 3
10๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท South KoreaTier 2Tier 1Tier 2
11๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ NetherlandsTier 3Tier 1Tier 2
12๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ช United Arab EmiratesTier 4Tier 1Tier 2
13๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต JapanTier 4Tier 1Tier 3
14๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช GermanyTier 4Tier 1Tier 4
15๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ AustraliaTier 4Tier 2Tier 3
16๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ ChinaTier 3Tier 2Tier 4
17๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡บ LuxembourgTier 4Tier 2Tier 3
18๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United KingdomTier 4Tier 2Tier 4
19๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท FranceTier 4Tier 2Tier 5
20๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ช IrelandTier 5Tier 2Tier 4