Potential superpower

The present day governments to be called, or to remain, a potential superpower for the 21st century.

  United States (current superpower)

  People's Republic of China

  European Union

  India

  Russia

A number of states have been speculated to be, or to be in the process of turning into, a superpower at some point of the 21st century. Presently, the most common belief held is that only the United States currently fulfills the criteria to be considered a superpower. Among the most commonly mentioned are China, the European Union, India, and Russia. However, the record of such predictions has not been perfect. For example, in the 1980s, many political and economic analysts predicted that Japan would eventually accede to superpower status, due to its large population, huge GDP, and high economic growth at that time.

China

Main article: Chinese Century

People's Republic of China

The People's Republic of China receives continual coverage in the popular press of its potential superpower status, and has been identified as a rising or emerging economic and military superpower by academics and other experts. Shujie Yao of Nottingham University has said that, "China will overtake the United States to become the world's largest economy by 2038 if current growth rates continue," and that China's nominal GDP will likely overtake that of Japan by 2009 or 2010.

International relations analyst Parag Khanna states that by making massive trade and investment deals with Latin America and Africa, China has established its presence as a superpower along with the European Union and the United States. China's rise is demonstrated by its ballooning share of trade in its gross domestic product. He believes that China's consultative style has allowed it to develop political and economic ties with many countries including those viewed as rogue states by the United States. He states that the Shanghai Cooperation Organization founded with Russia and the Central Asian countries may eventually be the "NATO of the East".

Another factor favoring China's rise is its government. As Fareed Zakaria and other academics observed, China's government can do tasks such as development or dealing with a crisis faster than democracies in Europe or India.

George Friedman, founder of Stratfor, however doesn't believe that China will be a superpower, stating that China's geographic position is actually isolated due to Siberia in the north, the Himalayas and jungles to the south, and the majority of China's population is in the east, saying that with this, China can't easily expand. He also states that China has not been a major naval power for centuries, and building a navy will take a very long time. Lastly, he states

Third, there is a deeper reason for not worrying about China. China is inherently unstable. Whenever it opens its borders to the outside world, the coastal region becomes prosperous, but the vast majority of Chinese in the interior remain impoverished. This leads to tension, conflict, and instability. It also leads to economic decisions made for political reasons, resulting in inefficiency and corruption. This is not the first time that China has opened itself to foreign trade, and it will not be the last time that it becomes unstable as a result. Nor will it be the last time that a figure like Mao emerges to close the country off from the outside, equalize the wealth--or poverty--and begin the cycle anew. There are some who believe that the trends of the last thirty years will continue indefinitely. I believe the Chinese cycle will move to its next and inevitable phase in the coming decade. Far from being a challenger, China is a country the United States will be trying to bolster and hold together as a counterweight to the Russians. Current Chinese economic dynamism does not translate into long-term success.

Geoffrey Murphay's China: The Next Superpower argues that while the potential for China is high, this is fairly perceived only by looking at the risks and obstacles China faces in managing its population and resources. The political situation in China may become too fragile to survive into superpower status according to Susan Shirk in China: Fragile Superpower. Other factors that could constrain China's ability to become a superpower in the future include: limited supplies of energy and raw materials, questions over its innovation capability, inequality and corruption, and risks to social stability and the environment. Amy Chua states that whether a country has enough pull to bring immigrants is an important quality for a superpower. She also writes that China lacks the pull to bring scientists, thinkers, and innovators from other countries as immigrants. However, she believes that China has made up for this with its own diaspora, saying that size and resources for them are unparalleled.

The European Union

European Union

The European Union (EU) has been called an emerging superpower by academics. T.R. Reid, Andrew Reding, Mark Leonard,Jeremy Rifkin, John McCormick,, and some politicians like Romano Prodi and Tony Blair either believe that the EU is, or will, become a superpower in the 21st century. Leonard cites several factors: the EU's large population, large economy (EU has the largest economy in the world. The EU's nominal GDP is ~24% larger than that of the U.S. as of 2008), low inflation rates, the unpopularity and perceived failure of US foreign policy in recent years, and certain EU members states' high quality of life (when measured in terms such as hours worked per week, health care, social services).

John McCormick believes that the EU has already achieved superpower status, based on the size and global reach of its economy and on its global political influence. He argues that the nature of power has changed since the Cold War-driven definition of superpower was developed, and that military power is no longer essential to great power; he argues that control of the means of production is more important than control of the means of destruction, and contrasts the threatening hard power of the United States with the opportunities offered by the soft power wielded by the European Union.

Parag Khanna agrees, and like McCormick and Leonard believes that the EU will rival the power of the United States in the 21st century. He also mentions the large economy of the EU, that European technologies more and more set the global standards and that European countries give the most development assistance. On the fact that the EU lacks a common army, he agrees with McCormick that the EU does not need one. The EU uses intelligence and the police to apprehend radical Islamists, social policy to try to integrate restive Muslim populations and economic strength to incorporate the former Soviet Union and gradually subdue Russia. Khanna also writes that South America, East Asia, and other regions prefer to emulate the "European Dream" than the American variant. This could possibly be seen in the South American Union and the African Union. Notably, the EU as a whole is among the most culturally diverse "entities" on the planet, with some of the world's largest and most influential languages being official within its borders.

Parag Khanna also states that:

It’s a mistake to measure Europe against the coherence that is demanded of a singular unitary nation state. Europe is a different form of entity altogether—it’s a supranational, transnational, postmodern network empire. It’s actually a more appropriate structure for the 21st century than America’s structure is, in a way. They don’t have one army, they have many armies. They don’t have one foreign policy, they have many foreign policies. But can you demonstrate to me that there are areas where what one country does hurts the others rather than eventually helping them? When Italy builds a gas pipeline from Libya, does that hurt Denmark? No. I mean, the energy is going into the common gas market which is being developed. When Germany takes the lead on Russia and Spain takes the lead on Venezuela, is that a bad thing? No, not at all. When the French and the Spanish invest in migration centres in North Africa to create jobs there to diminish illegal immigration into Europe, is that bad for Germany and for Britain? No, it's good for them. I’m glad they don’t have a constitution. Why over-centralize?

Andrew Reding also takes the future EU enlargement into account. An eventual future accession of the rest of Europe would not only boost the economy of the EU, but it would also increase the EU's population to a level almost equal to that of India and China. The EU is qualitatively different from India and China, however. It is enormously more prosperous and technologically advanced. An important acceding nation is Turkey, which has been a candidate country of the European Union since 1999. The Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan told the Journal of Turkish Weekly in 2005 that: "In 10 or 15 years, the EU will be a place where civilizations meet. It will be a superpower with the inclusion of Turkey."

Author Robert J. Guttman writes in his book Europe in the New Century: Visions of an Emerging Superpower that the very definition of the term superpower has changed and that in the new 21st century, it doesn't only refer to states with "military power", but also to groups such as the European Union, which has strong market economics; young, highly educated workers who are savvy in high technology; and a global vision.

Alexander Stubb, the Finnish Minister for Foreign Affairs said on July 17 2008 that he thinks the EU is and is not a superpower. While the EU is a superpower in the sense that it is the largest political union, single market and aid donor in the world, it is not a superpower in the defense or foreign policy spheres. Factors constraining the EU’s rise to superpower status include its lack of statehood in the international system, a lack of internal drive to project power worldwide, and nostalgia for the nation-state amongst some Europeans. To become an actual superpower in the coming years, Mr. Stubb urged the EU to approve and ratify the Lisbon Treaty, create an EU foreign ministry, develop a common EU defense, hold one collective seat at the UN Security Council and G8, and address what he described as the “sour mood” toward the EU prevalent in some European countries today.

A large-scale study made by Mark Leonard and Ivan Krastev, chairman of the Centre for Liberal Strategies, indicates that the EU is the most "popular" superpower. People across the world like to see the European Union become more influential. The study, which quizzed 57,000 people across 52 countries, found that the EU was "unique among the four big powers (China, the EU, Russia and the United States) in that no one wants to balance its rise". According to the European council on foreign relations, which sponsored the research, 35 per cent of world citizens want the 27-member bloc to grow in power. Britons were revealed to be the most ambivalent towards the EU's growing influence with a positive balance of just eight per cent. The voice of the global opinion is very powerful. The author Anthony Barnett has even called the world opinion "the second superpower."

Additionally, it is argued by commentators that full political integration is not required for the European Union to wield international influence: that its apparent weaknesses constitute its real strengths (as of its low profile diplomacy and the obsession with the rule of law) and that the EU represents a new and potentially more successful type of international actor than traditional ones; however, it is uncertain if the effectiveness of such an influence would be equal to that of a politically integrated superpower such as the United States.

On the other hand, Laurent Cohen-Tanugi states that the EU as a whole has consistently suffered from a growth deficit compared to the US, high unemployment, and public deficits even while most member states of the EU lagged substantially behind the US in R&D investment, technological innovation, and, since 1995, productivity gains. In addition, the American National Intelligence Council predicts that the EU could become a "hobbled giant", unable to translate its economic clout into global influence due to demographic deficits, competing national agendas, and integration difficulties. .

Furthermore, according to British Foreign Secretary David Millibrand, while the European Union should be a "model power" unafraid of using military force and backing free trade, "The EU will never be a superpower, specifically pointing out it's military shortcomings.

India

Republic of India

Newsweek and the International Herald Tribune join several academics in discussing India's potential of becoming a superpower.

Founder and President of the Economic Strategy Institute and former counselor to the Secretary of Commerce in the Reagan Administration Clyde V. Prestowitz Jr. has predicted that "It is going to be India's century. India is going to be the biggest economy in the world. It is going to be the biggest superpower of the 21st century." Daniel Lak describes India as the underdog, facing more challenges than advantages, yet it is approaching superpower status. He also mentions that despite the hardships of large amount of poverty, and social inequality, India is overcoming all of this.

Fareed Zakaria also believes that India has a fine chance at becoming a superpower, pointing out that India's young population coupled with the second largest English-speaking population in the world could give India an advantage over China, and noting that while other industrial countries will face a youth gap, India will have a large, young workforce. Zakaria says another strength that India has is that, despite being one of the poorest countries in the world, its democratic government has lasted for 60 years, stating that a democracy can provide for long-term stability.

India also has been gaining influence in Asia with trade agreements, direct investment, military exercises, and aids funds. It is good allies with countries such as Iran and Japan, and has emerging ties with countries such as Vietnam, Thailand, Myanmar, and India even has an airforce base in Tajikistan.

Parag Khanna believes that India is not, and will not become a superpower for the foreseeable future, lagging decades behind China in both development and strategic appetite. Instead, he believes India will be a key swing state along with Russia. He says that India is "big but not important," has a highly successful professional class, while millions of its citizens still live in poverty. It is "almost completely third world". He also writes that it matters that China borders a dozen more countries than India does, is not hemmed in by a vast ocean and the world's tallest mountains, has a loyal diaspora twice the size of India's and enjoys a head start in Asian and African marketplaces.

Robyn Meredith claims that both India and China will be superpowers. However, she points out that China is decades ahead of India, and that the average Chinese person is better off than the average Indian person. Amy Chua also adds to this, stating that while India's potential for superpower is great, it still faces many problems such as "pervasive rural poverty, disease-filled urban slums, entrenched corruption, and egregious maternal mortality rates just to name a few". Also like China, India lacks the "pull" for immigrants, and Indians still continue to emigrate in large numbers. However, she notes that India has made tremondous strides to fix this, stating that some of India's achievements, such as working to dismantle the centuries old caste system and maintaining the world's largest diverse democracy is historically unprecedented.

Russia

Russian Federation

The Russian Federation has been suggested by some as a potential candidate for resuming superpower status in the twenty-first century due to its fast-growing economy, and the size of its military. According to Steven Rosefielde of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Russia intends to "reemerge as a full-fledged superpower," and "contrary to conventional wisdom, this goal is easily within the Kremlin’s grasp, but the cost to the Russian people and global security would be immense". Rosefielde further argues that "Russia has an intact military-industrial complex... and the mineral wealth to reactivate its dormant structurally militarized potential," and that "supply-side constraints don’t preclude a return to prodigal superpowerdom"

Alexander Golts of the The St. Petersburg Times argues that Putin's confrontations with the US on nuclear issues are in pursuit of regaining superpower status for Russia. In a more recent report by ABC News, a senior U.S. official asserted that "Russia is once again indisputably the number two military power in the world, second only to the United States". Mike Ritchie of industry analysts Energy Intelligence says "Russia was always a superpower that used its energy to win friends and influence among its former Soviet satellites. Nothing has really changed much. They are back in the same game, winning friends and influencing people and using their power to do so." Russia is often considered to be an energy superpower and a nuclear superpower due to its vast amounts of natural resources and large nuclear arsenal mostly leftover from the former Soviet Union.

There are significant obstacles to Russia gaining superpower status. In recent years Russia's sphere of influence significantly shrunk owing in part to gains by the EU and NATO. Russia's currently shrinking and aging population is a major problem for the country. In addition, Russia is currently only the eighth largest economy in the world by nominal GDP, and by this parameter is approximately eleven times smaller than the EU economy and about eight times smaller than the US one (in 2008). However by GDP (PPP), Russia is the 6th largest economy in the world. Russia is heavily reliant on resource extraction, especially fossil fuels, for its economy.

See also

• Superpower
• Great power