Editing Power (international relations)

{{short description|Concept in international relations}}
{{For|other types of power|Power (disambiguation){{!}}Power}}
{{Further|Superpower|Great power|Middle power|Small power}}
{{forms of government}}

In [[international relations]], '''power''' is defined in several different ways.<ref name="Barnett-2005"/> Material definitions of state power emphasize economic and military power.<ref name="Waltz-1979">{{Cite book|last=Waltz|first=Kenneth Neal|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=j6qOAAAAMAAJ|title=Theory of International Politics|date=1979|publisher=McGraw-Hill|isbn=978-0-07-554852-2|language=en}}</ref><ref name="Mearsheimer-2001">{{Cite book|last=Mearsheimer|first=John J.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jOV9HuCppqwC|title=The Tragedy of Great Power Politics|date=2001|publisher=Norton|isbn=978-0-393-02025-0|language=en}}</ref><ref name="Hopf-1998">{{Cite journal|last=Hopf|first=Ted|date=1998|title=The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/2539267|journal=International Security|volume=23|issue=1|pages=171–200|doi=10.2307/2539267|issn=0162-2889|jstor=2539267|url-access=subscription}}</ref> Other definitions of power emphasize the ability to structure and constitute the nature of social relations between actors.<ref name="Barnett-2005">{{Cite journal|last1=Barnett|first1=Michael|last2=Duvall|first2=Raymond|date=2005|title=Power in International Politics|journal=International Organization|language=en|volume=59|issue=1|pages=39–75|doi=10.1017/S0020818305050010|s2cid=3613655|issn=1531-5088|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name="Hopf-1998" /> Power is an attribute of particular actors in their interactions, as well as a social process that constitutes the social identities and capacities of actors.<ref name="Barnett-2005" />

International relations scholars use the term [[Polarity (international relations)|polarity]] to describe the distribution of power in the international system.<ref name="Waltz-1979" /> Unipolarity refers to an international system characterized by one hegemon (e.g. the United States in the post-Cold War period), bipolarity to an order with two great powers or blocs of states (e.g. the Cold War), and multipolarity refers to the presence of three or more great powers.<ref name="Waltz-1979" /> Those states that have significant amounts of power within the international system are referred to as [[small power]]s, [[middle power]]s, [[regional power]]s, [[great power]]s, [[superpower]]s, or [[hegemons]], although there is no commonly accepted standard for what defines a powerful state.{{cn|date=October 2024}}

Entities other than states can have power in international relations. Such entities can include [[multilateralism|multilateral]] [[international organizations]], military alliance organizations like [[NATO]], [[multinational corporation]]s like [[Walmart]],<ref>{{cite news |url = https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2003/03/03/338383/index.htm |publisher=CNN |access-date=2010-05-22 |title = One Nation Under Wal-Mart: How Retailing's Superpower—and our Biggest, Most Admired Company—Is Changing the Rules for Corporate America |date=2003-03-03 |first=Jerry |last=Useem }}</ref> [[non-governmental organizations]] such as the [[Roman Catholic Church]], or other institutions such as the [[Hanseatic League]] and technology companies like [[Facebook]] and [[Google]].{{cn|date=October 2024}}

== Concepts of political power ==
[[Michael N. Barnett|Michael Barnett]] and Raymond Duvall define power as "the production, in and through social relations, of effects that shape the capacities of actors to determine their circumstances and fate."<ref name="Barnett-2005" /> They reject definitions of power that conflate power as any and all effects because doing so makes power synonymous with causality.<ref name="Barnett-2005" /> They also reject persuasion as part of the definition of power, as it revolves around actors freely and voluntarily changing their minds once presented with new information.<ref name="Barnett-2005" />

[[Political science|Political scientists]], [[historian]]s, and practitioners of [[international relations]] ([[diplomat]]s) have used the following concepts of [[political power]]:{{cn|date=October 2024}}
* Power as a '''goal''' of states or leaders;
* Power as a measure of '''[[Social influence|influence]]''' or control over outcomes, events, actors and issues;
* Power as victory in conflict and the attainment of '''[[international security|security]]''';
* Power as control over resources and '''capabilities''';
* Power as '''status''', which some states or actors possess and others do not.

===Power as a goal===
The view that hegemony is a goal in international relations has long been discussed by political theorists. Philosophers such as [[Thucydides]], [[Niccolo Machiavelli]], [[Thomas Hobbes]] and [[Hans Morgenthau]] are thought to have provided a realistic portrait of this political aim.<ref>Forde, S. (1992). Varieties of realism: Thucydides and Machiavelli. The Journal of Politics, 54(2), 372-393.</ref>  Especially among Classical [[Realism in international relations|Realist]] thinkers, political dominance is the aim of nation states.<ref>Hobson, J. M. (2000). The state and international relations. Cambridge University Press.</ref>  The German military thinker [[Carl von Clausewitz]]<ref>Bauer, Richard H. "Hans Delbrück (1848–1929)." Bernadotte E. Schmitt. ''Some Historians of Modern Europe''. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1942.</ref> is considered to be the quintessential projection of European growth across the continent.  In more modern times, [[Baron Moser|Claus Moser]] has elucidated theories centre of distribution of power in Europe after the Holocaust, and the power of universal learning as its counterpoint.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/interview--sir-claus-moser-735-per-cent-english-what-is-dangerous-in-the-sort-of-life-ive-had-is-that-there-are-moments-when-one-might-think-one-is-indispensable-1536025.html#|title=INTERVIEW / Sir Claus Moser: 73.5 per cent English: 'What is dangerous|author=ANGELA LAMBERT|date=27 July 1992|work=The Independent}}</ref> [[Jean Monnet]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://europa.eu/about-eu/eu-history/founding-fathers/pdf/jean_monnet_en.pdf|title=About the EU – European Union website, the official EU website – European Commission|last=Anonymous|date=16 June 2016|access-date=27 November 2016}}</ref> was a French left-wing social theorist, stimulating expansive Eurocommunism, who followed on the creator of modern European community, the diplomat and statesman [[Robert Schuman]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://europa.eu/about-eu/eu-history/founding-fathers/pdf/robert_schuman_en.pdf|title=About the EU – European Union website, the official EU website – European Commission|last=Anonymous|date=16 June 2016|access-date=27 November 2016}}</ref>

===Power as influence===
[[File:North Atlantic Treaty Organization (orthographic projection).svg|thumb|upright|[[NATO]] accounts for 55% of [[List of countries by military expenditures|global military expenditure]], with the [[United States]] alone accounting for 37% of global military expenditure in 2023.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Tian |first1=Nan |last2=Lopes Da Silva |first2=Diego |last3=Liang |first3=Xiao |last4=Scarazzato |first4=Lorenzo |title=Trends in World Military Expenditure, 2023 |url=https://www.sipri.org/publications/2024/sipri-fact-sheets/trends-world-military-expenditure-2023 |website=Stockholm International Peace Research Institute |access-date=4 February 2025}}</ref>]]

[[Political science|Political scientists]] principally use "power" in terms of an actor's ability to exercise [[Sphere of influence|influence]] over other actors within the [[international relations|international system]].{{cn|date=October 2024}} This influence can be [[coercive]], attractive, [[cooperative]], or [[competitive]]. Mechanisms of influence can include the threat or use of force, economic interaction or pressure, diplomacy, and cultural exchange.{{cn|date=October 2024}}

Under certain circumstances, states can organize a [[sphere of influence]] or a bloc within which they exercise predominant influence. Historical examples include the spheres of influence recognized under the [[Concert of Europe]], or the recognition of spheres during the [[Cold War]] following the [[Yalta Conference]]. The [[Eastern Bloc]], the [[Western Bloc]], and the [[Non-Aligned Movement]] were the blocs that arose out of the Cold War contest. Military alliances like [[NATO]] and the [[Warsaw Pact]] are another forum through which influence is exercised. However, "[[political realism|realist]]" theory attempted to maintain the [[balance of power (international relations)|balance of power]] from the development of meaningful diplomatic relations that can create a [[hegemony]] within the region. [[British foreign policy]], for example, dominated Europe through the [[Congress of Vienna]] after the defeat of France. They continued the balancing act with the [[Congress of Berlin]] in 1878, to appease Russia and Germany from attacking Turkey.  Britain has sided against the aggressors on the European continent—i.e. the [[German Empire]], [[Nazi Germany]], [[Napoleonic France]] or the [[Austrian Empire]], known during the Great War as the [[Central Powers]] and, in World War II as the [[Axis Powers]].<ref>A.J.P.Taylor, "Origins of the First World War"</ref><ref>Ensor, Sir Robert (1962) 2nd ed. "Britain 1870–1914" The Oxford History of England.</ref>

International orders have both a material and social component.<ref name="Barnett-2021">{{Cite journal|last=Barnett|first=Michael|date=2021|title=International Progress, International Order, and the Liberal International Order|url=https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/poaa019|journal=The Chinese Journal of International Politics|volume=14|issue=1|pages=1–22|doi=10.1093/cjip/poaa019|issn=1750-8916|pmc=7989545}}</ref> [[Martha Finnemore]] argues that unipolarity does not just entail a material superiority by the unipole, but also a social structure whereby the unipole maintains its status through legitimation, and institutionalization. In trying to obtain legitimacy from the other actors in the international system, the unipole necessarily gives those actors a degree of power. The unipole also obtains legitimacy and wards off challenges to its power through the creation of institutions, but these institutions also entail a diffusion of power away from the unipole.<ref name="Finnemore-2009">{{Cite journal|last=Martha Finnemore|date=2009|title=Legitimacy, Hypocrisy, and the Social Structure of Unipolarity: Why Being a Unipole Isn't All It's Cracked Up to Be|journal=World Politics|volume=61|issue=1|pages=58–85|doi=10.1353/wp.0.0027|issn=1086-3338|doi-access=free}}</ref> David Lake has argued along similar lines that legitimacy and authority are key components of international order.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Lake|first=David A.|date=2018|title=International Legitimacy Lost? Rule and Resistance When America Is First|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/abs/international-legitimacy-lost-rule-and-resistance-when-america-is-first/1EB3776D8B18081E528F4A84E229E241|journal=Perspectives on Politics|language=en|volume=16|issue=1|pages=6–21|doi=10.1017/S1537592717003085|s2cid=148632667|issn=1537-5927|url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref>{{Citation|last=Lake|first=David A.|title=Authority, Coercion, and Power in International Relations|date=2013|url=https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199970087.001.0001/acprof-9780199970087-chapter-4|work=Back to Basics|pages=55–77|editor-last=Finnemore|editor-first=Martha|publisher=Oxford University Press|doi=10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199970087.003.0004|isbn=978-0-19-997008-7|editor2-last=Goldstein|editor2-first=Judith|url-access=subscription}}</ref>

[[Susan Strange]] made a key contribution to International Political Economy on the issue of [[Power (social and political)|power]], which she considered essential to the character and dynamics of the global economy.<ref name="Cohen-2008b">{{Cite book|last=Cohen|first=Benjamin J.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=H79WVDwMzCEC|title=International Political Economy: An Intellectual History|date=2008|publisher=Princeton University Press|isbn=978-0-691-13569-4|pages=45–51|language=en}}</ref> Strange was skeptical of static indicators of power, arguing that it was structural power that mattered.<ref name="Norrlof-2010">{{Cite book|last=Norrlof|first=Carla|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/americas-global-advantage/29F591B11AD3CCFDA25F7ED7D9191B55|title=America's Global Advantage: US Hegemony and International Cooperation|date=2010|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-76543-5|location=Cambridge|pages=18|doi=10.1017/cbo9780511676406}}</ref> In particular, interactions between states and markets mattered.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Katzenstein|first1=Peter J.|last2=Keohane|first2=Robert O.|last3=Krasner|first3=Stephen D.|date=1998|title=International Organization and the Study of World Politics|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S002081830003558X/type/journal_article|journal=International Organization|language=en|volume=52|issue=4|pages=645–685|doi=10.1017/S002081830003558X|s2cid=34947557 |issn=0020-8183|url-access=subscription}}</ref> She pointed to the superiority of the American technology sector, dominance in services, and the position of the U.S. dollar as the top international currency as real indicators of lasting power.<ref name="Cohen-2008a">{{Cite book|last=Cohen|first=Benjamin J.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=H79WVDwMzCEC|title=International Political Economy: An Intellectual History|date=2008|publisher=Princeton University Press|isbn=978-0-691-13569-4|pages=76|language=en}}</ref> She distinguished between relational power (the power to compel A to get B to do something B does not want to do) and structural power (the power to shape and determine the structure of the global political economy).<ref name="Cohen-2008b"/> Political scientists [[Henry Farrell (political scientist)|Henry Farrell]] and [[Abraham L. Newman]] argue that state power is in part derived from control over important nodes in global networks of informational and financial exchange, which means that states can "weaponize interdependence" by fighting over control of these nodes.<ref name="Farrell-2019">{{Cite journal|last1=Farrell|first1=Henry|last2=Newman|first2=Abraham L.|date=2019-07-01|title=Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion|journal=International Security|volume=44|issue=1|pages=42–79|doi=10.1162/isec_a_00351|issn=0162-2889|s2cid=198952367|doi-access=free}}</ref>

===Power as capability===
American author [[Charles W. Freeman, Jr.]] described power as the following:
{{blockquote|Power is the capacity to direct the decisions and actions of others. Power derives from strength and will. Strength comes from the transformation of resources into capabilities. Will infuses objectives with resolve. Strategy marshals capabilities and brings them to bear with precision. Statecraft seeks through strategy to magnify the mass, relevance, impact, and irresistibility of power. It guides the ways the state deploys and applies its power abroad. These ways embrace the arts of war, espionage, and diplomacy. The practitioners of these three arts are the paladins of statecraft.<ref>{{cite book|first=Gabriel|last=Marcella|chapter=Chapter 17: National Security and the Interagency Process|chapter-url=http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/army-usawc/strategy2004/17marcella.pdf|title=U.S. Army War College Guide to National Security Policy and Strategy|editor-first=J. Boone|editor-last=Bartholomees, Jr.|url=http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/army-usawc/strategy2004/index.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040903121835/http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/army-usawc/strategy2004/index.htm|url-status=dead|archive-date=September 3, 2004|pages=239–260|date=July 2004|publisher=United States Army War College}}</ref>}}

''Power'' is also used to describe the [[Resource (economics)|resources]] and [[Capability (systems engineering)|capabilities]] of a state. This definition is quantitative and is most often{{Dubious|''Power as resources most often used by geopoliticians and the military''|date=February 2017}} used by geopoliticians and the military. Capabilities are thought of in tangible terms—they are measurable, weighable, quantifiable assets. A good example for this kind of measurement is the ''Composite Indicator on Aggregate Power'', which involves 54 indicators and covers the capabilities of 44 states in [[Asia-Pacific]] from 1992 to 2012.<ref name="Fels2017a">{{cite book|author1=Fels, Enrico|title=Shifting Power in Asia-Pacific? The Rise of China, Sino-US Competition and Regional Middle Power Allegiance|url=https://www.springer.com/us/book/9783319456881|year=2017|publisher=Springer|isbn=978-3-319-45689-8|pages=225–340|access-date=2016-11-25}}</ref> Hard power can be treated as a potential and is not often enforced on the international stage.

[[People's Republic of China|Chinese]] strategists have such a concept of [[national power]] that can be measured [[Quantitative property|quantitatively]] using an index known as [[Comprehensive National Power]].

[[Michael Beckley (political scientist)|Michael Beckley]] argues that gross domestic product and military spending are imprecise indicators of power. He argues that better measurements of power should take into account "net" indicators of powers: "[Gross] indicators systematically exaggerate the wealth and military capabilities of poor, populous countries, because they tally countries' resources without deducting the costs countries pay to police, protect, and serve their people. A country with a big population might produce vast output and field a large army, but it also may bear massive welfare and security burdens that drain its wealth and bog down its military, leaving it with few resources for [[power projection]] abroad."<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Beckley|first=Michael|date=2018|title=The Power of Nations: Measuring What Matters|journal=International Security|volume=43|issue=2|pages=7–44|doi=10.1162/isec_a_00328|s2cid=57560003|issn=0162-2889|doi-access=free}}</ref>

==Power as status==

===Definitions===
Much effort in academic and popular writing is devoted to deciding which countries have the status of "power", and how this can be measured. If a country has "power" (as influence) in military, diplomatic, cultural, and economic spheres, it might be called a "power" (as status). There are several and inclusion of a state in one category or another is fraught with difficulty and controversy. In his famous 1987 work, ''[[The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers]],'' British-American historian [[Paul Kennedy]] charts the relative status of the various powers from AD 1500 to 2000. He does not begin the book with a [[theoretical definition]] of "great power"; however he lists them, separately, for many different eras. Moreover, he uses different [[working definitions]] of great power for different eras. For example
{{blockquote|"France was not strong enough to oppose Germany in a one-to-one struggle... If the mark of a Great Power is country which is willing to take on any other, then France (like Austria-Hungary) had slipped to a lower position. But that definition seemed too abstract in 1914 to a nation geared up for war, militarily stronger than ever, wealthy, and, above all, endowed with powerful allies."<ref name="Kennedy">{{cite book|last1=Kennedy|first1=Paul|author-link1=Paul Kennedy|title=The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000|year=1989|orig-year=1987|publisher=Fontana|location=London|isbn=0006860524|page=[https://archive.org/details/risefallofgreatp00paul/page/290 290]|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/risefallofgreatp00paul/page/290}}</ref>}}Neorealist scholars frequently define power as entailing military capabilities and economic strength.<ref name="Waltz-1979" /><ref name="Mearsheimer-2001" /><ref name="Lebow-2016"/> Classical realists recognized that the ability to influence depended on psychological relationships that touched on ethical principles, legitimacy and justice,<ref name="Lebow-2016">{{Cite book|last=Lebow|first=Richard Ned|url=https://www.oxfordpoliticstrove.com/view/10.1093/hepl/9780198707561.001.0001/hepl-9780198707561-chapter-2|chapter=2. Classical Realism|title=International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity (4th edn)|year=2016|publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn=978-0-19-185076-9|language=en-US|doi=10.1093/hepl/9780198707561.003.0003|doi-broken-date=2024-11-25 }}</ref> as well as emotions, leaders' skill and power over opinion.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Carr|first=E. H.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Gbz_EsWbioUC|title=The Twenty Years' Crisis 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations|date=2001|publisher=Palgrave Macmillan|isbn=978-0-333-96377-7|language=en}}</ref><ref name="Lebow-2016" /><ref>{{Citation|last1=Finnemore|first1=Martha|title=Puzzles about Power|date=2013|url=https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199970087.001.0001/acprof-9780199970087-chapter-1|work=Back to Basics|pages=3–16|editor-last=Finnemore|editor-first=Martha|publisher=Oxford University Press|doi=10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199970087.003.0001|isbn=978-0-19-997008-7|last2=Goldstein|first2=Judith|editor2-last=Goldstein|editor2-first=Judith|url-access=subscription}}</ref>

===Categories of power===

In the modern geopolitical landscape, a number of terms are used to describe various types of powers, which include the following:
* '''''[[Hegemony]]''''': a state that has the power to shape the international system and "control the external behavior of all other states."<ref name="Monteiro-2012">{{Cite journal |last=Monteiro |first=Nuno P. |date=2012 |title=Unrest Assured: Why Unipolarity Is Not Peaceful |url=https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00064 |journal=International Security |volume=36 |issue=3 |pages=9–40 |doi=10.1162/ISEC_a_00064 |issn=0162-2889 |s2cid=57558611|url-access=subscription }}</ref> Hegemony can be regional or global.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Mearsheimer |first=John J. |url= |title=The Tragedy of Great Power Politics |date=2001 |publisher=W. W. Norton & Company |isbn=978-0-393-34927-6 |language=en |chapter=Chapter 2}}</ref> Unlike unipolarity, which is a power preponderance within an anarchic international system of nominally equal states, hegemony assumes a hierarchy where the most powerful can control other states.<ref name="Monteiro-2012" />
* '''''[[Polarity (international relations)|Unipole]]''''': a state that enjoys a preponderance of power and faces no competitor states.<ref name="Monteiro-2012" /><ref name="Wohlforth-1999">{{Cite journal |last=Wohlforth |first=William C. |date=1999 |title=The Stability of a Unipolar World |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/2539346 |journal=International Security |volume=24 |issue=1 |pages=5–41 |doi=10.1162/016228899560031 |jstor=2539346 |s2cid=57568539 |issn=0162-2889|url-access=subscription }}</ref> According to William Wohlforth, "a unipolar system is one in which a counterbalance is impossible. When a counterbalance becomes possible, the system is not unipolar."<ref name="Wohlforth-1999" /> A unipolar state is not the same as an [[empire]] or a hegemon that can control the behavior of all other states.<ref name="Monteiro-2012" /><ref name="Jervis unipolar">{{cite journal |last=Jervis |first=Robert |date=2009 |title=Unipolarity: A Structural Perspective |url=http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/wp/summary/v061/61.1.jervis.html |journal=World Politics |volume=61 |issue=1 |pages=188–231, p. 190 |doi=10.1353/wp.0.0031 |quote=unipolarity implies the existence of many juridically equal nation-states, something that an empire denies|url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref name="Nexon Wright polarity">{{cite journal |last=Nexon |first=Daniel and Thomas Wright |date=2007 |title=What's at Stake in the American Empire Debate |journal=American Political Science Review |volume=101 |issue=2 |pages=253–271, p. 253 |citeseerx=10.1.1.136.2578 |doi=10.1017/s0003055407070220 |s2cid=17910808 |quote=in empires, inter-societal divide-and-rule practices replace interstate balance-of-power dynamics}}</ref> 
* '''''[[Superpower]]''''': In 1944, [[William T. R. Fox]] defined ''superpower'' as "great power plus great mobility of power" and identified three states, the [[British Empire]], the [[Soviet Union]] and the [[United States]].<ref>{{cite book|last1=Evans|first1=G.|last2=Newnham|first2=J.|year=1998|title=Dictionary of International Relations|url=https://archive.org/details/penguindictionar0000evan|url-access=registration|location=London|publisher=Penguin Books|page=[https://archive.org/details/penguindictionar0000evan/page/522 522]|isbn=9780140513974}}</ref> With the decolonisation of the British Empire following World War II, and then the [[dissolution of the Soviet Union]] in 1991, the United States has remained to be the sole superpower.<ref name="Nossal">{{cite conference|url=http://post.queensu.ca/~nossalk/papers/hyperpower.htm|title=Lonely Superpower or Unapologetic Hyperpower? Analyzing American Power in the post–Cold War Era|conference=Biennial meeting, South African Political Studies Association, 29 June-2 July 1999|access-date=2007-02-28|author=Kim Richard Nossal|archive-date=2019-05-26|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190526100449/http://post.queensu.ca/~nossalk/papers/hyperpower.htm|url-status=dead}}<!-- subtitle: "Paper for presentation at the biennial meetings of the South African Political Studies Association Saldanha, Western Cape 29 June-2 July 1999 --></ref> [[China]] is now considered an [[Potential superpowers#China|emerging global superpower]] by many scholars.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Five big takeaways from the 2019 Asia Power Index|url=https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/power-shifts-fevered-times-2019-asia-power-index|access-date=2020-05-06|website=Lowy Institute |first1=Hervé |last1=Lemahieu |language=en|quote=China, the emerging superpower, netted the highest gains in overall power in 2019, ranking first in half of the eight Index measures. For the first time, China narrowly edged out the United States in the Index's assessment of economic resources. In absolute terms China's economy grew by more than the total size of Australia's economy in 2018. The world's largest trading nation has also paradoxically seen its GDP become less dependent on exports. This makes China less vulnerable to an escalating trade war than most other Asian economies. |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200621152255/https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/power-shifts-fevered-times-2019-asia-power-index |archive-date= Jun 21, 2020 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Many Germans believe China will replace US as superpower: survey |url=https://www.dw.com/en/germany-china-us-superpower/a-54173383|access-date=2020-09-21|website=DW |date=July 14, 2020 |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last1=Huhua|first1=Cao|title=Facing China as a New Global Superpower|last2=Jeremy|first2=Paltiel|publisher=[[Springer Publishing|Springer]]|year=2016|isbn=978-981-287-823-6|location=Singapore|pages=XI, 279|doi=10.1007/978-981-287-823-6}}</ref>
* '''''[[Great power]]''''': In historical mentions, the term ''great power'' refers to the states that have strong political, cultural and economical influence over nations around them and across the world.<ref name="Ovendale-1988">{{cite journal|first=Ritchie|last=Ovendale|title=Reviews of Books: Power in Europe? Great Britain, France, Italy and Germany in a Postwar World, 1945–1950|journal=The English Historical Review|volume=103|date=January 1988|page=154|publisher=Oxford University Press|jstor=571588|issn=0013-8266|issue=406|doi=10.1093/ehr/CIII.CCCCVI.154}}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine|url=http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/61705/ben-w-heineman-jr-and-fritz-heimann/the-long-war-against-corruption|first1=Ben W. Jr.|last1=Heineman|first2=Fritz|last2=Heimann|title=The Long War Against Corruption|date=May–June 2006|magazine=[[Foreign Affairs]]|publisher=[[Council on Foreign Relations]]|quote=Ben W. Heineman, Jr., and Fritz Heimann speak of Italy as a major country or 'player' along with Germany, France, Japan, and the United Kingdom.}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=X4xw8-Oj9usC&q=regional+power+italy+in+europe&pg=PA157|title=Middle East and Europe: The Power Deficit|first=B. A.|last=Roberson|publisher=Taylor & Francis|year=1998|access-date=2013-08-11|isbn=9780415140447}}</ref>
* '''''[[Middle power]]''''': A subjective description of influential second-tier states that could not quite be described as great or small powers. A middle power has sufficient strength and authority to stand on its own without the need of help from others (particularly in the realm of [[security]]) and takes diplomatic leads in regional and global affairs.<ref name="Fels2017">{{cite book|author1=Fels, Enrico|title=Shifting Power in Asia-Pacific? The Rise of China, Sino-US Competition and Regional Middle Power Allegiance|url=https://www.springer.com/us/book/9783319456881|year=2017|publisher=Springer|isbn=978-3-319-45689-8|page=213|access-date=2016-11-25}}</ref> Clearly not all middle powers are of equal status; some are members of forums such as the [[G20]] and play important roles in the [[United Nations]] and other international organisations such as the [[WTO]].<ref name="Rudd">Rudd K (2006) [http://eherald.alp.org.au/articles/0906/natp28-01.php Making Australia a force for good], ''Labor eHerald'' {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070627041402/http://eherald.alp.org.au/articles/0906/natp28-01.php |date=June 27, 2007 }}</ref>
* '''''[[Small power]]''''': The International System is for the most part made up by ''small powers''. They are instruments of the other powers and may at times be dominated; but they cannot be ignored.<ref>Vital, D. (1967) The Inequality of States: A Study of Small Power in International Relations</ref>

====Other categories====
* '''''[[Emerging power]]''''': A transitional category in which a state or union of states is viewed as on a trajectory of increasing global influence.<ref name="Emergingpower1">{{cite book|title=The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers|url=https://archive.org/details/risefallofgreatp00kenn|url-access=registration|year=1987|first=Paul|last=Kennedy|publisher=Random House|isbn=0679-720197}}</ref><ref name="Emergingpower2">{{cite book|title=The European Union and Emerging Powers in the 21st Century: How Europe Can Shape a New Global Order|date=2013|first1=Thomas|last1=Renard|first2=Sven|last2=Biscop}}</ref>
* '''''[[Regional power]]''''': This term is used to describe a nation that exercises influence and power within a region. Being a ''regional power'' is not mutually exclusive with any of the other categories of power. The majority of them exert a strategic degree of influence as minor or secondary regional powers, although primary regional powers (like [[Australia]] or [[Brazil]]) can also have an important role in international affairs outside of its region too.<ref>Schenoni, Luis (2017). "Subsystemic Unipolarities?" in Strategic Analysis, 41(1): 74–86 [https://www.academia.edu/30528886/_Subsystemic_Unipolarities_Power_Distribution_and_State_Behaviour_in_South_America_and_Southern_Africa_in_Strategic_Analysis_41_1_74-86]</ref>
* '''''Cultural superpower''''': Refers to a country whose [[culture]], [[arts]], [[sports]], or [[entertainment]] have worldwide appeal, significant international popularity or large influence on much of the world. Among the countries described as such are [[Brazil]],<ref>{{Cite web|title=Soft power superpowers - Brazil, China, France, Germany, Russia, South Korea and the US |url=https://www.britishcouncil.org/research-insight/soft-power-superpowers|access-date=2025-02-22|website=British Council |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Brazil’s Ascendance: The soft power role of global health diplomacy |url=https://www.aber.ac.uk/en/media/departmental/interpol/chair/KL---Brazil%27s-ascendance-article.pdf|access-date=2025-02-22|website=Aberystwyth University |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Brazil: Rich Cultural Scene and Beautiful Nature Against Government's Handling of Pandemic |url=https://brandfinance.com/insights/brazil-cultural-scene-nature-handling-of-pandemic|access-date=2025-02-22|website=Brand Finance |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Emerging Powers - Brazil |url=https://senecalearning.com/en-GB/revision-notes/a-level/geography/edexcel/9-2-4-emerging-powers-brazil#brazil-cultural-demographic-and-environmental|access-date=2025-02-22|website=Seneca Learning |language=en}}</ref>  [[China]],<ref>{{Cite web|title=Scholars and Media on China's Cultural Soft Power |url=https://www.wilsoncenter.org/scholars-and-media-chinas-cultural-soft-power|access-date=2020-09-21|website=Wilson Center |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Asia Power Index 2019: China Cultural Influence|url=https://power.lowyinstitute.org/countries.php?profile=CN|access-date=2020-09-21|website=power.lowyinstitute.org|language=en}}</ref> [[France]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Shawcross |first=Edward |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=fftKDwAAQBAJ&q=France+remained+a+military,+economic,+scientific+and+cultural+superpower&pg=PA13 |title=France, Mexico and Informal Empire in Latin America, 1820-1867: Equilibrium in the New World |publisher=Springer |year=2018 |isbn=9783319704647 |page=13 |quote=France remained a "military, economic, scientific, and cultural superpower"}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |date=2017-08-10 |title=Why France and Italy can't help clashing |url=https://www.economist.com/europe/2017/08/10/why-france-and-italy-cant-help-clashing |access-date=2020-04-20 |newspaper=[[The Economist]] |quote=France and Italy both consider themselves the cultural superpower of Europe}}</ref>  [[Greece]],<ref>{{cite web |last1=Vourlias |first1=Christopher |title=How a New Generation of Greek Filmmakers Rode Out the Crisis and Found International Success |url=https://variety.com/2022/film/festivals/thessaloniki-fests-rise-parallels-resurgent-greek-film-biz-yorgos-lanthimos-1235415590/ |website=Variety |date=3 November 2022 |access-date=15 February 2024}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Falcinelli |first1=Patrizia |title=Italy and Greece: A common way ahead |url=https://www.ekathimerini.com/opinion/1185836/italy-and-greece-a-common-way-ahead/ |website=E-Kathimerini |access-date=15 February 2024}}</ref> [[India]],<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.sundayguardianlive.com/culture/diaf-projected-india-cultural-superpower|title = 'DIAF projected India as a cultural superpower'|date = 11 January 2020}}</ref><ref name="Smith-2021">{{Cite web |last=Smith |first=Noah |date=27 October 2021 |title=What makes a cultural superpower? |url=https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/what-makes-a-cultural-superpower |access-date=14 October 2023 |website=Noahpinion |language=en |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231129051141/https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/what-makes-a-cultural-superpower |archive-date= Nov 29, 2023 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Oaten |first=James |date=25 February 2020 |title=Donald Trump arrived in India with much fanfare. Here are the key moments from his first day |language=en-AU |work=ABC News |url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-25/donald-trump-stumbles-on-indian-names/11996832 |access-date=17 October 2023}}</ref>  [[Italy]],<ref>{{Cite web |date=2012-06-02 |title=Italy, a cultural superpower |url=http://www.arabnews.com/italy-cultural-superpower |website=Arab News |language=en |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141226231012/http://www.arabnews.com/italy-cultural-superpower |archive-date=December 26, 2014 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Midgette |first=Anne |date=2023-08-26 |title=Coming to the U.S.: 'The Year of Italian Culture 2013' |quote=""Culture is by far the most important element of Italian foreign policy," Terzi said on Friday, adding, "Italy is a cultural superpower" |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/coming-to-the-us-the-year-of-italian-culture-2013/2012/10/15/29f404a8-1703-11e2-9855-71f2b202721b_story.html |url-access=subscription |newspaper=Washington Post |language=en-US |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230322131521/https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/coming-to-the-us-the-year-of-italian-culture-2013/2012/10/15/29f404a8-1703-11e2-9855-71f2b202721b_story.html |archive-date= Mar 22, 2023 }}</ref><ref>Italy has been described as a '''cultural superpower''' [http://m.theaustralian.com.au/arts/italys-cultural-superpower-status-at-stake/story-e6frg8n6-1111113103044 by The Australian]. Italy has been described as a cultural superpower [http://italoamericano.com/story/2012-11-8/InterviewGeneralConsulSF#.VJgPzYA1 by the Italian consul general in San Francisco],  and [http://www.laquilablog.it/obama-litalia-superpotenza-culturale/48727-0409/ by US President Barack Obama].</ref> [[Jamaica]],<ref>{{Cite web |last=Motune |first=Vic |date=25 July 2017 |title=Countdown to I Love JA Day: Dawn Butler on heritage {{!}} The Voice Online |url=https://archive.voice-online.co.uk/article/countdown-i-love-ja-day-dawn-butler-heritage |access-date=14 October 2023 |website=archive.voice-online.co.uk}}</ref><ref name="Smith-2021" /><ref>{{Cite web |date=6 September 2022 |title=Jamaica |url=https://asiaone.co.in/jamaica/ |access-date=17 October 2023 |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=11 July 2023 |title=Portland, Jamaica: A Journey Down the Rio Grande and Beyond |url=https://www.wtravelmagazine.com/portland-jamaica-a-journey-down-the-rio-grande-and-beyond/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230927145941/https://www.wtravelmagazine.com/portland-jamaica-a-journey-down-the-rio-grande-and-beyond/ |archive-date=Sep 27, 2023 |access-date=14 October 2023 |website=World Travel Magazine |language=en-US}}</ref> [[Japan]],<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2002/jun/01/artsfeatures.features|title=The other superpower|work=[[The Guardian]]|date= 2002-06-01 |access-date=2009-07-17|location=London}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-japan-became-a-pop-culture-superpower/|title=How Japan became a pop culture superpower|date=31 January 2015|website=[[The Spectator]]|access-date=27 November 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Tamaki |first1=Taku |title=Japan has turned its culture into a powerful political tool |url=http://theconversation.com/japan-has-turned-its-culture-into-a-powerful-political-tool-72821 |website=[[The Conversation (website)|The Conversation]] |date=26 April 2017 |language=en |access-date=2021-12-12 |archive-date=2021-11-18 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211118214114/https://theconversation.com/japan-has-turned-its-culture-into-a-powerful-political-tool-72821 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title='Pure Invention': How Japan's pop culture became the 'lingua franca' of the internet |url=https://www.japantimes.co.jp/culture/2020/07/18/books/pure-invention-jpop-culture/ |work=[[The Japan Times]] |date=2020-07-18 |access-date=2021-12-12 |archive-date=2021-12-14 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211214054619/https://www.japantimes.co.jp/culture/2020/07/18/books/pure-invention-jpop-culture/ |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=How Japan's global image morphed from military empire to eccentric pop-culture superpower|url=https://qz.com/1806376/japans-image-has-changed-from-fierce-to-lovable-over-the-decades/ |publisher=[[Quartz (publication)|Quartz]] |date=2020-05-27 |access-date=2021-12-12 |archive-date=2021-10-21 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211021121139/https://qz.com/1806376/japans-image-has-changed-from-fierce-to-lovable-over-the-decades/amp/ |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Nagata |first=Kazuaki |date=7 September 2010 |title='Anime' makes Japan a cultural superpower |url=https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2010/09/07/reference/anime-makes-japan-superpower/ |via=Japan Times Online}}</ref> [[South Korea]],<ref>{{Cite web |last=Jun-hee |first=Park |date=16 November 2022 |title=[Feature] Making big waves: How K-pop swelled into cultural superpower |url=https://m.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20221116000635 |access-date=14 October 2023 |website=The Korea Herald |language=en}}</ref><ref name="Smith-2021" /><ref>{{Cite web |date=14 February 2016 |title=Sunday Feature: South Korea - The Silent Cultural Superpower |url=https://www.bbc.com/mediacentre/proginfo/2016/07/sunday-feature |access-date=14 October 2023 |website=BBC |language=en |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240224194827/https://www.bbc.com/mediacentre/proginfo/2016/07/sunday-feature |archive-date= Feb 24, 2024 }}</ref> [[Spain]],<ref>"Spain, main reference for world's Hispanic heritage". ABC.es (Madrid). 2014-07-03. http://www.abc.es/cultura/20140703/abci-espana-patrimonio-inmaterial-humanidad-201407011734.html. Retrieved 2016-06-08.</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://explora.globalpresence.realinstitutoelcano.org/en/country/iepg/global/ES/ES/2021 | title=Elcano Global Presence Index – Explora }}</ref><ref>{{cite tech report|last=Markovic|first=Darinka|date=November 2021|title=Spain. Country Report|editor=Helmut K. Anheier|editor1-link=Helmut Anheier|editor2=((ifa (Institut für Auslandsbeziehungen)))|work=The External Cultural Policy Monitor|publication-place=Stuttgart, Germany|institution=ifa|url=https://opus.bsz-bw.de/ifa/frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/92/file/ECP_Monitor_Spain_Country_Report.pdf|pages=3, 6, 18}}</ref> the [[United Kingdom]]<ref>{{cite journal |date=Winter 2011 |title=The cultural superpower: British cultural projection abroad |url=http://www.britishpoliticssociety.no/British%20Politics%20Review%2001_2011.pdf |url-status=dead |journal=Journal of the British Politics Society, Norway |volume=6 |issue=1 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180916155419/http://www.britishpoliticssociety.no/British%20Politics%20Review%2001_2011.pdf |archive-date=16 September 2018 |access-date=24 October 2014}}</ref> and the [[United States]],<ref>[https://archive.today/20130116122332/http://www.alexaobrien.com/secondsight/ideas/entertainment_s.html Entertainment Superpower: the economic dominance of American media and entertainment], Alexa O'Brien, 17 February 2005</ref> although the criteria upon which this is determined are sometimes debated. Unlike traditional forms of national power, the term cultural superpower is in reference to a nation's [[soft power]] capabilities.
* '''''[[Energy superpower]]''''': Describes a country that supplies large amounts of energy [[Natural resource|resources]] ([[crude oil]], [[natural gas]], [[coal]], [[uranium]], etc.) to a significant number of other states, and therefore has the potential to influence world markets to gain a political or economic advantage. [[Saudi Arabia]] and [[Russia]] are generally acknowledged as the world's current energy superpowers, given their abilities to globally influence or even directly control prices to certain countries. [[Australia]] and [[Canada]] are potential energy superpowers due to their large natural resources.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy-Resources/2012/07/20/Report-Canada-can-be-energy-superpower/UPI-65171342796207/|title=Report: Canada can be energy superpower|work=[[UPI.com]]|date=2012-07-20|access-date=2013-04-30}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy-Resources/2012/05/14/Australia-to-become-energy-superpower/UPI-26871337012856/|title=Australia to become energy superpower?|work=[[UPI.com]]|date=2012-05-14|access-date=2013-04-30}}</ref>

==Hard, soft and smart power==
{{more sources needed section|date=October 2024}}
{{Main|Hard power|Soft power|Smart power}}
Some political scientists distinguish between two types of power: Hard and Soft.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=S. Gray |first=Colin |date=2011-04-01 |title=Hard Power and Soft Power: The Utility of Military Force as an Instrument of Policy in the 21st Century |url=https://press.armywarcollege.edu/monographs/581/ |journal=[[U.S. Army War College]] |pages=Page v}}</ref> The former is coercive (example: [[military invasion]]) while the latter is attractive (example: [[broadcast media]] or cultural invasion).<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Nye |first=Joseph |date=2017-02-21 |title=Soft power: the origins and political progress of a concept |journal=Palgrave Communications |language=en |volume=3 |issue=1 |pages=1–3 |doi=10.1057/palcomms.2017.8 |issn=2055-1045|doi-access=free }}</ref>

Hard power refers to coercive tactics: the threat or use of [[armed forces]], [[economic]] pressure or [[International sanctions|sanctions]], assassination and subterfuge, or other forms of intimidation. Hard power is generally associated to the stronger of nations, as the ability to change the domestic affairs of other nations through military threats. Realists and [[Neorealism (international relations)|neorealists]], such as [[John Mearsheimer]], are advocates of the use of such power for the balancing of the international system.{{cn|date=October 2024}}

[[Joseph Nye]] is the leading proponent and theorist of [[soft power]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Pazzanese |first=Christina |date=2017-05-09 |title='Soft power' expert Joe Nye reflects on decades-long Harvard career |url=https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2017/05/soft-power-expert-joe-nye-reflects-on-decades-long-harvard-career/ |access-date=2024-09-23 |website=Harvard Gazette |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Freedman |first=Lawrence |date=2024-01-17 |title=Soft Power and Smart Power |url=https://samf.substack.com/p/soft-power-and-smart-power |access-date=2024-09-23 |website=Comment is Freed}}</ref> Instruments of soft power include debates on cultural values, dialogues on ideology, the attempt to influence through good example, and the appeal to commonly accepted human values. Means of exercising soft power include diplomacy, dissemination of information, analysis, propaganda, and cultural programming to achieve political ends.{{cn|date=October 2024}}

Others have synthesized soft and hard power, including through the field of [[smart power]]. This is often a call to use a holistic spectrum of statecraft tools, ranging from soft to hard.{{cn|date=October 2024}}

== See also ==
* [[Global policeman]] 
* [[International relations (1814–1919)]]
* [[Peace through strength]]
* [[Power Politics (Wight book)]]
* [[Power transition theory]]
* [[Right of conquest]]
* [[Responsibility to protect]]

== References ==
{{Reflist}}

== Further reading ==
* Bennett, Andrew (2013). "[[doi:10.1177/1354066113495484|The mother of all isms: Causal mechanisms and structured pluralism in International Relations theory]]." ''European Journal of International Relations.''
* Barnett, Michael; Duvall, Raymond (2005). "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/3877878 Power in International Politics]". ''International Organization'' '''59''' (1): 39–75.

{{International relations}}
{{International power}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Power In International Relations}}
[[Category:Power (international relations)| ]]
[[Category:Political history]]