More from this creator
Other episodes by Kitty Cat.
More like this
If you liked this, try these.
Transcript
The full episode, in writing.
Here are the four biggest U.S. and international stories as of Thursday, July 23, 2026.
Shifting Perceptions in Southeast Asia
On July 19, 2026, Asia Society released a report examining global public opinion on China, focusing specifically on China’s standing in Southeast Asia’s swing states. The report identifies a trend of shifting attitudes toward China within these countries throughout 2026. Swing states in Southeast Asia are defined as countries that do not consistently align with or against major powers and whose foreign policy positions can be pivotal in determining the balance of influence in the region.
One of the key findings of the report is that China’s standing in several of these swing states has experienced notable volatility. The mechanism behind these changes in public opinion involves a combination of domestic political debate, the perceived benefits and drawbacks of Chinese investment, and recent regional security developments. Public surveys cited by the report indicate that in at least three major Southeast Asian countries, favorable views of China have declined by several percentage points when compared to the prior year. In some states, positive perceptions remain above 50%, but in others, the numbers have dropped below that threshold, signaling a shift in the regional mood.
The report notes that public trust in China’s intentions has become a central subject of discussion among key demographic groups in these countries. In urban centers, younger voters show more skepticism toward Chinese influence than older generations, who may value economic growth over concerns about political autonomy. This generational divide shapes the nature of political discourse and influences the platforms of parties in these countries. The shift is most pronounced in countries that have recently experienced local disputes over infrastructure projects linked to the Belt and Road Initiative, with residents expressing concerns about debt sustainability and transparency.
Asia Society’s analysis draws attention to the fact that perceptions of China are not static but are instead highly responsive to recent events. For example, diplomatic incidents or disputes in the South China Sea have an immediate and measurable effect on public attitudes, with negative news cycles correlating with sharp drops in China’s favorability. Conversely, when China provides disaster relief or facilitates trade deals, these moves can yield temporary upticks in public approval.
The report points out that social media plays a crucial role in the formation of public opinion about China in Southeast Asia. Viral stories about environmental impacts or controversies surrounding labor practices on Chinese-funded projects spread rapidly, amplifying negative sentiment when it emerges. Traditional media coverage, meanwhile, often frames bilateral relations in economic terms, highlighting fluctuations in trade volume or investment figures as evidence of deepening or weakening ties.
Diplomatic and Economic Impacts
The changing attitudes documented in Southeast Asia’s swing states have direct consequences for diplomatic relationships with China in 2026. Leaders in these countries increasingly calibrate their foreign policy stances based on fluctuations in public opinion, aware that domestic approval or criticism of China can influence their own political standing. In cases where negative sentiment rises, officials are more likely to delay or renegotiate agreements related to Chinese investment or security cooperation.
A specific outcome of this shift is the slower pace of new large-scale infrastructure projects involving Chinese companies. In several swing states, governments have postponed announcements of additional Belt and Road Initiative projects until after local elections, reflecting concerns that close association with Chinese funding could become a political liability. This delay can be traced directly to public skepticism voiced in opinion polls and to grassroots mobilization against perceived overreliance on foreign capital. In some instances, national parliaments have launched inquiries into the terms of previous Chinese-backed deals, citing constituent pressure.
The immediate economic impact of these changing attitudes manifests in trade figures and investment flows. In at least two swing states, the report documents a year-on-year slowdown in new Chinese foreign direct investment, with figures dropping by more than 10% compared to the previous period. The mechanism behind this decline involves both government policy—such as tightening approval processes for foreign-funded projects—and a more cautious approach from Chinese investors facing heightened scrutiny.
Diplomatic signaling has also shifted. Where Southeast Asian leaders once emphasized “win-win partnerships” with China, recent official statements are more likely to stress the need for balance and diversification in foreign relations. The effect of this rhetorical change can be measured in the number of new memoranda of understanding signed with Western or regional partners, sometimes as a counterweight to Chinese initiatives.
The Asia Society report also notes that economic relationships are not uniformly affected across sectors. While manufacturing might see reduced growth in Chinese-funded plants, other sectors such as digital technology or tourism may remain robust if they are less subject to politicized scrutiny. The mechanism here is the visibility and perceived sensitivity of projects: major physical infrastructure draws more public attention—and, consequently, more political risk—than less tangible investments.
The decision-making process within these swing states has become more consultative and less centralized as a result of shifting public opinion. Where once executive branches could enter into long-term strategic partnerships with little debate, now legislatures and civil society groups are more involved, ensuring that foreign policy reflects a wider range of domestic interests.
Strategies for Influence
Major nations, including China and its competitors, have responded to these trends by adapting their strategies to shape global image and influence foreign publics. In 2026, strategies for influence increasingly blend economic, cultural, and digital components. Governments are investing in public diplomacy campaigns designed to address specific concerns of target populations, especially in regions where perceptions are volatile.
China, for example, has expanded its use of “soft power” by sponsoring cultural festivals, educational exchanges, and media partnerships throughout Southeast Asia. The mechanism is to build positive associations with Chinese culture and society to offset negative news or political friction. These efforts are often coordinated through Chinese embassies and cultural centers, which report increases in attendance at events and applications for university scholarships. The Asia Society report highlights that scholarship programs for Southeast Asian students have grown by double digits year-over-year, with one country reporting a 23% rise in Chinese-funded academic placements since 2025.
Other major players respond in kind. The United States, for instance, has increased funding for its own cultural and educational outreach in the region, launching English language programs, leadership seminars, and tech innovation contests targeting youth demographics. The mechanism here is competitive engagement, aiming to build lasting networks of alumni who are predisposed to view the United States favorably. Western embassies have documented increased attendance at their programs since the start of 2026, with some initiatives oversubscribed by more than 200%.
Digital influence operations are another area of rapid innovation. Governments and affiliated organizations deploy targeted advertising on social media platforms to promote positive narratives about their countries or to counteract critical reporting. The Asia Society report documents a rise in sponsored digital content in local languages, including explainers about infrastructure projects and testimonials from business leaders who have benefited from Chinese or Western investment. The effectiveness of these campaigns is measured in online engagement metrics, with some government-backed videos reaching several million views within days.
Although these campaigns generate awareness, the report also notes the risk of backlash if publics perceive messaging as propaganda. In several swing states, opposition politicians have made criticism of foreign influence a central part of their platforms, pledging to expose or counter what they call “hidden agendas” in public diplomacy. The effect is to force a more nuanced approach, as major powers must now balance visibility with credibility, tailoring their messages to local contexts and partnering with trusted domestic organizations to enhance legitimacy.
The interplay between traditional and new strategies for influence means that regional public opinion remains highly dynamic. As a result, diplomatic actors must constantly monitor sentiment and be prepared to adjust both messaging and material offers to maintain or improve their standings.
Comparative Case: Israel’s U.S. Campaign
On July 19, 2026, The Wall Street Journal reported that Israel has launched a $50 million campaign to change public opinion in the United States. This initiative is designed to influence perceptions of Israel among the American public and is notable for its scale and ambition. The mechanism of the campaign involves a combination of outreach and media strategies, reflecting a growing global trend among major nations to invest heavily in public image management.
The $50 million budget for Israel’s campaign is larger than many national tourism promotion efforts and represents a significant allocation of resources for a foreign government’s public diplomacy in the United States. The campaign utilizes a range of tactics, including high-profile advertising in major media outlets, social media outreach, and partnerships with cultural and community organizations. The design is intended to reach both broad audiences and targeted demographic groups whose views may be especially influential in shaping overall public sentiment.
One element of the campaign is the use of paid digital content and influencer partnerships. Israeli agencies are working with American social media personalities to deliver positive narratives about Israel, focusing on themes like innovation, shared values, and humanitarian aid. The mechanism here is to leverage the credibility and reach of popular figures to normalize favorable views of Israel within everyday online discourse.
The campaign also includes traditional outreach, such as sponsoring educational programs, hosting cultural events, and facilitating visits to Israel for opinion leaders from the U.S. These exchanges are structured to generate first-hand positive experiences, which participants are encouraged to share upon returning home. The Wall Street Journal report mentions that Israel is prioritizing outreach to key constituencies, including university students, faith-based groups, and business leaders.
Measuring the impact of such a campaign involves tracking shifts in public opinion polling and analyzing engagement data from media and digital platforms. Israel’s campaign is being closely watched by both allies and competitors, as it represents one of the largest coordinated efforts to shape perceptions in a major democracy in recent years.
The context for this campaign is a broader environment in which countries are willing to devote large sums to managing their international reputations, particularly in environments where public opinion can affect legislative or executive decisions about foreign aid, trade, and security cooperation. The mechanism involves not just image-building but also preemptive response to criticism, with rapid rebuttal teams prepared to address negative coverage or emerging controversies.
As of July 19, 2026, Israel’s $50 million experiment highlights a trend in which foreign governments increasingly treat public opinion abroad as a strategic asset, worthy of investment on a scale comparable to traditional diplomatic or defense initiatives. The immediate consequence is a more crowded and competitive landscape, in which multiple actors employ increasingly sophisticated methods to win the favor of foreign publics.