| Revision as of 22:21, 24 January 2018 editClueBot NG (talk | contribs)Bots, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers6,439,038 editsm Reverting possible vandalism by 69.248.97.21 to version by Editor760. Report False Positive? Thanks, ClueBot NG. (3259637) (Bot)Tag: Rollback← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:23, 24 January 2018 edit undo69.248.97.21 (talk)No edit summaryTags: possible vandalism repeating charactersNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart | |||
| {{About|the geographic and political term|the powers of superheroes|Superpower (ability)|other uses|Superpower (disambiguation)}} | |||
| {{specific|date=March 2016}} | |||
| ] ] and ] ], then leaders of the ]'s rival superpowers, meeting in ], ] in November 1985]] | |||
| '''Superpower''' is a term used to describe a ] with a dominant position, which is characterised by its extensive ability to exert ] or ] on a global scale. This is done through the combined-means of economic, military, technological and cultural strength, as well as ] and ] influence. Traditionally, superpowers are preeminent among the ]s. | |||
| The term was first applied post World War II to the ], the ] and the ]. However, after the end of ] and the ] in 1956, the United Kingdom's status as a superpower ], leaving just the United States and Soviet Union as superpowers. For the duration of the ] the United States and the Soviet Union came to be generally regarded as the two remaining superpowers, dominating world affairs. At the end of the Cold War and the ] in 1991, only the United States appeared to fulfill the criteria of being a world superpower.<ref name="Time-May-28-2015">{{Cite journal|author=Bremer, Ian|title=These Are the 5 Reasons Why the U.S. Remains the World’s Only Superpower|url=http://time.com/3899972/us-superpower-status-military/|magazine=]|date=May 28, 2015}}</ref><ref name="Nossal">{{cite conference|author=Kim Richard Nossal|title=Lonely Superpower or Unapologetic Hyperpower? Analyzing American Power in the post–Cold War Era|url=http://post.queensu.ca/~nossalk/papers/hyperpower.htm|conference=Biennial meeting, South African Political Studies Association, 29 June-2 July 1999|accessdate=2007-02-28}}<!-- subtitle: "Paper for presentation at the biennial meetings of the South African Political Studies Association Saldanha, Western Cape 29 June-2 July 1999 --></ref><ref> (Published 2008), by Professor George C. Herring (Professor of History at Kentucky University)</ref> | |||
| ] defines a superpower as "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 ]."<ref name="stanford">{{cite web|last=Miller|first=Lyman|url=http://www.stanford.edu/group/sjir/6.1.03_miller.html |title=www.stanford.edu|publisher=stanford.edu|accessdate=2010-08-27}}</ref> | |||
| There have been many attempts by historians to apply the term 'superpower' to a variety of past entities. However, since even the most powerful empires of old had little to no means to exert influence over very long distances, labeling them as such is complicated. | |||
| == Terminology and origin == | |||
| ], the ] (blue), the ] (red) and the ] (teal) were superpowers]] | |||
| ] | |||
| No agreed definition of what is a 'superpower' exists, and may differ between sources.<ref name="Nossal"/> However, a fundamental characteristic that is consistent with all definitions of a superpower is a nation or state that has mastered the seven dimensions of state power: geography, population, economy, resources, military, ] and ].<ref>'']'' (1987) written by Paul Kennedy</ref> | |||
| The term was first used to describe nations with greater than ] status as early as 1944, but only gained its specific meaning with regard to the ], the ] and its ] and the ] after ]. This was because the United Kingdom, the United States and the Soviet Union had proved themselves to be capable of casting great influence in global politics and military dominance. The term in its current political meaning was coined by Dutch-American ] ] in a series of lectures in 1943 about the potential shape of a new post-war world order. This formed the foundation for the book ''The Geography of the Peace'', which referred primarily to the unmatched maritime global supremacy of the British Empire and United States as essential for peace and prosperity in the world. | |||
| A year later, in 1944, ], an American foreign policy professor, elaborated on the concept in the book ''The Superpowers: The United States, Britain and the Soviet Union — Their Responsibility for Peace'', which spoke of the global reach of a super-empowered nation.<ref name="auto">{{cite web|url=http://www.casaasia.es/pdf/9200595422AM1127202862621.pdf |title=China Superpower |format=PDF |accessdate=2010-08-27}}</ref> Fox used the word Superpower to identify a new category of power able to occupy the highest status in a world in which, as the war then raging demonstrated, states could challenge and fight each other on a global scale. According to him, there were (at that moment) three states that were superpowers: the ], the ], and the ]. The British Empire was the most ] in world history and considered the foremost great power, holding sway over 25% of the world's population<ref>Angus Maddison. ''The World Economy: A Millennial Perspective'' (p. 98, 242). ], Paris, 2001.</ref> and controlling about 25% of the Earth's total land area, while the United States and the Soviet Union grew in power before and during ]. | |||
| According to Lyman Miller, "The basic components of superpower stature may be measured along four axes of power: military, economic, political, and cultural (or what political scientist ] has termed “]”).<ref name="stanford"/> | |||
| In the opinion of ] of ] in Canada, "generally this term was used to signify a political community that occupied a continental-sized landmass, had a sizable population (relative at least to other major powers); a superordinate economic capacity, including ample indigenous supplies of food and natural resources; enjoyed a high degree of non-dependence on international intercourse; and, most importantly, had a well-developed nuclear capacity (eventually normally defined as ] capability)."<ref name="Nossal" /> | |||
| In the opinion of Professor ], "a superpower must be able to conduct a global strategy including the possibility of destroying the world; to command vast economic potential and influence; and to present a universal ideology". Although, "many modifications may be made to this basic definition".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://abe.etailer.dpsl.net/Home/html/moreinfo.asp?bookid=536885601|title=The Superpowers – A Short History|date=8 December 2008|publisher=|deadurl=bot: unknown|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20081208142349/http://abe.etailer.dpsl.net/Home/html/moreinfo.asp?bookid=536885601|archivedate=8 December 2008|df=}}</ref> According to Professor June Teufel Dreyer, "A superpower must be able to project its power, soft and hard, globally."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fpri.org/docs/media/FN1205-Ch-dreyer.pdf |title=PDF Version - Foreign Policy Research Institute |publisher=www.fpri.org |accessdate=2015-05-31|format=PDF}}</ref> In his book, '']'', Dr. ], president of the ], argues that a superpower is "a country that can exert enough military, political, and economic power to persuade nations in every region of the world to take important actions they would not otherwise take."<ref>Bremmer, Ian. 2015. Portfolio (Penguin Group): New York.</ref> | |||
| == Superpowers of the past == | |||
| ] | |||
| There have been many attempts by historians to apply the term superpower retrospectively, and sometimes very loosely, to a variety of entities in the past. Recognition by historians of these older states as superpowers may focus on various superlative traits exhibited by them. Examples of these ancient or historical superpowers include the ],<ref name="auto"/> ],<ref>{{cite book|last1=Christensen|first1=Wendy|title=Empire of Ancient Egypt|date=2009|publisher=Infobase Publishing|location=United States|isbn=1604131608|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LpQBdsH12acC&dq=Empire+of+Ancient+Egypt&source=gbs_navlinks_s}}</ref> the ],<ref>{{cite book|last1=Bierbrier L|first1=Morris|title=Historical Dictionary of Ancient Egypt|chapter=Introduction|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Wp9u7bmexz8C&pg=PR32&lpg=PR32&dq=hittite+empire|publisher=Scarecrow Press|year=2008|accessdate=4 November 2015}}</ref> the ],<ref>{{cite book|last1=Holland|first1=Tom|title=Persian Fire: The First World Empire, Battle for the West|date=2011|publisher=Hachette|location=United Kingdom|isbn=0748131035}}</ref> the ] Empire of ],<ref>{{cite book|last1=Skelton|first1=Debra|title=Empire of Alexander the Great|publisher=Infobase Publishing|location=2009|isbn=1604131624}}</ref> the ],<ref>{{cite book|last1=Goldsworthy|first1=Adrian|title=How Rome Fell: Death of a Superpower|date=1 September 2010|publisher=Yale University Press|location=United States|isbn=0300164262}}</ref> the ],<ref>{{Cite book | |||
| | last1=Kulke | |||
| | first1=Hermann | |||
| | last2=Rothermund | |||
| | first2=Dietmar | |||
| | authorlink= | |||
| | year=2004 | |||
| | title=A History of India | |||
| | place= | |||
| | publisher=4th edition. Routledge, Pp. xii, 448 | |||
| | isbn=0-415-32920-5 | |||
| | url=https://www.amazon.com/History-India-Hermann-Kulke/dp/0415329205/ | |||
| }} | |||
| </ref><ref>{{Cite book | |||
| | last1=Thapar | |||
| | first1=Romila | |||
| | authorlink=Romila Thapar | |||
| | year=1990 | |||
| | title=A History of India, Volume 1 | |||
| | place= | |||
| | publisher=New Delhi and London: Penguin Books. Pp. 384 | |||
| | isbn=0-14-013835-8 | |||
| | url=https://www.amazon.com/History-India-Penguin/dp/0140138358/ | |||
| }} | |||
| </ref> the ], the ],<ref>{{cite web|last1=Lockard|first1=Craig. Professor|title=Tang Civilization and the Chinese Centuries|url=http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/services/dropoff/china_civ_temp/week06/pdfs/tangci.pdf|website=ccnmtl.columbia.edu|publisher=University of Wisconsin and Colombia University|accessdate=4 November 2015}}</ref> the ],<ref>{{cite book|last1=Cooper|first1=Jane Burbank & Frederick|title=Empires in world history: power and the politics of difference|date=2011|publisher=Princeton University Press|location=Princeton, N.J.|isbn=0691152365}}</ref> the ], the ],<ref>{{cite book|last1=Stone|first1=Norman|title=Turkey: a short history|date=2010|publisher=Thames & Hudson|location=London|isbn=0500251754}}</ref> the ],<ref>Kamen, H., ''Spain's Road To Empire: The Making Of A World Power, 1492–1763'', 2003, ], 640p.</ref> and the ] of ].<ref>Steven Englund, ''Napoleon: A Political Life'', 2005, Harvard University Press, page 254</ref> | |||
| According to historical statistics and research from the ], until the ], ], ], and ] accounted for roughly ⅔ of the world's GDP.<ref name="Maddison 2006 656">{{cite book|last=Maddison|first=Angus|title=The World Economy - Volume 1: A Millennial Perspective and Volume 2: Historical Statistics|year=2006|publisher=OECD Publishing by ]|location=|isbn=9789264022621|page=656|url=http://www.oecdbookshop.org/oecd/display.asp?K=5L9ZBQKL5RLW&lang=EN&sort=sort_date%2Fd&stem=true&sf1=Title&st1=world+economy&sf3=SubjectCode&sp1=not&st4=E4+or+E5+or+P5&sf4=SubVersionCode&ds=world+economy%3B+All+Subjects%3B+&m=3&dc=26&plang=en}}</ref> | |||
| == The Cold War == | |||
| {{Main|Cold War}} | |||
| ] in 1980. | |||
| {{legend|#000099|<small>] member states}} | |||
| {{legend|#6666ff|<small>Other allies of the U.S. and NATO}} | |||
| <span style="color:blue"><small>'''×'''</big></span> Anti-communist guerrillas | |||
| {{legend|#ff0000|<small>] member states}} | |||
| {{legend|#ff6666|<small>Socialist country allied with the Warsaw Pact}} | |||
| {{legend|#ffcccc|<small>Other allies of the USSR}} | |||
| <span style="color:red"><small>'''×'''</big></span> Communist guerrillas | |||
| {{legend|#ffcc33|<small>Socialist country not allied with the USSR and the Warsaw Pact}} | |||
| {{legend|#ccccff|<small>Neutral nations}} | |||
| <span style="color:green"><small>'''×'''</big></span> Other conflicts]] | |||
| The 1956 ] suggested that ], financially weakened by two world wars, could not then pursue its ] objectives on an equal footing with the new superpowers without sacrificing ] of its ] as a central goal of policy.<ref>Adam Klug and Gregor W. Smith, 'Suez and Sterling', ''Explorations in Economic History'', Vol. 36, No. 3 (July 1999), pp. 181–203.</ref> As the majority of World War II had been fought far from its national boundaries, the United States had not suffered the industrial destruction nor massive civilian casualties that marked the wartime situation of the countries in ] or ]. The war had reinforced the position of the United States as the world's largest long-term creditor nation<ref>"Getting Serious About the Twin Deficits "by Author: Menzie D. Chinn - September 2005 by Council on Foreign Relations Press </ref> and its principal supplier of goods; moreover it had built up a strong industrial and technological infrastructure that had greatly advanced its military strength into a primary position on the global stage.<ref> Gary E. Oldenburger by Oldenburger Independent Studies; December 2002</ref> Despite attempts to create multinational coalitions or legislative bodies (such as the ]), it became increasingly clear that the superpowers had very different visions about what the post-war world ought to look like, and after the withdrawal of British aid to ] in 1947, the United States took the lead in ] Soviet expansion in the ].<ref>Robert Frazier, 'Did Britain Start the Cold War? Bevin and the Truman Doctrine', ''Historical Journal'', Vol. 27, No. 3 (Sep., 1984), pp. 715–727.</ref> | |||
| The two countries opposed each other ideologically, politically, militarily, and economically. The Soviet Union promoted the ideology of ]: ] and a one-party state, whilst the United States promoted the ideologies of ] and the ]. This was reflected in the ] and ] military alliances, respectively, as most of Europe became aligned with either the United States or the Soviet Union. These alliances implied that these two nations were part of an emerging ] world, in contrast with a previously multipolar world. {{Citation needed|date=August 2008}} | |||
| The idea that the Cold War period revolved around only two blocs, or even only two nations, has been challenged by some scholars in the post–Cold War era, who have noted that the bipolar world only exists if one ignores all of the various movements and conflicts that occurred without influence from either of the two superpowers.<ref> by Signal Alpha News Achieve Press 2005</ref> Additionally, much of the conflict between the superpowers was fought in "]s", which more often than not involved issues more complex than the standard Cold War oppositions.<ref> Benjamin O. Fordham by World Peace Foundation; Massachusetts Institute of Technology April 1998</ref> | |||
| After the Soviet Union disintegrated in the early 1990s, the term ] began to be applied to the United States, as the sole remaining superpower of the Cold War era.<ref name="Nossal"/> This term, popularized by French foreign minister ] in the late 1990s, is controversial and the validity of classifying the United States in this way is disputed. One notable opponent to this theory, ], rejects this theory in favor of a multipolar ]. Other international relations theorists, such as ], theorize that because the threat of the Soviet Union no longer exists to formerly American-dominated regions such as Western Europe and Japan, American influence is only declining since the end of the Cold War, because such regions no longer need protection or have necessarily similar foreign policies as the United States.<ref>Henry Kissinger, '''', pp. 24, 26</ref> | |||
| The Soviet Union and the United States fulfilled the superpower criteria in the following ways: | |||
| {{Clear}} | |||
| {| class="wikitable" | |||
| |- | |||
| ! | |||
| ! {{flagicon|Soviet Union}} Soviet Union | |||
| ! {{flagicon|United States}} United States | |||
| |- | |||
| | '''Demography''' | |||
| | Had a population of 286.7 million in 1989, the third largest on Earth behind China and India.<ref name="USLOCstudies">{{cite web|url=http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdy:@field(DOCID+su0006) |title=Library of Congress Country Studies |publisher=Lcweb2.loc.gov |accessdate=2010-08-27}}</ref> | |||
| | Had a population of 248.7 million in 1990, at that time the fourth largest on Earth behind China, India and the Soviet Union.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.census.gov/population/censusdata/table-2.pdf |title=www.census.gov |format=PDF |accessdate=2010-08-27}}</ref> | |||
| |- | |||
| | '''Geography''' | |||
| | Largest state in the world (actually a ]), with a surface area of {{convert|22,270,000|km²|sqmi|abbr=on}}.<ref name="USLOCstudies"/> | |||
| | Fourth largest country in the world, with an area of {{convert|9,147,593|km²|sqmi|abbr=on}}.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/616563/United-States|title=United States|publisher=Encyclopædia Britannica|accessdate=31 January 2010}}</ref> | |||
| |- | |||
| | '''Economy''' | |||
| | GDP of $2.9 trillion in 1990 (equivalent to ${{Inflation|US|2.9|1990|r=1}} trillion in {{Inflation-year|US}}). Second largest economy in the world.<ref name=cia1990>{{cite web|url=http://www.umsl.edu/services/govdocs/wofact90/world12.txt|publisher=]|accessdate=2009-10-12|title=1990 CIA World Factbook}}</ref> Enormous mineral ] and fuel supply. Generally ] using a minimal amount of imports, though suffered resource inadequacies such as in agriculture. ] economic theory based primarily on production: Large-scale industrial production directed by centralised state organs leading to a high degree of inefficiency. ] frequently used to accomplish economic goals. Economic benefits such as guaranteed employment, free healthcare, free education provided to all levels of society, though were frequently below Western standards such as in ]. Economy tied to Central and Eastern-European satellite states. | |||
| | GDP of $5.2 trillion in 1990 (equivalent to ${{Inflation|US|5.2|1990|r=1}} trillion in {{Inflation-year|US}}). Largest economy in the world. Capitalist ] economic theory based on supply and demand: production determined by customers' demands, though it also included rising income inequality since 1979.<ref>{{cite web|title=A Guide to Statistics on Historical Trends in Income Inequality|url=http://www.cbpp.org/files/11-28-11pov.pdf|publisher=Center on Budget and Policy Priorities|accessdate=2 October 2012|author=Stone, C. |author2=Shaw, H. |author3=Trisi, D. |author4=Sherman, A.|pages=7–11|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20150331123409/http://www.cbpp.org/files/11-28-11pov.pdf|archivedate=31 March 2015}}</ref> Enormous ] base and a large and modernized ]ing industry. Large volume of imports and exports. Large resources of minerals, energy resources, metals, and timber. High standard of living with accessibility to many manufactured goods, though only modern industrialized nation without national, publicly-funded and government-provided healthcare and education programs. Home to a multitude of the largest global ]s. ] served as the dominant world ] under ]. Allied with ] major economies. Supported allied countries' economies via such programmes as the ]. | |||
| |- | |||
| | '''Politics''' | |||
| | Strong ] with extensive ], organized under a quasi-] with strong ], with ] for both the executive and (unusually) the judiciary primarily based on ]. The ] enjoyed de facto ], despite a ] and nominal ], as no court was vested with ]. No formal office of ] has existed; the ] also served as a collective ]. The only national-level popular elections were the quinquennial elections to the ], which were yes-or-no votes on candidates handpicked beforehand. However, radical government reforms in 1989 introduced competitive elections, a directly-elected executive ] and a ], both having rudimentary ] from the existing components of the system. One-party system with the ] ] having an institutionalized monopoly of power. Permanent seat on the ]. | |||
| | Strong ] ], organized under a ] with strong ], with a complicated system of ] exercised between the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary. The legislative powers of the ] were limited both by the ] and by the ] nature of the national government. Despite the lack of a dedicated ], ] of laws has been vested in the Supreme Court by ]. The ] was not only ], but also ], and ] was not required to ]. The only national popular elections were the biennial congressional elections; however the quadrennial presidential election has de facto changed from an ] by an ] into a direct, though ], popular election. Two-party system between ] ] and ] ]. Permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council plus two allies (France and the UK) with permanent seats. | |||
| |- | |||
| | '''Foreign relations''' | |||
| | Strong ties with ], countries in ], ], and ]. Also had an alliance with China up until 1961. Supported Communist and socialist countries around the world. | |||
| | Strong ties with ], some countries in ], the ], and several ]n countries. Supported democracies and anti-Communist dictatorships around the world. | |||
| |- | |||
| | '''Military''' | |||
| | Possessed largest ] and air force in the world, and the second of the world's largest navies. Possessed bases around the world. Held the world's largest stockpile of nuclear weapons for the second half of the Cold War. Founder of ] with satellite states in Central and Eastern Europe. Global ] with the ] and the ] of the ]. Ties with ] and ] groups in the developing world. Large ] production with global distribution. | |||
| | Highest ] in the world,<ref>{{cite web|author=John Pike |url=http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htm |title=World Wide Military Expenditures |publisher=Globalsecurity.org |accessdate=2010-08-27}}</ref> with the world's largest ] surpassing the next 13 largest navies combined,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2009-01-01/balanced-strategy|title=A Balanced Strategy: Reprogramming the Pentagon or a New Age|last=Gates|first=Robert M|publisher=Council On Foreign Relations|accessdate=31 May 2015}}</ref><ref name="Defense Analysis; Dec2001, Vol. 17 Issue 3, p259-265">Weighing the US Navy Defense & Security Analysis, Volume 17, Issue 3 December 2001, pages 259–265</ref> and an army and air force rivaled only by that of the Soviet Union. Possessed bases around the world, particularly in an incomplete "ring" bordering the Warsaw Pact to the West, South and East. Largest ] in the world during the first half of the Cold War. Powerful military allies in Western Europe (]) with their own nuclear capabilities. Global ] with the ] (IC). Ties with paramilitary and guerrilla groups in the developing world. Large armament production through ] along with its developed allies for the ]. | |||
| |- | |||
| | '''Media''' | |||
| | Constitutional guarantees for ] and ] were made conditional both for fulfilling one's citizen's duties and for conformity with the interests of the government, thereby turning them into effective dead letters. Press explicitly controlled and censored. Promoted, through the use of ], its Communist and Socialist ideal that workers of all countries should unite to overthrow capitalist society and what they called the ] and replace it with ] where all means of production are publicly owned. | |||
| | Maintained constitutional guarantees for ] and ], though the ongoing Cold War did lead to a degree of censorship, particularly during the ] and the ] when censorship was the heaviest. | |||
| |- | |||
| | '''Culture''' | |||
| | Rich tradition in ], ], and ]. | |||
| | Rich tradition and worldwide cultural influence in ], ], ], ], ], ], and ]. | |||
| |- | |||
| |} | |||
| == Post–Cold War era == | |||
| ] trading floor. Economic power such as a large ] and a world ] are important factors in projection of ].]] | |||
| After the dissolution of the ] in 1991 which ended the ], the post–Cold War world has in the past been considered by some to be a ] world,<ref name="Krauthammer1">Charles Krauthammer, , ''Foreign Policy Magazine'' (1991).</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gaikoforum.com/P03_19_122.pdf |title=www.gaikoforum.com |format=PDF |accessdate=2010-08-27}}</ref> with the ] as the world's sole remaining superpower.<ref>, BBC News. Retrieved March 11, 2007.</ref> In 1999, ] wrote, "The United States, of course, is the sole state with preeminence in every domain of power – economic, military, diplomatic, ideological, technological, and cultural – with the reach and capabilities to promote its interests in virtually every part of the world." However, he rejected the claim that the world was unipolar: "There is now only one superpower. But that does not mean that the world is unipolar," describing it instead as "a strange hybrid, a uni-multipolar system with one superpower and several major powers." He further wrote that "Washington is blind to the fact that it no longer enjoys the dominance it had at the end of the Cold War. It must relearn the game of international politics as a major power, not a superpower, and make compromises."<ref name="affairs">{{cite web|url=http://www-stage.foreignaffairs.org/19990301faessay966/samuel-p-huntington/the-lonely-superpower.html|title=The Lonely Superpower|work=Foreign Affairs|author=Samuel P. Huntington|date=27 April 2006|publisher=|deadurl=bot: unknown|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20060427150630/http://www-stage.foreignaffairs.org/19990301faessay966/samuel-p-huntington/the-lonely-superpower.html|archivedate=27 April 2006|df=}}</ref> | |||
| Experts argue that this older assessment of ] is too simplified, in part because of the difficulty in classifying the ] at its current stage of development. Others argue that the notion of a superpower is outdated, considering complex global economic interdependencies, and propose that the world is ].<ref name="The Global list (No superpower)">{{cite web|url=http://www.theglobalist.com/DBWeb/printStoryId.aspx?StoryId=3553|title=The Multipolar World Vs. The Superpower|work=The Globalist|author=Sherle Schwenninger|date=December 5, 2003|accessdate=2006-06-10 |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20060613215234/http://www.theglobalist.com/DBWeb/printStoryId.aspx?StoryId=3553 <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate=2006-06-13}}</ref><ref name="Washington Post (No superpower)">{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/03/AR2006030302055.html|title=The Multipolar Unilateralist|accessdate=2006-06-10 |work=The Washington Post |date=5 March 2006 |first=David |last=Von Drehle}}</ref><ref name="Globalpolicy.org (No superpower)">{{cite web|url=http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/challenges/competitors/2005/0315chinapower.htm|title=No Longer the "Lone" Superpower|accessdate=2006-06-11}}</ref><ref name="A Times (No superpower)">{{cite web|url=http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/ED05Ak01.html|title=The war that may end the age of superpower |work=Asia Times|author=Henry C K Liu|date=April 5, 2003|accessdate=2006-06-11}}</ref> | |||
| A 2012 report by the ] said that America's superpower status will have eroded to merely being first among equals by 2030, but that the US would remain highest among the world's most powerful countries because of its influence in many different fields and global connections that the great regional powers of the time would not match.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/news/2012/intell-121211-rferl01.htm|title=Forecast Sees Eroded U.S. Power|first=John|last=Pike|publisher=}}</ref> Additionally, some experts have suggested the possibility of the United States losing its superpower status completely in the future. Citing speculation of the United States relative decline in power to the rest of the world, economic hardships, a declining ], Cold War allies becoming less dependent on the United States and the emergence of future powers around the world.<ref name="uiuc-superpower">Unger J (2008), ''University of Illinois''</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Almond |first=Steve |url=http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/08/22/american_decline |title=Seizing American supremacy |publisher=Salon.com |date=2007-08-22 |accessdate=2010-08-27}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts03012005.html |title=The Coming End of the American Superpower |publisher=Counterpunch.org |date=2005-03-01 |accessdate=2010-08-27}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|author=Leonardo Martinez-Diaz |url=http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2007/0428us_economics_martinez-diaz.aspx |title=U.S.: A Losing Superpower? |publisher=Brookings.edu |date=2007-04-28 |accessdate=2010-08-27}}</ref> | |||
| Some people doubt the existence of superpowers in the ] altogether, stating that today's complex global marketplace and the rising interdependency between the world's nations has made the concept of a superpower an idea of the past and that the world is now ]. However, while the military dominance of the United States remains unquestioned for now and its international influence has made it an eminent world power, countries such as China, India, Brazil and Russia are inventing new ways to counter US military supremacy (namely space) and are making great strides in science, literature, soft power, and diplomacy.<ref name="The Global list (No superpower)" /><ref name="Washington Post (No superpower)" /><ref name="Globalpolicy.org (No superpower)"/><ref name="A Times (No superpower)" /> | |||
| === Potential superpowers === | |||
| {{Main|Potential superpowers}} | |||
| [[File:Potential Superpowers.svg|300px|thumb|A map showing the United States as the current superpower, along with other political entities that have varying degrees of academic support as potential superpowers. | |||
| {{legend|#75507b|<big>]</big>}} | |||
| {{legend|#cc0000|<big>]</big>}} | |||
| {{legend|#3465a4|<big>]</big>}} | |||
| {{legend|#73d216|<big>]</big>}} | |||
| {{legend|#f57900|<big>]</big>}} | |||
| {{legend|#edd400|<big>]</big>}}]] | |||
| The term 'potential superpowers' has been applied by scholars and other qualified commentators to the possibility of several states achieving superpower status in the 21st century. Due to their large markets, growing military strength, economic potential, and influence in international affairs, ],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19995218|title=What kind of superpower could China be?|date=19 October 2012|publisher=|via=www.bbc.co.uk}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=848 |title=China as a global power |publisher=China.usc.edu |date=2007-11-13 |accessdate=2010-08-27}}</ref><ref>CNN (1999). Visions of China. CNN Specials, 1999. Retrieved on 2007-03-11 from http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1999/china.50/asian.superpower/.</ref> the ],<ref>Leonard, Mark (2005-02-18). . Irish Times, 28 February 2005. Retrieved on 31-05-2015</ref><ref>],(2007). The European Superpower. Palgrave Macmillan.</ref> ],<ref>Meredith, R (2008) ''The Elephant and the Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What it Means for All of Us'', "W.W Norton and Company" {{ISBN|978-0-393-33193-6}}</ref> and ]<ref>{{cite book|title=Russia in the 21st Century|publisher=] Press|date=February 2005|last=Rosefielde|first=Steven|authorlink=Steven Rosefielde|isbn=978-0-521-54529-7|url=http://www.cambridge.org/gb/academic/subjects/economics/international-economics/russia-21st-century-prodigal-superpower}}</ref> are among the political entities most cited as having the potential of achieving superpower status in the 21st century. Many historians, writers, and critics have expressed doubts, however, whether any of these countries would ever emerge as a new superpower.<ref>{{cite news|last=Biswas|first=Soutik|title=Why India Will Not Become a Superpower|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-17350650|publisher=BBC India|accessdate=2012-04-29|date=2012-03-13}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Yuanan|first=Zhang|url=http://www.worldcrunch.com/business-finance/why-china-is-still-no-superpower/china-usa-economy-superpower-confucius/c2s12860/#.UyNI_j-SxA0|title=Why China Is Still No Superpower|accessdate=2014-03-14|date=2013-07-31}}</ref> Some political scientists and other commentators have even suggested that such countries might simply be ]s, as opposed to potential superpowers.<ref name="BRICS">{{cite web|url=http://www.ccs.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/China_Monitor_JUNE_2010.pdf|title=The Centre for Chinese Studies – Study of China and East Asia on the African continent|website=www.ccs.org.za|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20131204011005/http://www.ccs.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/China_Monitor_JUNE_2010.pdf|archivedate=2013-12-04|df=}}</ref> | |||
| Besides those mentioned above, a limited number of observers have also discussed, though ultimately dismissed, ] having the potential to emerge as a superpower.<ref name="Collecott">{{cite web|author=Peter Collecott|url=http://www.diplomaticourier.com/brazil-s-quest-for-superpower-status/|title=Brazil's Quest for Superpower Status|publisher=The Diplomatic Courier|date=29 October 2011|accessdate=10 August 2014}}</ref> | |||
| The record of such predictions has admittedly not been perfect. For example, in the 1980s, some commentators thought Japan would become a superpower, due to its large GDP and high economic growth at the time.<ref> 1988 article "Japan From Superrich To Superpower"</ref> However, ], creating a long period of economic slump in the country which has become known as '']''. As of August 2012, Japan had yet to fully recover from the 1991 crash.<ref>{{cite news|title=Japan eyes end to decades long deflation|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/17/japan-economy-estimate-idUSL4E8JH1TC20120817|author=Leika Kihara|publisher=Reuters|date=August 17, 2012|accessdate=2012-09-07}}</ref> | |||
| == See also == | |||
| {{Portal|International relations}} | |||
| {{columns-list|colwidth=30em| | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| }} | |||
| == References == | |||
| <!-- do not put a scroll box per ] --> | |||
| {{Reflist|30em}} | |||
| == Bibliography == | |||
| * {{cite book | author= Belt, Don| year=2004| title=]| chapter=Europe's Big Gamble | editor= | pages=54–65 | publisher= | id=| url= | authorlink= }} | |||
| * {{cite book | author = Brzezinski, Zbigniew | year= 1997 | title=The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives | publisher= Basic Books | location = New York |isbn = 0-465-02726-1 | authorlink= Zbigniew Brzezinski}} | |||
| * {{cite book | author=Fox, William | year=1944 | title = The Super-powers: the United States, Britain, and the Soviet union—their responsibility for peace| chapter= | editor= | pages= | publisher=Harcourt, Brace a. Co | id= | url= | authorlink=William Thornton Rickert Fox }} | |||
| * {{cite book | author = Kamen, Henry| year=2003 | title=Spain's Road To Empire: The Making Of A World Power, 1492–1763 |postscript = 640 pages |publisher=Penguin }} | |||
| * {{cite book | author=Kennedy, Paul| year=1988 | title=] | chapter= | editor= | pages= | publisher= |isbn = 0-679-72019-7 | url= | authorlink=Paul Kennedy }} | |||
| * {{cite book | first=John |last=McCormick, John | year=2007 |title=The European Superpower |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |authorlink=John McCormick (political scientist) }} | |||
| * {{cite book | author=Todd, Emanuel |year=200X |title=After the Empire – The Breakdown of the American Order| pages= | publisher= | authorlink= Emmanuel Todd }} | |||
| * {{cite book |last=Rosefielde |first=Steven |title=Russia in the 21st Century: The Prodigal Superpower |url = http://assets.cambridge.org/97805218/36784/excerpt/9780521836784_excerpt.pdf |format=PDF |accessdate=2007-10-07 |year=2005 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |location=Cambridge, UK |isbn = 0-521-83678-6 }} | |||
| * Erik Ringmar, "," ''Cooperation & Conflict'', 37:2, 2002. pp. 115–36. – an explanation of the relations between the superpowers in the 20th century based on the notion of recognition. | |||
| * Litwin Henryk, , ''BUM Magazine'', October 2016. | |||
| == External links == | |||
| {{Commons category|Superpowers}} | |||
| * {{cite news|url=http://www.iht.com/articles/1999/02/05/france.t_0.php|title=To Paris, U.S. Looks Like a 'Hyperpower'|work=The International Herald Tribune|date=February 5, 1999|accessdate=August 20, 2006 |archiveurl = https://web.archive.org/web/20061026003700/http://www.iht.com/articles/1999/02/05/france.t_0.php <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = October 26, 2006}} | |||
| * {{cite news|title=Rule America?|first=Jonathan|last=Last|url=http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=6200|work=The Weekly Standard|publisher=News America Incorporated|date=October 21, 2005|accessdate=2006-09-15 |archiveurl = https://web.archive.org/web/20070311132645/http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=6200 <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = 2007-03-11}} | |||
| * Védrine, Hubert. ''France in an Age of Globalization'', Brookings Institution Press, 2001. {{ISBN|0-8157-0007-5}} | |||
| * {{cite web|title=Word Spy - hyper-power|url=http://www.wordspy.com/words/hyper-power.asp|accessdate=2006-09-15}} | |||
| * Li, Bo; Zheng Yin (Chinese) (2001) 5000 years of Chinese history, Inner Mongolian People's publishing corp, {{ISBN|7-204-04420-7}} | |||
| * | |||
| {{International power}} | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
Revision as of 22:23, 24 January 2018
fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart