US superpower status is shaken

Status
Not open for further replies.

waraich

Banned Member
US superpower status is shaken

By Paul Reynolds
World affairs correspondent, BBC News website



Will Uncle Sam still bestride the world in future?
The financial crisis is likely to diminish the status of the United States as the world's only superpower.

On the practical level, the US is already stretched militarily, in Afghanistan and Iraq, and is now stretched financially.

On the philosophical level, it will be harder for it to argue in favour of its free market ideas, if its own markets have collapsed.

Pivotal moment?

Some see this as a pivotal moment.

The political philosopher John Gray, who recently retired as a professor at the London School of Economics, wrote in the London paper The Observer: "Here is a historic geopolitical shift, in which the balance of power in the world is being altered irrevocably.

"The era of American global leadership, reaching back to the Second World War, is over... The American free-market creed has self-destructed while countries that retained overall control of markets have been vindicated."

"In a change as far-reaching in its implications as the fall of the Soviet Union, an entire model of government and the economy has collapsed.

"How symbolic that Chinese astronauts take a spacewalk while the US Treasury Secretary is on his knees."

No apocalypse now

Not all would agree that an American apocalypse has arrived. After all, the system has been tested before.
John Bolton gives rumours of US hegemony's demise short shrift

In 1987 the Dow Jones share index fell by more than 20% in one day. In 2000, the dot-com bubble burst. Yet both times, the US picked itself up, as it did post Vietnam.

Prof Gray's comments certainly did not impress one of the more hawkish figures who served in the Bush administration, the former UN ambassador John Bolton.

When I put them to him, he replied only: "If Professor Gray believes this, can he assure us that he is selling his US assets short?

"If so, where is he placing his money instead? And if he has no US assets, why should we be paying any attention to him?"

Nevertheless, it does seem that the concept of the single superpower left bestriding the world after the collapse of communism (and the supposed end of history) is no longer valid.

Multi-polar world

Even leading neo-conservative thinkers accept that a more multi-polar world is emerging, though one in which they want the American position to be the leading one.

Robert Kagan, co-founder in 1997 of the "Project for the New American Century" that called for "American global leadership", wrote in Foreign Affairs magazine this autumn: "Those who today proclaim that the United States is in decline often imagine a past in which the world danced to an Olympian America's tune. That is an illusion.



The US is seen as declining relatively and there has been an enormous acceleration in this perfect storm of perception in the waning days of the Bush administration



Dr Robin Niblett
Chatham House



"The world today looks more like that of the 19th Century than like that of the late 20th.

"Those who imagine this is good news should recall that the 19th Century order did not end as well as the Cold War did."

"To avoid such a fate, the United States and other democratic nations will need to take a more enlightened and generous view of their interests than they did even during the Cold War. The United States, as the strongest democracy, should not oppose but welcome a world of pooled and diminished national sovereignty.

"At the same time, the democracies of Asia and Europe need to rediscover that progress toward this more perfect liberal order depends not only on law and popular will but also on powerful nations that can support and defend it."

New scepticism

The director of a leading British think-tank Chatham House, Dr Robin Niblett, who has worked on both sides of the Atlantic, remarked that, at a recent conference he attended in Berlin, an American who called for continued US leadership was met with a new scepticism.


Despite its feats in space, China is said to face a future food crisis

"The US is seen as declining relatively and there has been an enormous acceleration in this perfect storm of perception in the waning days of the Bush administration. The rise of new powers, the increase in oil wealth among some countries and the spread of economic power around the world adds to this," he said.

"But we must separate the immediate moment from the structural. There is no doubt that President Bush has created some of his own problems. The overstretch of military power and the economic crisis can be laid at the door of the administration.

"Its tax cuts were not matched by the hammer of spending cuts. The combined effect of events like the failures in Iraq, the difficulties in Afghanistan, the thumbing of its nose by Russia in Georgia and elsewhere, all these lead to a sense of an end of an era.

The longer term

Dr Niblett argues that we should wait a bit before coming to a judgment and that structurally the United States is still strong. :D


America has been stretched by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan

"America is still immensely attractive to skilled immigrants and is still capable of producing a Microsoft or a Google," he went on.

"Even its debt can be overcome. It has enormous resilience economically at a local and entrepreneurial level.

"And one must ask, decline relative to who? China is in a desperate race for growth to feed its population and avert unrest in 15 to 20 years. Russia is not exactly a paper tiger but it is stretching its own limits with a new strategy built on a flimsy base. India has huge internal contradictions. Europe has usually proved unable to jump out of the doldrums as dynamically as the US.

"But the US must regain its financial footing and the extent to which it does so will also determine its military capacity. If it has less money, it will have fewer forces."

With the US presidential election looming, it will be worth returning to this subject in a year's time to see how the world, and the American place in it, looks then.

[email protected]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7645743.stm


Iraq and Afghanistan wars and with more then one trillion debt plus present world economic down turn , its too late for US economy to recover ,however if China continue its 8.5GDP growth rate in next two years can emerge as super power.:D
 

Merlöwe

New Member
Iraq and Afghanistan wars and with more then one trillion debt plus present world economic down turn , its too late for US economy to recover, however if China continue its 8.5GDP growth rate in next two years can emerge as super power.:D
Not at all, China will need decades to begin to match the United States, the Chinese themselves don't think they''ll overcome the Americans in this century.

I'm not sure if you understand this, but if the US economy doesn't recover neither will China. China's record economic growth is fueled mainly by exports to other countries, with the US being its major consumer. The US is virtually the backbone of the world economy, if the US collapses so does nearly every other industrialized nation in the world, meaning that China's export market is gone. With its fuel for economic growth gone, China is a goner and the Communist party will face mass dissent and possibly revolution.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
The United States is not so much the back bone as it is the global financial center. If it loses that position, and no suitable alternative emerges, then yes the world will be screwed.

EDIT: The discussions seems to be aimed and politics and economics. Not at the military. I'm moving this to the Off-Topic forum. Play nice everyone. This discussion is interesting and I wouldn't want it to get closed. :)
 

Schumacher

New Member
Not at all, China will need decades to begin to match the United States, the Chinese themselves don't think they''ll overcome the Americans in this century.

I'm not sure if you understand this, but if the US economy doesn't recover neither will China. China's record economic growth is fueled mainly by exports to other countries, with the US being its major consumer. .....
Even before the current crisis, we have studies that show China would overtake the US in total size by certain measures in abt 10 yrs. With the crisis & US going negative & if China can maintain abt 8%, which they seem confident of, add in how various currencies behave, it might well be sooner than 10 yrs.
But of course on a per capita basis, China will still be behind but I tend to see that as only giving it more potential for further growth.

Various arguments have either said China is very dependent or not very on exports to US. I put my money on the latter. Anyway, I suspect this debate will largely be decided around the next 12 months as exports to US is already slumping, we'll just have to see whether China's overall growth stays high regardless or slump with it.
 

Manfred2

New Member
Ah, but if China begins to really suffer and loose ground, won't they embark on a war of expansion, now that they are well-equipped to do so?

Bringing us back to the military side of things, why would they not do so, if the economic incentive for peace is gone?
 

ReAl PrOeLiTeZ

New Member
US superpower status is shaken

By Paul Reynolds
World affairs correspondent, BBC News website



Will Uncle Sam still bestride the world in future?
The financial crisis is likely to diminish the status of the United States as the world's only superpower.

On the practical level, the US is already stretched militarily, in Afghanistan and Iraq, and is now stretched financially.

On the philosophical level, it will be harder for it to argue in favour of its free market ideas, if its own markets have collapsed.

Pivotal moment?

Some see this as a pivotal moment.

The political philosopher John Gray, who recently retired as a professor at the London School of Economics, wrote in the London paper The Observer: "Here is a historic geopolitical shift, in which the balance of power in the world is being altered irrevocably.

"The era of American global leadership, reaching back to the Second World War, is over... The American free-market creed has self-destructed while countries that retained overall control of markets have been vindicated."

"In a change as far-reaching in its implications as the fall of the Soviet Union, an entire model of government and the economy has collapsed.

"How symbolic that Chinese astronauts take a spacewalk while the US Treasury Secretary is on his knees."

No apocalypse now

Not all would agree that an American apocalypse has arrived. After all, the system has been tested before.
John Bolton gives rumours of US hegemony's demise short shrift

In 1987 the Dow Jones share index fell by more than 20% in one day. In 2000, the dot-com bubble burst. Yet both times, the US picked itself up, as it did post Vietnam.

Prof Gray's comments certainly did not impress one of the more hawkish figures who served in the Bush administration, the former UN ambassador John Bolton.

When I put them to him, he replied only: "If Professor Gray believes this, can he assure us that he is selling his US assets short?

"If so, where is he placing his money instead? And if he has no US assets, why should we be paying any attention to him?"

Nevertheless, it does seem that the concept of the single superpower left bestriding the world after the collapse of communism (and the supposed end of history) is no longer valid.

Multi-polar world

Even leading neo-conservative thinkers accept that a more multi-polar world is emerging, though one in which they want the American position to be the leading one.

Robert Kagan, co-founder in 1997 of the "Project for the New American Century" that called for "American global leadership", wrote in Foreign Affairs magazine this autumn: "Those who today proclaim that the United States is in decline often imagine a past in which the world danced to an Olympian America's tune. That is an illusion.



The US is seen as declining relatively and there has been an enormous acceleration in this perfect storm of perception in the waning days of the Bush administration



Dr Robin Niblett
Chatham House



"The world today looks more like that of the 19th Century than like that of the late 20th.

"Those who imagine this is good news should recall that the 19th Century order did not end as well as the Cold War did."

"To avoid such a fate, the United States and other democratic nations will need to take a more enlightened and generous view of their interests than they did even during the Cold War. The United States, as the strongest democracy, should not oppose but welcome a world of pooled and diminished national sovereignty.

"At the same time, the democracies of Asia and Europe need to rediscover that progress toward this more perfect liberal order depends not only on law and popular will but also on powerful nations that can support and defend it."

New scepticism

The director of a leading British think-tank Chatham House, Dr Robin Niblett, who has worked on both sides of the Atlantic, remarked that, at a recent conference he attended in Berlin, an American who called for continued US leadership was met with a new scepticism.


Despite its feats in space, China is said to face a future food crisis

"The US is seen as declining relatively and there has been an enormous acceleration in this perfect storm of perception in the waning days of the Bush administration. The rise of new powers, the increase in oil wealth among some countries and the spread of economic power around the world adds to this," he said.

"But we must separate the immediate moment from the structural. There is no doubt that President Bush has created some of his own problems. The overstretch of military power and the economic crisis can be laid at the door of the administration.

"Its tax cuts were not matched by the hammer of spending cuts. The combined effect of events like the failures in Iraq, the difficulties in Afghanistan, the thumbing of its nose by Russia in Georgia and elsewhere, all these lead to a sense of an end of an era.

The longer term

Dr Niblett argues that we should wait a bit before coming to a judgment and that structurally the United States is still strong. :D


America has been stretched by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan

"America is still immensely attractive to skilled immigrants and is still capable of producing a Microsoft or a Google," he went on.

"Even its debt can be overcome. It has enormous resilience economically at a local and entrepreneurial level.

"And one must ask, decline relative to who? China is in a desperate race for growth to feed its population and avert unrest in 15 to 20 years. Russia is not exactly a paper tiger but it is stretching its own limits with a new strategy built on a flimsy base. India has huge internal contradictions. Europe has usually proved unable to jump out of the doldrums as dynamically as the US.

"But the US must regain its financial footing and the extent to which it does so will also determine its military capacity. If it has less money, it will have fewer forces."

With the US presidential election looming, it will be worth returning to this subject in a year's time to see how the world, and the American place in it, looks then.

[email protected]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7645743.stm


Iraq and Afghanistan wars and with more then one trillion debt plus present world economic down turn , its too late for US economy to recover ,however if China continue its 8.5GDP growth rate in next two years can emerge as super power.:D
its economy is already a superpower, its not could be a superpower it is already. China account balance is $372 billion, while USA is -$731 billion, 5 times greater in debt then the next country which is Spain. So if any so USA will go to war cause of loss of ground, not China, they have can just buy ground instead of fighting for it.
 

Merlöwe

New Member
Even before the current crisis, we have studies that show China would overtake the US in total size by certain measures in abt 10 yrs. With the crisis & US going negative & if China can maintain abt 8%, which they seem confident of, add in how various currencies behave, it might well be sooner than 10 yrs.
But of course on a per capita basis, China will still be behind but I tend to see that as only giving it more potential for further growth.

Various arguments have either said China is very dependent or not very on exports to US. I put my money on the latter. Anyway, I suspect this debate will largely be decided around the next 12 months as exports to US is already slumping, we'll just have to see whether China's overall growth stays high regardless or slump with it.
It can't overtake the US economy in 10 years, not unless it expands by around 25-50% percent a year while the US dramatically drops. They may be able to have 6% growth but the Chinese gov't needs high growth to keep their peasants from revolting.

Its not just dependant on exports to the US, but to other countries as well, most of which are also suffering from the financial crisis. Plus, something like 20 million of their migrant workers have been laid off as so many factories have closed their doors.

Ah, but if China begins to really suffer and loose ground, won't they embark on a war of expansion, now that they are well-equipped to do so?

Bringing us back to the military side of things, why would they not do so, if the economic incentive for peace is gone?
Where would they expand? An expansionist campaign into South Asia is invariably going to end with China's cities experiencing nuclear holocaust.

its economy is already a superpower, its not could be a superpower it is already. China account balance is $372 billion, while USA is -$731 billion, 5 times greater in debt then the next country which is Spain. So if any so USA will go to war cause of loss of ground, not China, they have can just buy ground instead of fighting for it.
Lets not get too liberal with the term superpower. Currently, only the US meets the qualifications for a superpower. The definition is a country that has the capacity to project dominating power and influence anywhere in the world, and sometimes, in more than one region of the globe at a time, and so may plausibly attain the status of global hegemon.

China meets none of those characteristics. It can't project its influence anywhere in the world, and in multiple regions. Its power is not dominating considering that its military are currently outdated. And it certainly is not the global hegemon.
 

black shark

New Member
The US will react and come out of this crisis for sure. Western powers have worked for many years to get to where they are today, notwithstanding the crisis. Lessons will be learned and a balance found once more.
All that is happening with this crisis is a redistribution of wealth from investor to consumer (via the governments), mostly within national boundries.

As for China being a superpower, you can call them a superpower if that means having an army with soldiers armed with bolt action rifles and a large population well below the poverty line.
 

nevidimka

New Member
While the US looks to be in the same situation where Soviet Union foud itself 17 years ago, I feel the US has 1 thing that the SU lacked which made it collapse. The US is integrated into the world financial market, while the Soviet Union was cut off from the world market. The market will prop up US and allow it to survive and not collapse and break up IMO.
 

Merlöwe

New Member
While the US looks to be in the same situation where Soviet Union foud itself 17 years ago, I feel the US has 1 thing that the SU lacked which made it collapse. The US is integrated into the world financial market, while the Soviet Union was cut off from the world market. The market will prop up US and allow it to survive and not collapse and break up IMO.
What would it break up into? The majority of Americans are fully assimilated, unlike the USSR which had ethnic republics.
 

SoCalSooner

New Member
It is not like the US is the only country effect by the melt down.

Superpower - since this is a Military forum and the post is mostly financial/economics, I fail to see to connection.

Military superpower - yes

Financially superpower - yes

Economical superpower - ?
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Well lets not confuse the real economy and the numbers. Those are two very different things.

EDIT: By the way, this is the off-topic forum so it's ok to talk about almost anything here. ;)
 

AdvanXer

New Member
It is not like the US is the only country effect by the melt down.

Superpower - since this is a Military forum and the post is mostly financial/economics, I fail to see to connection.

Military superpower - yes

Financially superpower - yes

Economical superpower - ?
Military superpower - No

Financially superpower - ? (maybe)

Economical superpower - ? (most likely)

fixed.

You need all three plus more to be a superpower in the general sense.

China can project much soft power but not a lot of HARD power, at least not overseas anyways. If they can't do that, they are not a Superpower. For instance could China have pulled off the invasion of Iraq? Forget about the occupation, but just the invasion part. I think not!
 

ReAl PrOeLiTeZ

New Member
It can't overtake the US economy in 10 years, not unless it expands by around 25-50% percent a year while the US dramatically drops. They may be able to have 6% growth but the Chinese gov't needs high growth to keep their peasants from revolting.

Its not just dependant on exports to the US, but to other countries as well, most of which are also suffering from the financial crisis. Plus, something like 20 million of their migrant workers have been laid off as so many factories have closed their doors.



Where would they expand? An expansionist campaign into South Asia is invariably going to end with China's cities experiencing nuclear holocaust.



Lets not get too liberal with the term superpower. Currently, only the US meets the qualifications for a superpower. The definition is a country that has the capacity to project dominating power and influence anywhere in the world, and sometimes, in more than one region of the globe at a time, and so may plausibly attain the status of global hegemon.

China meets none of those characteristics. It can't project its influence anywhere in the world, and in multiple regions. Its power is not dominating considering that its military are currently outdated. And it certainly is not the global hegemon.
well your wrong my friend. The term superpower isnt only used for military, but for economy too. thats what i was implying. not everything is about war you know.
 

ReAl PrOeLiTeZ

New Member
The US will react and come out of this crisis for sure. Western powers have worked for many years to get to where they are today, notwithstanding the crisis. Lessons will be learned and a balance found once more.
All that is happening with this crisis is a redistribution of wealth from investor to consumer (via the governments), mostly within national boundries.

As for China being a superpower, you can call them a superpower if that means having an army with soldiers armed with bolt action rifles and a large population well below the poverty line.
you so uneducated in Chinese military and economy. China using bolt action rifles yeah true about 40 years ago. Dont forget US still uses bolt action rifles today. Mechanics of a weapon doesnt characterise one being a superpower or not.

how is large population of china in poverty aye? lets compare this to USA they are around 12-13% poverty level, while China is 10%. Hmm lets see by ratio USA has more people in poverty then China. China only has larger numbers cause its population is larger.

China military lets see front line, marines, special forces, airbourne all use Type-95.
China reserves all use Type 81. Both rifles are automatic rifles.

so dont write nonsense comments if non are true. lack of knowledge is evident in the last paragraph written.
 

Transient

Member
A superpower should be judged based on a few metrics. Economic power, diplomatic power, military power and cultural influence. There is some overlap, but not much. The US has a good deal of margin over its closest rival in every one of these areas. China can at best be described as a regional power.
 

black shark

New Member
you so uneducated in Chinese military and economy. China using bolt action rifles yeah true about 40 years ago. Dont forget US still uses bolt action rifles today. Mechanics of a weapon doesnt characterise one being a superpower or not.

how is large population of china in poverty aye? lets compare this to USA they are around 12-13% poverty level, while China is 10%. Hmm lets see by ratio USA has more people in poverty then China. China only has larger numbers cause its population is larger.

China military lets see front line, marines, special forces, airbourne all use Type-95.
China reserves all use Type 81. Both rifles are automatic rifles.

so dont write nonsense comments if non are true. lack of knowledge is evident in the last paragraph written.
Yes, apologies the Type 56 Carbine has been retired. My information is out of date.
I think my point still stands. China has a massive military no doubt but very far behind the US in terms of military power and capabilities. China is still playing catch up with current weapons never mind what the US has in the pipeline.
 

Falstaff

New Member
While the US looks to be in the same situation where Soviet Union foud itself 17 years ago, I feel the US has 1 thing that the SU lacked which made it collapse. The US is integrated into the world financial market, while the Soviet Union was cut off from the world market. The market will prop up US and allow it to survive and not collapse and break up IMO.
What the... makes you think that the US of today are in the same situation as the SU 17 years ago? Does the US have a history of decades of communism? Has the SU been the center of the world's economy for decades? Has the SU been the center of inventive and economical spirit for decades? Has the SU had a free and prospering population? Has the SU had absolute cultural dominance apart from the countries that were occupied? Is there anything like a soviet way of life that billions of people go for?

Man, I'm an old European and we're feeling comfortable claiming cultural superiority over the US, but this doesn't change the fact that the US are and will be the world's dominating superpower despite all your Russia and China fanboy blah.
Never underestimate America's ability to reinvent themselves, emerging stronger than they were before.
I'm sorry, but fact is, all other countries are only trying to catch up with the Western Hemisphere. And although there might be a donturn now, it will take a while.

ReAl PrOeLiTeZ said:
how is large population of china in poverty aye? lets compare this to USA they are around 12-13% poverty level, while China is 10%. Hmm lets see by ratio USA has more people in poverty then China. China only has larger numbers cause its population is larger.
Hey propaganda-boy, do you have the slightest idea what poverty means by western compared to chinese standards? I guess not. "so dont write nonsense comments if non are true. lack of knowledge is evident in the last paragraph written. "
 

Tavarisch

New Member
Yes, apologies the Type 56 Carbine has been retired. My information is out of date.
I think my point still stands. China has a massive military no doubt but very far behind the US in terms of military power and capabilities. China is still playing catch up with current weapons never mind what the US has in the pipeline.
Yeah, given today's circumstances. If China overtakes you guys economically and gain enough money to buy new toys, you guys are gonna be in trouble.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top