Skip to main content

Conclusion: The Future Maneuvers of the Great Powers

  • Chapter
The Great Powers versus the Hegemon
  • 203 Accesses

Abstract

The great power relations at the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century were at a watershed. China was definitely enhancing its political clout, largely because, despite the global economic meltdown of 2008–9, its economy remained vibrant. That very reality created a situation whereby the global power arrangements were inexorably edging away from unipolarity toward bipolarity. However, the emergence of a bipolar global order was far from a done deal. The United States (US) — entirely unlike the United Kingdom (UK) at the end of World War II, when it started to lose its status as a great power — did not appear to be an exhausted power, either economically or militarily (still an excellent example of internal balancing through a combination of effective use of economic wealth and consistently high investments in defense-related research and development). According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ (IISS) publication, The Military Balance 2009, the United States’ total defense equipment budget for 2008 was reported to be $125 billion, thereby placing the hegemon at number one in that category of global ranking. This figure was expected to go down to $115 billion for 2015. China was ranked at number two, with the total defense equipment budget at $16 billion for 2008. But that figure was expected to rise to $29 billion for 2015. India’s ranking in that category was number 5, with the total defense equipment budget at $9 billion for 2008. This figure was expected to rise to $17 billion for 2015. Finally, Russia was ranked at number 10 for that category, with the total defense equipment budget for 2008 at $6 billion. This figure was expected to increase to $11 billion for 2015.1

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. The Military Balance 2009’, The International Institute for Strategic Studies as cited in S. Bowns and S. Gebicke (2010) ‘From R&D Investment to Fighting Power 25 years later’, Exhibit 2, p. 73, McKinsey & Company. http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/publicsector/pdf/MoG_DefenseR&D.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  2. The Pivotal states are ‘countries whose fate determines the survival and success of the surrounding region and ultimately the stability of the international system’; see R. Chase, E. Hill, P. Kennedy (January/February 1996) ‘Pivotal States and US Strategy’, Foreign Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  3. P. E. Tyler (March 13, 1996) ‘China Signaling US That It Will Not Invade Taiwan’, The New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/13/world/china-signaling-us-that-it-will-not-invade-taiwan.html.

    Google Scholar 

  4. A. P. Tsygankov (November 4, 2009) ‘Russia Continues to Tilt Toward China’, The Telegraph, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sponsored/russianow/6501964/Russia-continues-to-tilt-towards-China.html.

    Google Scholar 

  5. A. Lukin (October 15, 2009) ‘China Sees Diminishing Returns With Russia’, Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University), http://www.mgimo.ru/news/experts/document123535.phtml.

    Google Scholar 

  6. K. DeYoung (1 June 2008) ‘US Africa Command Trims Its Aspirations’, The Washington Post,http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102055.html.

    Google Scholar 

  7. T. G. Ash (November 18, 2009) ‘Obama’s Beijing balancing act points to the new challenge for the west’, Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/nov/18/china-obama-west-conversationvalues.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Copyright information

© 2011 Ehsan M. Ahrari

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ahrari, E.M. (2011). Conclusion: The Future Maneuvers of the Great Powers. In: The Great Powers versus the Hegemon. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230348431_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics