Superpowers!? [Archive]

23rd February 2010, 17:53

I thought the wikipedia definition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superpower) to be useful:

A superpower is a state with a leading position in the international system and the ability to influence events and its own interests and project power on a worldwide scale to protect those interests; it is traditionally considered to be one step higher than a great power.

Russia could, after the collapse of the USSR, be better classified as a regional power, not so much a global hegemon.

Joe_Germinal

23rd February 2010, 18:02

Superpower is generally an ill defined term which gets thrown around without much thought. It basically begins its life as the extension of a concept from the field of international relations.

International relations theorists had long used the concept of "great power" to describe a country which could influence, or even determine, the political actions of its neighbors. For example, before the second world war, Nazi Germany was a great power--it was able among other things to install a fascist regime in Spain--but Spain was not a great power because, under both republican and fascist governments, it was unable to have much say in the affairs of most other European countries.

After the second world war, some international relations theorists realized that the US, the Soviet Union, and Britain (for a brief period prior to losing its empire) had become so powerful that they could influence not only nearby countries and weak colonies, but they also had the capacity to influence nearly any country nearly anywhere in the world. The US could, in the late 40s and early 50s, prevent popular governments from coming to power in Italy, France, Greece, and Turkey while at the same time fighting a war in Korea and overthrowing popular governments in Latin America. Old empires focused on limited areas at any one time: they did not scramble for Africa at the same time they colonized the New World. In contradistinction, superpowers are able to simultaneously exert influence on the five big continents all at the same time.

So, that's the basic concept as I understand it. The reason why the former Soviet Union is no longer a superpower is, I think, twofold: (1) money: being a superpower means being able to fund armies, movements, and political parties across the globe. The Soviet Union lost 80% of its GDP in its collapse and could no longer afford to do that. (2) the pro-Soviet communist and national liberation movements: just as the US used capital and corporations from all countries to spread its influence, the Soviet Union was able to rely on the support of most communist parties and many national liberation movements to expand its influence. When these movements came to power, it was almost assured that the Soviet Union would have a great deal of influence in the country. These movements are now extremely weak and practically none look towards bleak, capitalist Russia for support and inspiration