The year 2026 began with a bump. The spectacular abduction by the United States forces of Nicolas Maduro from Venezuela, as well as boarding actions for the shadow fleet, introduced us in the second year – so far very intense – the presidency of Donald Trump. And they came little than a period after the U.S. National safety strategy was published by the fresh Washington administration.
After 12 months of hard and frequently violent Trump's policy towards allies, soft to rivals and enemies of the United States, as well as due to the content of the NSS, many have asked themselves whether the planet is inactive in the form of the United States hegemony, but are we dealing with full-blooded multipolarity?
However, the answer to this question must begin by defining the concept of hegemony. What was it like in 1990-2013 erstwhile no 1 questioned the existence of this kind of planet order?
The Hegemony of the United States from that period was neither an undisputed planet leadership (although it was commonly said so), nor full dominance or sovereignty over another countries. For during this period there were powers not only assertive to the US, but besides reluctant or hostile to them. Even weakened during the time of the alleged Yeltsinian sadness Russia was not completely submissive to the Americans. Communist China has always been assertive towards the US and Iran has been hostile since the 1979 Revolution. Like North Korea. American influences were not unlimited. A network of Russian alliances and influences included: Europe (e.g. Belarus but besides Ukraine for W. Yanukovich), North Africa (e.g. Libya), mediate East (Syria), Caucasus (Armenia), Asia (India, Central Asia), as well as South America (Venezuela) and North America (Kuba).
So what was the (or is) period of U.S. hegemony? This is simply a time erstwhile there was only 1 superpower in the world. During the Cold War there was talk of a bipolar world, due to the fact that doubtless both the United States and the USSR belonged to specified ones, having a crucial advantage over the remainder of the world. After 1989, however, the russian Union fell apart. There was only 1 champion left in the arena. His hegemony, however, was not absolute. The United States inactive could not effectively and without restrictions impose its will on specified countries as Russia, China, Iran, or North Korea, or even do so against Venezuela, Cuba or Armenia. Nor could Americans force their will against European partners who felt safe at the time and sometimes even demonstrated their independency from the US (vide France for Jacques Chirac).
In 2001, the United States held very strong legitimacy and casus belli Against Afghanistan. In 2004, they needed strong justification – vide The subject of chemical weapons, which proved false – to attack Iraq. In 2008, Russia attacked NATO-bound Georgia, which was like a sulphisticated cheek to the Americans. Although Tbilisi was able to save then, it was not for long, due to the fact that the Russians rapidly gained political influence there. In 2012, president Barack Obama issued an ultimatum against Syria, and the intervention did not occur, among others, due to the fact that the Americans did not get Europe's support. Clearly, there were limits to American freedom of action. And they were not always appointed by opponents and enemies, as they besides stemmed from the request to reckon with the views of partners, allies or widely understood planet opinion.
In view of the above, whether planet order functions in a single or multipolar planet does not find how many entities have unlimited freedom of action (because in a multipolar planet it would even be impossible), and how many states with the position of superpowers (polar). And the position of the superpower is determined by the potential, and not necessarily the fact that it is demonstrated (e.g. the USA – being a hegemon – acted passively many times, or utilized possible ineffectively).
In another words, in a day of hegemony, for example, Ferrari stables in the F1 formula, this squad would have the best: management, car, squad and finance surpassing the possible of all others. However, this would not mean that Ferrari drivers would gotta win any race. After all, they could lose them due to external conditions, method squad errors, drivers or ineffective strategy chosen for the race. On the another hand, the position of automotive hegemon would consequence in the Ferrari squad having an advantage over others and could make more mistakes, and inactive have a chance for a final triumph throughout the season. And surely Ferrari hegemony would not mean in this example that all another teams would surrender in subsequent races even before the start (without fighting). On the contrary, the inseparable feature of racing (rivaling) is to challenge hegemon and effort to catch up with him or even outrun him. However, the fact that any squad wins a single race with Ferrari does not mean automatically dropping a hegemon. Whether we are dealing with 1 or multipolarity is not determined by 1 victory, but by the real possible that gives (or does not) the basis for repeating successes and winning the full season.
Meanwhile, the fresh geopolitical season, which surely came after 2022, continues. So it is worth answering the question whether the United States inactive has the characteristics of a superpower, and if so, how many and what? It is besides essential to examine whether, by chance, another countries, specified as China, have obtained specified status?
The analysis below is intended to service this purpose. For this purpose, I chose – completely subjectively – eleven categories that I consider to be the characteristics of a state with a superpower status. This does not mean that a country must meet all the conditions in order to gain specified a position. The USSR did not fulfil many of them, but many of them did. And these were sometimes decisive features (e.g. size and potential: nuclear, conventional, and political arsenals).
So if we were to decide whether we are inactive surviving in a single-polar planet (with 1 superpower) or already in a multi-polar (no superpower, but many powers, or respective superpowers), then should we examine whether anyone else too the US has superpower status, and if so, who and why?
Below, I present a table which is the consequence of the analysis, and the justification for assessing the potentials of countries from different categories is included in the following section.
As you can see in the above ranking, the possible of the United States gained 10 of the possible 11 points. Chinese only 4.5 and Russian only 3.5. Undoubtedly, the United States has remained a superpower, although there is no uncertainty that their advantage over China has been eroding for 2 decades. On the another hand, American possible for Russia or Europe is increasing. Although the second cannot be qualified as 1 entity/power, it was so not included in the list.
The People's Republic of China is on an elevating wave, but inactive does not have even half of the characteristics required – in my opinion – to accomplish superpower status.
Of course, with these assessments of countries in circumstantial categories, not everyone has to agree, just as not everyone has to share my opinion on the selection of categories themselves. Without imposing my assessment on anyone, however, I will effort to explain it further below.
NUCLEAR POTENTIAL
Clearly, having the most powerful weapons in the planet must be a feature of the state of power or superpowers. And it doesn't substance what that atomic possible is. In terms of technological advancement as well as the scale of possible use. According to the SIPRI study of 2025, more than 12,000 atomic warheads existed in the planet at the beginning of 2024, of which more than 9.5 1000 were in stores for possible use. Of these, nearly half (nearly 4,000) were mounted on rocket missiles or aircraft. With 90% of all atomic warheads only owned 2 countries. The United States and the Russian Federation (a possible comparable with a slight numerical advantage in favour of Russia). And it's mostly these 2 countries that put together about 2100 warheads in advanced alert condition.
Great Britain, France, Pakistan, India, North Korea, Israel, but besides China belong in this area only to the second league, having between tens and respective 100 heads (China most of this group, due to the fact that most likely around 600 heads for today). Which means that with a possible atomic exchange, no of these countries would have the slightest chance against the US or Russia. Thus, these second 2 countries could theoretically endanger everyone else with almost complete annihilation, with limited losses in the event of retaliation.
In the context of a possible atomic war, only Americans could neutralize Russians (and vice versa). The remainder of the atomic powers have the anticipation of atomic deterrence – the very usage of specified weapons, even in tiny numbers, poses a threat – but yet only the United States and the Russian Federation could scare the others with full demolition by atomic impact.
It is besides crucial to have appropriate head carriers. Both Washington and Moscow have a full atomic triad (intercontinental ballistic missiles, air missiles/bombs and ballistic missiles launched from submarine districts). Only China and India (and possibly Israel) have these capabilities. France has its own atomic arsenal, launched from submarines or Rafale fighters (manufacturing missiles). The British carry warheads with submarines, but their arsenal is dependent on cooperation with the US. Pakistan, in turn, has land launchers as well as air carriers. Finally, North Korea has land launchers.
The scope of missiles is besides important. This 1 could be different. From intercontinental ballistic missiles (over 5500 km) through intermediate missiles (3 to 5 000 km), average ones (1 to 3 000 km) and short ranges (up to a 1000 km). ICBM — Intercontinental ballistic missile) does not have Pakistan (although work is ongoing), while Russia and the US – due to the limitations of the INF Treaty, which expired in 2019 – have only late renewed the arsenal of intermediate and average scope missiles.
There is inactive a division into strategical and tactical atomic resources, with differences in possible in this area not affecting the overall assessment of possible in the created classification.
All this makes on the atomic possible needed to accomplish superpower position (and not just power) only the US and Russia fulfil the essential criteria.
Not only do they have a full atomic triad and technologies for the construction of missiles of various ranges and types, but most of all, the number of their arsenals exceeds even the full amount of warheads held by the remainder of the atomic powers. The disparity here is besides clear. The Chinese – having a triad – with a warehouse of about 600 heads and preferring a crucial expansion of possible may in any time become a state with a possible to become a superpower in this category. In order to full accomplish this status, they would gotta have a number of heads and media comparable to Russia's or the US's current potential. So far, they're beautiful far distant from it.
MILITARY POTENTIAL
The assessment of conventional military possible is always difficult, especially erstwhile delving into nuances and details. However, there is no uncertainty that in addition to atomic resources – which are now more of a deterrent than a fight – military power is crucial. Without it, even the most economically or technologically powerful state is susceptible to aggression or even external force resulting from a threat of force. It is besides a military power that is 1 of the tools of the alleged power projection, and thus of exerting force on others to accomplish political objectives. If so, armed forces can besides act as a political tool to defend their partners or allies, building political dependence on the safety guarantor (as with a atomic umbrella).
However, erstwhile it comes to the position of superpowers, the military power must besides meet certain standards. Be – for any reason – much greater than in the case of average powers. Be a possible giving something "extra" compared to the possible of another countries.
United States
And so, the United States has the largest, most technologically advanced, strongest and most versatile aviation in the world. While the U.S. built the first series fighters of the 5th generation as early as 1997 (F-22), competitors only comparatively late started an adventure with specified machines. The Americans have already produced more than 200 F-22 units and over 1,100 F-35 fighters. Additionally, the Americans have a fleet of strategical bombers – besides built in technology stealth – and all another aviation resources, i.e. spy aircraft, radar reconnaissance, electronic combat, air refuelling, transport, and combat machines capable of operating from aircraft carriers. The Americans so have the most numerous, complete and universal air force, designed for various types of operations – especially offensive ones.
US Navy is in turn the undisputed leader of seas and oceans with 11 super-aircraft and 10 landing ships (de facto aircraft carriers), many escort ships, as well as the largest fleet of submarines (c. 70). besides the land army is many (450 1000 soldiers in active service, and additionally over 300 1000 in the National Guard), modern and equipped with advanced equipment in large numbers. Importantly, the U.S. Armed Forces are experienced in combat, and their equipment, procedures, etc. have been tested under war conditions. The U.S. besides has the top space possible in the world, as well as any of the best cyber forces that support the Pentagon's military machine. All this makes United States Armed Forces the strongest in the world.
Of course, Americans are incapable to win the war themselves against all their adversaries at once, nevertheless have the possible to defend – conventionally – U.S. territory before any armed attack, while allowing war to be waged almost without territorial restrictions, in any corner of the planet with any opponent. Such possible is unique on a global scale. It does not make it possible for Americans to defeat everyone and in all circumstances, but it gives the chance to choose the minute of a possible attack or decision to defend an ally. As there are limitations on the U.S. military power, the assessment of "partial dominance" seems to be full adequate.
People's Republic of China
The possible of the Chinese armed forces is, for now, a mystery. The last real test of the capabilities of the Chinese army was the 1979 Vietnam War, as well as battles with India for sticks and stones in the Kashmir area, which took place any time ago.
Nevertheless, the Chinese have the largest army in the planet (about 2 million soldiers in active service), and late besides the largest fleet, which, however, gives way to the tonnage and capabilities of the American fleet. China is making large technological progress, but it is inactive hard to measure how much of their military technology is catching up with American weapons. On the 1 hand, large numbers are a problem in the context of the modernisation of the armed forces (high maintenance costs absorb funds to implement method innovations). On the another hand, the Navy and the Air Force are already superior to Russian counterparts. The question is, is the modernisation of sea and air fleets not at the expense of investing in land forces?
The Chinese besides invested a lot in the ability to fight in cyberspace, and besides built space possible that surpasses the Russian. They besides focused on the construction of rocket troops, which are surely an crucial deterrent – including conventional ones.
At this point, it seems that the Chinese armed forces are the second army of the world. Although it has not been tested in any way. surely in the conventional war Beijing could defend the country against any opponent, possibly even aggression from the United States – although there is no certainty here (a question about war goals, conditions of conflict etc., due to the fact that different circumstances would increase the chances of 1 side or the other). On the another hand, the Chinese do not have the offensive capacity to make a direct threat to the US. In another words, not only the defensive war, but even the assault war (e.g. against Taiwan) could end up being struck in Chinese territory, and Beijing would not have the chance to respond to the Americans the same. This is crucial, due to the fact that while the Americans – operating during, or conflict with, allied territories – would have the chance to destruct China's production and logistics facilities, the Chinese would not be able to do precisely the same. In another words, the popular argument present that the US is not prepared for a long war with China is problematic, due to the fact that the longer specified a conflict would continue, the more American production facilities could make (exactly as in the war with Japan), while the Chinese would gotta reckon with the anticipation of reducing their own potential.
Moreover, surely the weakness of the Chinese army is the deficiency of experience. due to the fact that even if it has modern technology, there is no certainty that it can usage it decently and effectively.
The Chinese besides have another serious problem. They are incapable to usage the army as a political tool further than in the immediate vicinity. 2 reasons. Firstly, China – unlike the US – has powerful neighbours. Russia and India on land, and additionally relentless and hard to scope Vietnam. At sea, the Chinese fleet is limited by the capabilities of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and their ally – the United States. In the event of a possible conflict, Chinese aircraft carriers may be afraid to exit ports. They could be easy sunk, whether through enemy aviation, submarines or even antiship missiles deployed in the alleged first chain of islands.
In another words, the second army of the planet – so far – is trapped within Chinese borders. Consequently, it is not a tool for projecting forces in another parts of the world. However, this is due to geopolitical conditions, not to the military possible itself, so the assessment of "a large but unproven army" fulfils the feature of superpowers.
Russian Federation
The Russian army receives a brutal lesson in the war in Ukraine. Nevertheless, it is inactive many (more than a million soldiers in the service), supported by numerous, albeit medium-quality, aviation, as well as rather extended cyber troops and very limited space capabilities. Nevertheless, conventional Russian armed forces are inactive a threat to the environment. In Central Asia, the Caucasus and Europe. Especially as the Russians have acquired experience in combat, have survived the weak moments and show large determination in conducting the conflict. Undoubtedly, their armed forces have proved that they are capable of a long, exhausting war, and it is this asset that makes them a threat to more technologically advanced European armies.. With an assessment of the “significantly large but medium-quality” military possible of the Russian Federation – possibly a small overgrowth – but can be considered adequate for a superpower. It appears to be capable of defending the country (or at least deterrence) and at the same time is simply a tool of political force in respective close regions.
POLICY POTENTIAL
History has repeatedly proved that having even the most powerful army in the planet does not warrant war victory. Especially if there is simply a conflict against a full group of supporters. The possible to build and keep alliances is invaluable in terms of global influence. It was strong alliances that decided on the results of both planet wars. This existence of alliances has repeatedly made war not to break out. For these reasons, the political possible should be a criterion that includes a country as a superpower.
United States
For more than a century, Americans have built their position internationally. And they have the largest and most extended network of military and political alliances in the world. They're the leader. NATO, which brings together 32 countries from the Atlantic region (Europe + Canada and the USA). In addition, they have a bilateral alliance with Canada (NORAD), the safety Treaty with Australia and fresh Zealand (NZUS) and bilateral alliances with: Japan, South Korea and Australia.
The United States is besides working very closely with Israel, Saudi Arabia, Morocco or Egypt, and their network of influences and various types of cooperation frameworks include many another countries from the world's most key regions.
This does not mean that all these alliances and influences have no defects or limitations. The Americans did not tie the full globe together, but there is presently no second, so politically strong state. The assessment of "partial dominance" is intended to reflect the limitations of US abroad policy, while it should be remembered that Washington's strength on the global phase is the largest and powerfully distances the remaining contenders to superpower status.
Of course, the fact that Donald Trump's methods of conducting abroad policy powerfully hit the credibility of the US cannot be ignored. Which weakens allied ties and trust. Nevertheless, the treaties inactive exist, they do exist, and if any of the American allies were attacked by Russia or China, then, even despite the large reluctance to Trump, they would yet search aid from Washington. Everyone is aware of this due to the fact that neither Europe has the appropriate deterrent possible of Russia (mainly nuclear) today, nor allies from the US in the Far East in the context of the Chinese threat.
In this context – so far – the Americans can be calm about their network of alliances, due to the fact that it is mainly they who decide whether it exists or not. The remainder of the countries depend on the US in this regard. Donald Trump's actions – e.g. on Greenland – although weakening common trust within the alliance, however, have proved that these alliances are able to last even though the credibility of the US is so powerfully undermined. Paradoxically, it shows the political strength of the United States.
People's Republic of China
In the case of China not only can we not talk about the existence of a Chinese alliance network, but we cannot even identify 1 formal Beijing ally... The Chinese focus on strategical partnerships, which, on the 1 hand, does not oblige them to defend anyone, but on the another hand, does not supply any guarantees of assistance. These strategical partnerships are besides few. The countries closely cooperating with China surely include:
- North Korea, although in this case Kim Jong Un is increasingly beginning to focus on the Russian Federation,
- The Russian Federation, with a strong contractual partnership, and cooperation – especially on a political-military level – functions in a limited way. China has no safety guarantees from Russia, nor assurances of the extension of the atomic coat. Rather, both parties treat themselves as untrustworthy competitors who are forced to cooperate against the common threat (US).
- Pakistan, however, inactive does not avoid flirting with Washington due to its economical and political circumstances.
In addition, the Chinese have been trying to build a network of economical dependency for 2 decades, utilizing their position especially towards weaker countries. However, financial and economical issues go second erstwhile safety becomes a priority. In addition, China’s aggressive policy has alienated many partners. Moreover, this attitude, on a safety level, is what makes the countries of the region increasingly dependent on the United States.
For these reasons, the assessment of Chinese political power cannot be affirmative in the context of fulfilling the characteristics of a superpower.
Russian Federation
In the past, the russian Union subjected itself to the forces of the full east Block. Today, there was no trace of the last one. Russia's only certain ally is Belarus. Of course there is inactive OUBZ To which, apart from Russia and Belarus, the countries of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan) besides belong, but Kazakhstan's attitude is not entirely certain, and Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are countries dependent on Moscow's help, not real allies with any potential. The organization left: Azerbaijan, Georgia, Uzbekistan, and Armenia suspended its participation in it.
In addition, the Russians keep close relations with China, Iran, Serbia, and have late signed alliance with North Korea. They cooperate in limited dimensions with India, Cuba, Venezuela (?), as well as Hungary. The Russians are besides trying to act in Africa, but it is impossible to say that they have allies and partners there.
Russia's commitment to war in Ukraine has completely weakened Moscow in another directions. Surely, in fresh years, they have lost all the architecture of influence in North Africa and the mediate East. They weakened in the Caucasus as well as in Central Asia. The main opponent – NATO – expanded to include Sweden and Finland, creating fresh safety dilemmas for the Russians.
Of course, cooperation on the Moscow – Beijing line is important, but from a strategical position it does not give Russia any guarantees of security, and it is simply a origin of expanding concern and economical dependence on China. On the another hand, Russia besides does not offer China any certain and steel guarantees. Moreover, even if it did, the Russians would not be able to aid the Chinese in any crucial way due to the challenges in Europe. It is besides doubtful that they should go to a devastating atomic war from the United States in defence of China.
More than that, cooperation – or alternatively dependence on China, makes Russian hands uncomfortable. due to the fact that erstwhile Putin wanted to scare the usage of atomic weapons in Ukraine, it was Beijing that was the capital that led Moscow distant from specified an idea.
With this in mind, besides in this case we are not dealing with a political superpower, but at most with a power with a limited – inactive decreasing – sphere of influence and opportunity.
FINANCIAL POTENTIAL
There is simply a view that the financial plane does not seem to be crucial adequate to constitute a stand-alone criterion for whether or not the State belongs to superpowers. However, it should be pointed out that it is this issue that determines the effectiveness of many sanctions. The control of payment transactions is simply a powerful tool in the context of the application of blockages and commercial sanctions. And the interrelationship of own currency builds a network of dependencies, which makes the above control grow. It can, of course, be argued that the financial quality was created only for the needs of the United States, due to the fact that only the United States can score here, which is true. However, it is impossible to ignore the fact that it is the financial plane that gives Washington the "extra" capacity that others do not have. Even if they have powerful economies (like China). At the same time, these capabilities – the ability to enforce politically imposed sanctions – are crucial and are the object of desire for another powers. Not without reason the Russians tried to increase their currency scope (depending at any point on the acquisition of Russian oil from payments in rubles), and the Chinese inactive do. The euro, the common currency created for a large region (the euro area in the EU), which builds greater financial independency of parts of the European countries than global competitors, cannot be overlooked in all of this. For these reasons, the financial sphere was included in the ranking, as a separate category.
United States
The US has all possible global financial advantages. The dollar accounts for nearly 60% of the abroad exchange reserves of all global central banks. This represents 3 times the share of the vice-leader, the euro. Nearly half of global payments are made in USDs (invoices issued in dollars) and dollar participates in over 90% of global currency transactions. Dollar is simply a global currency whose only issuer is the American Central Bank (FED). This fact not only made the planet – trade order and reserves – dependent on the American currency, but besides gave the Americans powerful tools for global control of global transactions.
This control is indirectly exercised by respective institutions. The United States manages the Clearing home Interbank Payments System, which settles large dollar transactions. They besides have a immense impact on the SWIFT system, which enables global payments to be made. The exclusion from SWIFT was applied to Iran (2012 and 2018), North Korea (2017), as well as Russia after 2022.
The dollar plays a unique global currency role, which gives American institutions opportunities that no 1 else has. Americans can so effort to control global financial flows, making it easier to enforce US sanctions if necessary. It is so a tool for implementing political will and besides allows force on 3rd countries. This crucial and unique asset makes the United States a financial superpower.
This does not change the fact that public sector debt in the US over GDP was around 124% (about 1/4 of debt is abroad debt) and the private sector was additional about 140% of GDP. It is worth remembering that modern money is simply a debt. Meanwhile, erstwhile Americans print (via QE or credits) they print not only for their own needs but for the global market. due to the fact that dollars are utilized by the full world. It is besides worth noting that Americans have the largest gold reserves in the planet (more than 8,000 tonnes).
People's Republic of China
Chinese yuan with a 2% share in global abroad exchange reserves is not a power. In this respect, he gives way to a pound of sterling as well as a nipponese yen. China, like almost any another country, is dependent on the dollar. For example, the Chinese agreed to apply US financial sanctions to Iran. This was motivated by the fact that breaking these restrictions would entail massive penalties for Chinese banks. Penalties that could easy be enforced, as Chinese banks besides usage US dollar exchange systems. besides for the second reason, the Chinese had to quit dollar transactions in relations with Russia. This was not due to the desire to strike a dollar and build any large financial consortium with Russia, and to the fact that Beijing had to avoid a situation where dollars would even be a broker in transactions. This would consequence in repercussions from the US.
A fewer years ago, many experts pointed out that China's possession of immense amounts of dollars and bonds in central bank reserves was an asset against the United States. In 2022, the share of US currency and bonds in Chinese reserves was almost 2/3. To the state of 2025 we do not know this proportion, although it is said that the Chinese limit the amount of US dollars and bonds. This is possibly due to the fact that with so much money in reserves, The Chinese are besides dependent on the value of this currency. If the American dollar had fallen, Beijing would have lost the lion's condition of the security, which would have fundamentally besides resulted in a immense devaluation – if not a fall – of yuan. Especially if the Americans stated that they would not pay off their liabilities and buy out bonds (which was a threat erstwhile in Donald Trump's mouth).
Another Chinese problem is that until late China has provided massive loans to countries whose solvency is problematic. Importantly, these loans were frequently granted in... dollars. In another words, if there had been a sharp devaluation of the dollar, then China, as a creditor, would have suffered additional, immense losses.
So Chinese finances couldn't last without a dollar today. On the another hand, if the Chinese currency disappeared overnight, then we might not even announcement it. This makes the Chinese – even though they want – not to attack the dollar besides much at the minute due to the fact that they would besides hit the foundations of their finances. It makes the Beijing authorities very uncomfortable.
The fact that the Chinese have created their own cross-border settlement strategy in the yuan and that they have a comparable amount of gold as the Russians cannot change China's negative assessment, in the context of fulfilling the characteristics of superpowers in terms of finances. due to the fact that Chinese yuan is only liable for about 3% of global payments, and Chinese finances do not give Beijing any unique – globally – capacity. In addition, it is worth remembering that Chinese public debt is expanding regularly and in 2025 it reached about 96% of GDP, but it is not him who is the problem here. This is the immense private sector debt of around 200% of Chinese GDP. Importantly, nearly half of this debt was drawn in abroad currency. mostly in dollars (near 80% share and around 8% in euro) ... In another words, the Chinese private sector must pay off abroad debts in abroad currency, which derives mainly from... exports. A possible drop in export levels is simply a decrease in abroad currency receipts, which could be insolvent. This is simply a immense problem for the Chinese private sector, which is not mentioned loudly and which is very delicate to US duties and sanctions.
Russian Federation
In the case of Russia, making a long speech short. Rubel is simply a garbage currency that no 1 in the planet wants to pay, and no 1 wants to collect it. Even Russian partners forced her to account for Russian oil in their own local currencies (video China and India for a while). The fact that the Russians created their own Ruble Settlement strategy (SPFS) does not change anything here. It is only a tool for circumventing US sanctions, but is utilized to a very limited extent, even erstwhile dealing with partners. First of all, due to the fact that no 1 wants to accept payment in rubles from Russia, and therefore, the number of rubles outside the Russian marketplace is small. Consequently, ruble transactions do not have much, and only in specified SPFS is useful. In another words, Russia has no financial means of pressing anyone. On the contrary, it is itself subject to specified pressure, even from its strategical partners. Russia is simply a financial dwarf who was put in a rusty, giant golem to control it.
The only affirmative (?) in this respect is that the Moscow authorities have never supported the improvement of the state based on fiducial money mechanisms (current public debt does not exceed 20% of GDP). Which, on the 1 hand, did not give the Russian Federation the same growth impulse as in the case of the U.S. or China in particular, but on the other, it is most likely the only way Russia can wage war. For dependence on abroad capital in the current situation would be lethal for Russian finance. The Russians besides have over 2,300 tons of gold in their reserves. At least officially, due to the fact that it is not known how much gold was lost during the war. However, this is not a origin that could change Russia's financial assessment.
ECONOMIC POTENTIAL
There is no uncertainty that military power, atomic power, or even technological or political power, is an economical power. The economy itself neither fights nor develops technology nor conducts abroad policy. However, it is her work to keep an appropriate army, make the conditions for innovation, and give arguments in the conduct of politics. This category besides includes the possible of the population, as in itself it would be besides insignificant in the context of the state's qualification for superpowers (e.g. Indonesia, Nigeria or Bangladesh, whose immense populations do not translate into state power). It is precisely the compilation of people, their possible and numbers with economical efficiency that are complementary resources.
United States
The American society is the 3rd largest in the planet with about 340 million inhabitants who produce the largest GDP in the planet (c. 31 trillion usd – 2025). Thanks to the vast economy, Americans can devote the top resources to armaments, which affects their military and atomic power.
In 2024, nearly $86,000 (GDP per capita, PPP), which accounted for more than 3 times China's score ($27,000 per head, taking into account the purchasing power parity of money) and nearly twice the Russian index (approximately 47,000 UAH). Among another things, the U.S. is besides the largest global importer to suck goods from the global marketplace worth about $3.5 trillion a year. A large proportion of imports are consumer goods (raw materials account for about 7-8 % of the import value). This makes the US marketplace the most absorbent and so the most desirable marketplace in the planet (looking at countries individually and the second largest in the EU). The U.S. has had a immense trade deficit for decades, and since Americans have always paid in dollars, this fact has increased the amount of dollar in the world's bloodstream and currency reserves. Which in turn served American financial influences. Access to the American marketplace is besides an argument on a political level, which was felt especially in 2025, erstwhile president Donald Trump decided to usage this jack to negociate trade agreements.
Undoubtedly, the 3rd largest population, the largest economy and besides the most absorbent marketplace in the planet make the US a planet superpower. Of course, the U.S. has its problems and challenges, but their economical possible gives them unique abilities, as proved by the Donald Trump administration. No another country in the planet could wage a customs war on anyone else and win it in most cases. The United States has achieved its objectives by making a major refurbishment in the global trading system, which should be considered unprecedented in the 21st century and comparable to R. Nixon's policy, which ended the dollar exchange for gold in 1971.
People's Republic of China
China is officially inhabited by about 1.4 billion people (second population on Earth), although this number may be lower due to data uncertainty. With the Chinese producing the second largest GDP (less than 20 trillion usd) and having the second most absorbent marketplace (value. $2.6 trillion import). With as much as 30% of the import value of natural materials, including energy, as well as ore, slag and ash. We must besides remember that there is simply a economies of scale (number), not prosperity, which is seen mainly on the coast of the country and balances poorness in the western regions of China.
What is the strength of the Chinese economy is production and export. The value of the second amounted to $3.6 trillion in 2024, yet giving a trade surplus of nearly 1 trillion dollars in total. China, on many levels, has made the planet dependent on its own production, which undoubtedly is their strength and a possible tool for exerting pressure. However, as long as the goods sold do not have unique global technologies – so long as China does not have a technological monopoly in selected areas – it would be suicidal to cut customers off from Chinese products. due to the fact that the 2 largest outlets – American and European – are able to deliver certain goods to their competitors themselves in a billable time, or to transfer production to another regions of the planet (e.g. India). And since the Chinese marketplace is inactive incapable to replace external customers, a drastic drop in exports would destruct Chinese production and thus increase unemployment and offset home consumption by driving a spiral of economical collapse.
As a result, China realises that it must become a technological leader, otherwise it is simply a substance of time for the planet to restrict imports from China in consequence to Beijing policy. Leading to the economical problems of the mediate State.
Despite this, the second largest society, generating the second largest economy in the world, whose marketplace is the largest global maker and exporter (a unique feature) deserves the position of an economical superpower.
Russian Federation
In the case of Russia, you don't gotta compose down long. The state's "gas station" inhabited by about 143 million inhabitants with GDP of 2.5 trillion dollars corresponds to the size of the 59 million Italian economy. The value of Russian imports is lower than in the case of 36 million Poland. Exports mainly come down to natural materials, as the Russians are incapable to produce anything that abroad consumers would like (until late the arms sector was the exception). Even in the arms trade, Russia – erstwhile a power – was a dwarf, as manufacture mainly works for the needs of war. 2025 can only be the first year in which Russia's GDP will exceed the size of 2013 (before the invasion of Ukraine). Which means that after 12 years of war, the Russians came back to square one. As the planet went on. At the same time, it should be pointed out that Russian GDP is driven by the production of equipment destroyed in Ukraine. The competence of the arms manufacture is important, especially during the war, but in a situation where the Russian economy would gotta return to peace mode, it would have collided with the harsh reality of the hold and underinvestment of the private sector.
Given the large population yielding economies of scale as well as the proceeds from the sale of hydrocarbons, Russia can inactive be qualified as an economical power at most, but surely not as a superpower. Especially since Russia is de facto no longer essential on a global scale. Neither to produce – even energy natural materials – nor to consume nor to cooperate in technology. Those who cooperate with Russia (India, China) are curious mainly to compression out everything possible from it due to its hard political situation (permanent war and imposed sanctions).
TECHNICAL POTENTIAL
The sphere of innovation and technology is crucial, which co-decisions on the strength of the economy, military possible (including nuclear), energy or even on the subject of extraction and production of natural materials. The technological race is the 1 that has decided and is inactive deciding whether a given power will keep its global position. Not only intellectual resources (happiness) but besides industrial and digital resources are crucial here.
United States
Americans are inactive the undisputed leader of technology, although many commentators indicate that they have given up on the Chinese. It's not. The United States and its technology companies dominate or lead, among others:
- in space technologies and have the only 2 companies in the planet that usage multiple-use rockets (SpaceX and Blue Origin). Elona Muska besides introduced Starlinka, which gives access to the satellite web, the United States has the most extended network of civilian and military satellites, which have been embedded in various management systems for decades,
- in the improvement of artificial intelligence (OPENAI, Google, X, etc.),
- in designing the most advanced graphics chips and CPU (NVIDIA, Intel, AMD),
- Whereas in biotechnology, where American pharmaceutical companies reign and their technological advantage emerged, among another things, during COVID-19, as it was Pfizer, J&J or Moderna who were able to deliver vaccines as shortly as possible, while the Chinese had to trust on the conventional method of restrictive isolation of society,
- in mining technologies, the alleged shale revolution, during which the improvement and implementation of fresh gas and oil extraction technologies, The USA has become the world's largest maker of energy natural materials,
- in military technologies, making the U.S. equipped with state-of-the-art ships, aircraft and combat helicopters, as well as combat vehicles, air defense, etc. (Lockheed Martin, RTX, Northrop Grumman, General Dymmcs, Boeing, and are besides the largest arms exporter in the world.
In addition, the United States made up very rapidly the losses to China, in terms of electrical cars, quantum technologies, and yet the expansion of the 5G network – which technologies indicated as the planes of Chinese advantage.
The US not only leads in modern technologies, but besides is frequently the most effective in implementing and benefiting from them. Which is due to decades of experience and evolution of their own technologies. The assessment of partial technological dominance – as there is no gap between the US and China or Europe for example – seems to be most legitimate. It is impossible to clearly identify another country that would dominate the US with technology, but the United States is besides not a technological monopolist, and in the technological race the situation may change in a short time.
People's Republic of China
Although the discussion of Chinese technological improvement continues, and many are delighted with the number of patents filed by Chinese companies, it is hard to identify even 1 key technological field in which Chinese would clearly dominate not only the US but even Europe. The Chinese advantage inactive lies mainly in mass, cheaper production, which is more competitive on the market, but is not technological puzzles for the West. The Chinese do more, faster, cheaper and sometimes better, but not necessarily in a more technologically advanced way. Thus, they undoubtedly have an industrial advantage, but this does not automatically mean the superiority of Chinese products on a qualitative or technological level. Although China has made large advancement in this respect and is spreading fresh solutions very rapidly in its economy.
The mediate State is undoubtedly a technological power, due to the fact that on many levels it has achieved a advanced level and considerable independence. However, while the argument became common that without Chinese production, the planet would have a problem present (at least for a while), it cannot be said that without Chinese technology, human improvement would slow down. It's the opposite, inactive The Chinese are the ones chasing, not the pace of progress.. This may, of course, change even in the span of a fewer years, but to this day, the average (progressive) rating seems to be most legitimate, even in the context that in a situation where the US restricts access to modern chips for China, the Chinese were incapable to respond to the Americans in a symmetrical way (also withholding access to any technology). Instead, they utilized a tool related to access to uncommon earth metals. Which proves that the Chinese do not yet have control of any technology that the West would request and the West does not have. On a technological level, they have nothing ‘extra’, which gives emergence to the word China as a technological superpower.
Russian Federation
What modern technologies from Russia look like, everyone sees. If only in the war in Ukraine, in which the Russian army made technological advancement (dronization) thanks to... Iran. The same is not a technological mogul. The Russian ‘think’ method has always been the first to enter the army, and only later – possibly – to the private sector. Russian technology can so be easy verified by the armed forces. Here, the modern strategy of “active” defence of combat vehicles, consisting of welding nets and construction of “lakes”, reigns. The Russian army on many levels is undergoing or already undergoing technological degradation. And what the Russians had, it didn't bring anyone to their knees. improvement can be seen in individual directions, e.g. in rocket systems. In turn, the Russian economy has not yet delivered to the global marketplace any technologically valuable product that would be modern and desirable. And it will not supply long enough, due to the fact that years of isolation and operation under sanctions, as well as armed conflict, make the Russian private sector die. Space dwarf. In turn, the military struggles to keep its existing capabilities.
In a technological race, Russians barely count. They are not only far behind Americans and Europeans, but besides succumbing to the Chinese. The second – frequently based on older Russian constructions – built more modern air forces and a navy than the Russians. Without Western technology, the Russians were incapable to make their strategically key energy sector. Even before the war, they besides based many of their own weapons systems on European technologies. After imposing sanctions, they were incapable to fill the gaps with their own technologies.
INDUSTRY
The level of state industrialisation is all the more important, the little unchangeable the global political agreement is. This is due to the fact that on this level it is determined how independent the country is from the global supply chain, self-sufficient productively, and so capable of operating its own economy, but besides war machinery. The scale of production and its diversity are then of large importance.
United States
It is surely premature for any publicists to announce the death of the American industry. First of all, due to the fact that the USA is inactive the second largest maker in the planet (with around 17% in planet production value). The American manufacturing sector is more than 3 times larger than the nipponese (3 place in the world, more than 5% global share) or German (4 m, close 5%). Additionally, Donald Trump's fresh global trading strategy should support the improvement of American production as well as direct investment in the US. To be reinforced by a national strategy of investor relief and incentives. specified a strategy is not due to the fact that Americans are weak in production, but to the fact that they want to return to leadership and reduce their dependence on global supply chains.
Importantly, with nearly 3 trillion U.S. production, nearly 15% generated the space-military sector. The US arms manufacture dominates the planet market, as the largest arms exporter with a marketplace share of about 43% between 2020 and 2020. This is much more than the Russian (nearly 8%) or Chinese (nearly 6%) share.
The 5 largest arms manufacturers in the planet come from the US. As many as six companies from the United States are ranked among the top 10 companies. 3 others belong to China, and 1 is British. Among the 100 largest arms companies in the world, the value of U.S. arms companies is greater than that of all another combined arms companies.
Of course, it is not insignificant that the United States has expanded supply chains over many decades, moving the production of components and components mainly to Asia. This fact frequently makes American products not just and exclusively American origin. Which represents a weakness and a challenge for the future. However, the US has all the know-how needed to decision factories to more accessible places or to return to the country.
Despite this weakness, the American manufacture meets the criteria of the superpower industry. It has the most advanced technological solutions, it is the second largest in the world, with a crucial advantage over the next at stake, has access to the most absorbent marketplace and is the planet leader in the defence and space sectors. In particular, the second is simply a strengthening element: U.S. abroad policy, military potential, and advancement in the field of modern technologies.
People's Republic of China
China is the world's largest maker and accounts for about 27% of the global production value. The Chinese industrial and manufacturing sector is powerful and impressive. China is called the mill of the planet for a reason. However, the sector has any weaknesses. Firstly, it is dependent on supply of gas from abroad. Secondly, the Chinese have crucial overproduction and their interior marketplace is very weak in relation to population size. At a production value of $4.6 trillion (2024), Chinese exports amounted to nearly $3.6 trillion in 2024, and the trade surplus reached the level of 1 trillion usd. The United States and Europe account for about 40% of the trade surplus. This means that without Western markets, the Chinese industrial and manufacturing sector would be severely degraded due to deficiency of customers. The Chinese are so very susceptible to the global economy, and the crisis and the simplification in request in the West is simply a hazard origin for the economy of the mediate State. Thirdly, a large part of Chinese production comes from abroad factories/assembly plants located in China. This means that these factories do not contribute to technological improvement in China – the technology is owned by the corporate office located in their home countries – and can be relocated or simply closed.
Nevertheless, it should be remembered that the authoritarian authorities in Beijing have the anticipation of central control of the economy and industry, which, through public procurement, could reduce possible losses and to any degree and save production capacity in circumstantial areas for a time.
Undoubtedly, the fact of being the world's largest maker gives China additional assets in the economic, commercial and sometimes even political spheres. And it gives emergence to the inclusion of your centre as an industrial superpower.
Russian Federation
The Russian manufacturing and industrial sector is not among the strongest in the world. Sanctions have made many products in Russia simply lacking. Especially electronics to be imported from China. Nevertheless, due to the war, the Russians have put more emphasis on the production of weapons. And in this respect, they service their armed forces, although many shortcomings arise. The Russians are able to keep the army in combat readiness to deliver Russian equipment. The Russians were 1 of the weapon export tycoons, although their share of the planet marketplace declined importantly after 2022 due to the needs of their own army. Although it is not first-quality equipment and the latest technology, the production base is large and is mostly based on its own solutions. This does not make Russia an industrial superpower, on the contrary, there are many shortcomings on this level. However, this possible inactive serves Russian needs, especially as regards the long-term material war. fewer countries in the planet have specified unique potential, which, despite all another reservations, should be seen. I so decided to grant Russia a "yellow" category in this respect. Russia is not an industrial superpower, but it has a considerable industrial and production autonomy that allows to wage devastating war equipment for many years under political and economical conditions (partial) isolation.
ENERGY POTENTIAL
In the modern world, the function of the energy sector for modern societies and their economies cannot be overestimated. Dependence on the outside environment exposes the country to force not only from suppliers but besides from those who control supply chains (sea tracks, pipelines). Undoubtedly, 1 of the key features of modern superpowers is at least energy independence. Without it, a possible rival or opponent can effort to influence 1 of the most crucial sectors of the economy.
United States
The US is the world's largest oil producer. Annually they mine nearly twice as many (approximately 22 million barrels a day in 2024) as Saudi Arabia (nearly 11 million) or Russian Federation (0.5 million). In the second case, production is falling and will fall due to the comprehensive – already exploited – deposits and the deficiency of fresh mines. The United States accounts for nearly 22% of global oil production and is at the same time its largest consumer (near 19% of global consumption). due to the fact that there are many specialized refineries in the United States, Americans besides import quite a few natural material from the outside (more than 6 billion b/d), of which around 60% comes from Canada, a further about 23% from Central and Latin America (so local sources). This makes the US the second largest oil exporter in Saudi Arabia.
In the case of natural gas, the USA is besides its largest maker (more than 1 trillion million million/year) and consumer (about 1 billion EUR/year) worldwide. In addition, LNG production occurs, thanks to which the US is the largest exporter of liquefied gas on Earth (export in 2024 is about 130 billion ml).
Coal is not a deficit fuel in the United States either. With more than 500 million tonnes (American, about 907 kg) per year, about 411 million were utilized in 2024.
The above figures indicate that the US is not only independent in terms of energy natural materials needs, but is besides a key maker for the global market. And these are essential for the transport services sector (vehicles/combustion ships), but above all for the generation of electricity (without which there is no modern civilization), heating (heating plants) and the operation of industry.
In terms of electricity generation, the United States besides has the advantage of diversified sources. Americans have many atomic power plants (manufacturing about 18% of energy), coal (about 15%), wind and solar (about 17%), and gas (about 43%). What is crucial is that Americans have the technology to build this kind of power plant and besides have the resources to power it.
Given the fact that the US has both energy reserves and has a advanced self-sufficiency in terms of electricity production and the possible to increase this production for technological development, it is clear that they do not have the weakness described. On the contrary, by exporting gas and oil, they are gaining on an economical but besides political level (the ‘extra’ element). Together, it makes them an energy superpower.
People's Republic of China
China is the only 1 among the countries compared, with immense energy shortages. In the production of 5 million barrels/day, Chinese request was over 16 million b/d and was the second largest in the planet (approximately 16% of planet consumption). A immense deficit – corresponding to 2/3 of the request – is met by imports from the Gulf and Russia.
It is no better for gas, where China besides has a immense deficit. With yearly consumption around 434 billion sqm (2024), only a somewhat half (246 billion sqm) was mined in China. The shortages are met by imports of gas from Central Asia via Central Asia – China gas pipelines (passive capacity of 55 billion ml/year) as well as the Siberian Power (targeted by 38 billion ml/year). Finally, China draws about 106 billion lL of LNG per year by sea, making it the world's largest liquefied gas importer.
Despite the immense coal extraction (approximately 4.8 billion tonnes), the Chinese economy, at 4.9 billion tonnes, had to support imports.
China is not only 1 of the most dependent on the import of energy resources from countries on Earth. There are besides – in this respect – dependent on the operation of the marine routes, which they do not control at all. The Chinese economy is so very delicate to both fluctuations in natural material prices and to supply disruptions. Whether it is due to insufficient global production or to the breaking of supply chains.
No wonder, then, that the Chinese do what they can to limit this dependence. Investing in renewable energy sources as well as in the electrification of the automotive sector. In both cases, advancement is awesome on its scale, but it will take many years for the Chinese to balance production and request for energy resources.
The state of 2024 was liable for nearly 60% of the electricity produced in China for coal plants (and a fewer for oil). Wind and solar were about 20% involved, and atomic was just 5%. The Chinese electricity sector is comparatively independent of gas or oil imports, but these natural materials are essential for heating (gas heating), transport (fuel) and, above all, industrial (gas). Yes, the awesome Chinese manufacture is based on imported natural gas and LNG, and in the industrial sector it is impossible to replace gas with energy produced by RES... The increase in electricity production by wind and solar farms does not contribute proportionally to the simplification in gas demand. On the contrary, the last Chinese economy needs more and more, despite immense investments in RES.
The dependence on energy resources so makes China not gathering the characteristics of an energy superpower, although it is worth remembering that they meet their needs in terms of electricity. Moreover, they are able, thanks to investments in RES, to meet possible increased request due to the improvement of AI. At the same time, Chinese energy is inexpensive in relations with that produced in the West, which gives Chinese marketplace advantage. Clearly, China is simply a power in this narrower matter.
Russian Federation
The Russians produced nearly 11 million barrels of oil/day in 2024. A large production surplus must so be placed on the external market. The problem is that the current largest marketplace (Europe) almost cut off from Russian energy resources. For these reasons, the Russians had to look for replacement recipients. In the form of China, India and Brazil. The point is that the oil train to China was inactive working at maximum capacity, and land connections are neither with India nor Brazil. So the lion's share of oil exports began to usage the alleged "shadow float" on the sea routes after 2022.
A akin situation applies to gas. Russia produced about 685 billion l of natural gas in 2024, and utilized about 477 billion l (the second largest score in the world). any of the over 200 billion million surplus was transferred to China (about 30 billion), Turkey and Europe. In total, it is estimated that the Russians could sale approx. 120 billion l of natural gas and additionally about 47 billion l of LNG, but in subsequent years it can only be worse. The attacks on critical infrastructure organised by Ukraine, as well as the fact that Europe has tightened its sanctions and the beginning of the acquisition of ships from the shadow fleet, will surely negatively affect Russian exports.
In addition, in 2024 the Russians extracted 443 million tonnes of coal, of which 190 million tonnes were exported and 178 million were utilized for own use.
Undoubtedly Russia remains 1 of the largest energy producers and exporters in the world. However, despite the immense reserves, the presently utilized deposits either run out or have a problem with the aging or wartime infrastructure. Nor are sanctions that have limited exports of natural materials and have made it more and more of the planet by sea. Which forces the price to decrease for the natural material itself and negatively affects export revenue. However, despite these problems, Russia has a superpower feature in terms of independency from the supply of energy natural materials, as well as their export opportunities. In particular, it is besides independent in gathering the needs of the economy for electricity. For the Russians have all the resources needed to operate their gas plants (nearly 50% of the marketplace share), atomic (nearly 20%) or coal (nearly 20%).
–AUTOREKLAMA–
‘Poland to power. possible and strategy“ - It's already on sale! About Poland as it is.
ACCESS TO NATURAL RESOURCES (critical natural materials)
In a planet where technological improvement and industrial technology deployment are key to the future, access to natural resources – those critical to economies – besides becomes 1 of the characteristics of a superpower. It is not only about having a territory with adequate deposits, but besides about the anticipation of extracting/production of minerals. Without this, the state becomes delicate to limiting access to resources, which not only makes the modern economy grow but besides does not undergo technological degradation. It is worth noting that access to e.g. uncommon earth metals has become a political tool in Chinese hands. rather effective, which gives grounds for treating the described plane as a new, separate and independent feature of superpowers. possibly this feature will not be a key category of classification of states for superpowers in the future – for example, if the extraction and production of strategical natural materials were to become universal worldwide – but at this minute of history, the fact that 1 country dominated space makes it impossible to ignore this fact and underestimate it.
United States
According to the White House, the United States is 100% dependent on imports of 12 strategical natural materials, and 50% on imports of additional 29 elements. Americans import uncommon earth metals, cobalt, lithium or graphite, among others. In many cases, the natural materials come from China. In this context, the American manufacture – military, but besides civil, including modern technologies – is dependent on external factors. Which, in the context of possible chaos, breaking supply chains or open war, is simply a large weakness.
Washington has been trying for respective years to counteract this hazard through contracts with partners and allies to extract and manufacture strategical natural materials. The problem is that Americans are only at the beginning of the process of building an alternate to the Chinese supplier. So at this point, it should be considered that they do not meet the characteristics of the superpower on the described plane.
People's Republic of China
China dominated the marketplace for extraction and production of uncommon earth metals. Nearly half of the world's reserves of these elements have been located in China. Chinese mining accounts for around 70% of global production, but the share in planet production is as much as 94%. It is precisely the regulation of exports of uncommon earth metals to the US that has become the main Chinese weapon against United States pressure. An effective weapon. Let us add that China has practically monopolized the production of gallium and magnesium, has most of the shares in tungsten, graphite, cobalt or silicon production and many another natural materials.
Therefore, there is no uncertainty that Beijing has an advantage over the remainder of the planet in this substance and clearly this advantage gives additional opportunities in terms of economic, industrial, commercial and political. It is so a unique value which includes China in the superpower category in terms of access to critical natural materials.
Russian Federation
The Russian country is abounding in various kinds of natural materials, the problem is that the impact on the global marketplace has small to do with this fact. In spite of their wealth of deposits, the Russians are frequently incapable to meet their own needs. due to the fact that they do not have technologies to extract or produce circumstantial elements. Russians extract and export, for example, diamonds, platinum, nickel or cobalt. However, they are entirely dependent on imports of uncommon earth metals, lithium, magnesium, chromium, graphite and others. In this respect, they are, like the United States, dependent on Chinese supplies.
In view of the above, Russia does not fulfil the characteristics of a superpower in this category.
POTENTIAL CONTROL OF TRADE TRAINING AND planet POWER PROJECTION
Control of trade routes and the possible for force projection in the area of almost the globe are the characteristics that arise de facto from the sum of another potentials (military, political, technological, economical and even cultural, but besides geographical location). However, these features are unique as well as strategically applicable in the context of the assessment of the state's level of power. A superpower cannot be a state that has no control over even any of the most crucial trade routes, nor can it affect beyond its immediate neighbourhood. In another words, a country whose strength is comparatively indifferent to another global players cannot gain superpower status.
United States
The U.S. is the only planet power capable of controlling all the most crucial trade routes on its own – so truly narrow throats (choke points) – in the world. The Americans are strategically controlling the Panama Canal. They work with Egypt managing the Suez Canal. On both sides of the Straits of Gibraltar, they have allies (Spain, Morocco). As in the case of the Danish Straits (Denmark, Sweden), GIUK (Grenland, Iceland, United Kingdom), the English Channel (UK, France) and partners in the Malakka Straits (Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia). Thanks to Diego Garcia, the American fleet can besides control traffic from the key – due to the energy sector – Persian Gulf. The perfect geographical location makes Americans have unfettered access to the 2 most crucial oceans (Atlantic and Pacific).
The United States fleet is the only 1 in the planet to be able to self-impose a maritime blockade in any area that is key to global maritime trade routes. Not only due to the possible of U.S. Navy force, but besides due to the political influence that makes this fleet safe as it approaches the coast.
American combat groups with aircraft carriers in the lead have been patrolling simultaneously in respective regions of the planet for decades. Moving freely between the Atlantic and Indian Ocean, Atlantic or Pacific, as well as between the Pacific and Indian Ocean.
The United States is the only country on the globe that maintains bases and large military resources in so many parts of the world. Americans have their military resources in Greenland, Europe, the mediate East, Africa, the Indian Ocean, the Pacific Ocean, South Korea, Japan or Australia.
They are able to simultaneously increase the presence of their forces in Poland, bomb targets in the mediate East or Iran, kidnap the Venezuelan leader, take control of a ship sailing in the Atlantic, deploy a fleet to defend Taiwan and conduct military maneuvers together with Japan and South Korea. Americans have the top freedom of action from all countries in the planet and can task force on any continent in a short time. In this context, the US not only has superpower status, but a real hegemon. It is actual that there have been discussions over the years about limiting American presence in different regions. It does not change the fact that in the same regions from which Americans effectively withdraw, for example, land forces, they are inactive able to carry out complex and effective military operations. U.S. dominance is not one-zero (i.e. it is either complete or not in its entirety), and gradual.
The current process of reducing US engagement in the planet is intended to reduce the cost of maintaining global order, but it does not gotta reduce American possible to task force in a given region. On the contrary, reducing the costs spent on political prevention allows us to redirect resources and resources in order to increase the efficiency of periodic strength plan in order to accomplish a circumstantial effect.
In another words, Americans from a strategy of costly setting up police officers on all street of a dangerous city (prevention management), decision on to a strategy of creating a powerful, counter-terrorism strike group that on call would be able to neutralize any threat. Targeted to intimidate possible opponents and show their consequences in the event of inappropriate behaviour (management through terror/force).
If Europe had strengthened itself on the military level adequate to be able to deter Russia on its own, and preferably stabilise the mediate East, then the Americans could redirect all the mobile resources, cheaper but stronger and more effective in their action by a unit of “terror” their opponents. In form, for example, of even more powerful, focused in stronger teams, the U.S. Navy fleet (and here you can see the request for new, powerful and universal linear ships that want to introduce Trump administration into the line).
Given the above, undoubtedly the US inactive has superpower status, in the category of trade routes control (90% of planet trade takes place by sea) and the ability to task forces of global scope. specified capabilities will not cease even if the US reduces abroad engagement of land or air troops. This may even contribute to strengthening this potential, by strengthening the tools dedicated to this peculiar task. However, the condition is to keep a strong network of alliances, with US allies having to presume greater work for maintaining safety on land.
People's Republic of China
Despite his strong commitment to the expansion of the naval fleet, The Chinese have very limited capabilities. Firstly, due to the fact that for geographical reasons their coast is closed by the alleged first chain of islands which are controlled by US allies and partners. Secondly, China is at the end (or beginning depending on how you look at it) of trade routes. In another words, blocking the waters of the Chinese coast could be unnoticed by most of the planet (unless the Chinese would halt their own exports – which would be an economical form of pressure). In the event of the Chinese fleet being put up in a restricted area between the coast and the first island chain, even close to Taiwan, South Korea, Japan or Vietnam and the Philippines would have – the fact that more limited – access to a global network of maritime routes. Thus, the Chinese would gotta sail a fleet outside the first chain of islands to endanger their immediate surroundings. What they don't do in spite of being arrogant of the world's largest fleet, apart from training around Taiwan.
Even the acquisition of Taiwan would not increase Chinese opportunities on a global scale, as going to the Philippine Sea would be a problem for Japan and South Korea, but – from the position of access to trade routes – nobody else.
The Chinese operate towards dominance in the South China Sea and would like to be given the chance to task force in the Malakka Strait area. Which would let them to control the full marine environment in the Indo-Pacific region. The problem is, however, China's political weakness. The more Chinese search physical control of the South China Sea, the more they discourage their neighbours (Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia) and push them into a safety dependency from the US.
Meanwhile, operating a large fleet on the waters surrounded by hostile states would be suicide during the armed conflict. Especially since the Chinese fleet is not adapted to face the American, especially on the advanced seas (oceans). 2 of the arms of Chinese aircraft carriers are post-missile constructions with very dubious operational possible in the context of a possible clash with the US Navy. In turn, the 3rd aircraft carrier – already a Chinese thought and production – entered service only in 2025 as the first unit of this type. Not only does it make the Chinese – so far – incapable to gain a numerical advantage over the Americans in the most crucial kind of sea-going units, but they besides do not have proven technology, doctrine and how to usage them.
Thus both geography, politics and real capabilities stand in the way of Chinese control of key trade routes in the region and the plan of forces outside their immediate surroundings. The Chinese announce investments in a fleet of carriers with crucial resources, but their problem is that if they do not take over political control of the environment (Taiwan and Philippines minimum) this fleet of carriers – in case of conflict – will be afraid to leave ports. Due to the danger of being sunk by missiles from land-based anti-shipping missiles, aircraft or enemy ships operating in the area of the first chain of islands.
China so does not deserve any "points" to fulfil the characteristics of superpowers in the scope described. To justify this in a pictorial way, it is adequate to imagine a planet in which Chinese aircraft carriers fly to the Chinese port in Djibouti. They conduct military maneuvers in the East African area. They visit waters around Australia, and yet show the readiness to operate in the Bering Sea region (transition to the Arctic Sea). How different from this modern planet would that be? The Chinese dream about it and effort to make it happen 1 day. For today, however, they do not have specified opportunities. due to the fact that the Chinese fleet feels an expanding tingling and anxiety, with all nautical mile drifting distant from the Chinese coast.
The effect is that the Chinese are not capable of military protection of their abroad investments today. Not only in the sea, but besides in the land. China is heavy active in Central Asia. So what if all the gas and oil deposits in this region that feed the Chinese economy are far west on Caspian Lake. Where irrefutable dominance is owned by the Russian Caspian Fleet and aviation. As long as the Russians can without consequence bomb the full mining infrastructure of Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan or Uzbekistan, then Chinese influences in Central Asia are Moscow's hostage. The Chinese are besides incapable to control the land-based part of the fresh Silk Road, as 1 thread runs through Russia and the another by Georgia and the Black Sea. The third, in turn, by isolated Iran, and further by Turkey owned by NATO.
The Chinese are incapable to safe even their own maritime and land routes, essential for the import of oil and gas, as well as their exports to the most crucial outlets for them.
Russian Federation
For a change, the Russians did not request trade routes – especially those of the sea – almost at all. What they were curious in was pipelines to Europe that exported gas and oil. And it was this large independency to the global economy and trade routes that allowed them to act aggressively in Ukraine. They were not so afraid of the consequences of the sanctions that could prove to be lethal to the economy in China.
However, Russian independency from maritime routes has become – rather unexpectedly – a history. erstwhile the Nord Streams were blown up and Russian energy imports to Europe stopped, it turned out that the only outlets for them were... Outside the sea. It was China – through ports – India and Brazil became the biggest recipients of Russian oil and LNG. This, in turn, makes Russia highly dependent on the functioning of its "shadow float" so far unsensitive. For this is what the Russians are now selling most of their hydrocarbons through the latter. In this respect the Russians defend only and exclusively global maritime law J
In another words, Russia has become dependent on Ukraine over respective years, which it has avoided for centuries. Meanwhile, the Russian fleet is underinvested, obsolete and besides many to even effort to be a real protection force for its tankers.
However, it is worth noting that this rapidly rusting fleet has operations specified as a force projection in the east Mediterranean. On which she had until late a port in Syrian Tartus. In 2016, Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuzniecow performed an highly hard task for himself and, leaving Murmansk, sailed all over Europe – wrapping its coasts with dense smoke from coal boilers so that the British lost sight of the coast of France – and reached the Syrian area. This 1 – last 1 – the Russian unit's cruise was possibly longer than the sum of all the flights made so far by all 3 Chinese aircraft carriers. This well illustrates China's limited capabilities, despite the increasing possible at an highly fast rate.
Unlike China, the Russians had a very broad political sphere of influence that was strong in the mediate East, Africa, and even America. So they could usage land and air bases in selected countries. The point is, after the invasion of Ukraine in 2022, these influences vanish at an alarming rate. The Russians are no longer in Syria: Tartus and Latakia, and in Africa their influence is very, very limited and it comes down to hiring mercenaries. The last Russian force projection – but for aggression against Ukraine – was to decision the aeromobile brigade to the capital of Kazakhstan in January 2022 (just before the second invasion to Ukraine). However, this was an impact in the immediate surroundings, and additionally in reasonably controlled and certain conditions (acting almost as at home). It should be pointed out that the Ukrainian war consumes so much Russian attention and military resources, as well as has led to specified a fast erosion of political influences in another parts of the planet that the Russian ability to task force – on a global scale – is very limited.
For these reasons, too, the Russians do not deserve to be classified as superpowers in the category of controlling trade routes and projection of forces.
CULTURAL POTENTIAL
Although geopolitics frequently trust on hard data, statistic and possibilities, it is not possible to ignore the cultural potential, which has a immense impact on this political, but besides technological, economical and even military.
It does not substance what values are cultivated in a given society, what language it communicates, what ideology or religion it professes, and what cultural key it uses in everyday life. This all affects the quality of communication with another countries, and communication (understanding/understanding level) is everything.
United States
Americans belong to the Western cultural circle, which links them both to the Old planet and the full Western Hemisphere, as well as to Australia. Western culture is besides well known – due to colonialism – in Africa, the mediate East, India or among the Indo-Pacific states. In another words, the western cultural code is the most universal in the world. Like the Latin alphabet or the Arabic numerals.
The United States society, largely, belongs or derives from Christian families, and Christianity is inactive the top religion on earth in terms of the number of believers (common perception of values).
In turn, English is the most common language in the world. It besides covers the programming language. The democratic strategy and common political values combine Americans with Europeans, residents of both Americas, Australia, fresh Zealand, as well as the Far East (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan).
The American amusement manufacture (also sports) is the most recognizable and influential in the planet (Hollywood, music industry, NBA, NHL). The only weakness of Americans is the fact that it is simply a young nation, which makes it lacking classical representatives from the planet of art and literature. However, this is counterbalanced by the tremendous influence exerted by modern American creators.
For these reasons, the U.S. undoubtedly has all the assets essential to find that they fulfil the cultural criterion in the context of belonging to superpowers.
People's Republic of China
China is simply a cultural other of the United States. Their language is complicated and completely incomprehensible to others. In both speech and writing. Not only on a global scale, but even on a local scale. In China itself, society speaks different languages and dialects, although there is 1 common writing. However, this does not go beyond China and Taiwan itself.
Chinese culture does not have much external force, as it borders another powerful cultural centres (Russia, India, Japan, muslim states of Central Asia), as well as island states or the Indochina peninsula, which were under the colonial regulation of Europeans, so Chinese culture was incapable to affect them with a decisive mark (indopacification region).
China was erstwhile the cradle of Confucianism, but the communist authorities expelled religion in society. And it is the communist pedigree of the state that is the only more expressive cultural bond with the environment (Russia, North Korea or Vietnam). However, this is far besides small to call China a cultural superpower.
Russian Federation
Throughout the centuries, the Russians have done quite a few bad, but besides good, in the context of building their cultural influences in Euroasia. On the 1 hand, they subjected conquered nations and a society of aggressive rusification. On the another hand, they can boast of outstanding writers or composers. In the past, Christian pedigree (Legislaus), as well as closeness – although not identity – with Western culture were a considerable asset. However, communism (especially Stalinism) destroyed what Western and global in Russian society and further discouraged the Russian culture of neighbouring societies. Putin's policy deepens the degradation of Russian cultural influence (vide separation of Ukrainian church from Patriarch). Although Moscow – during the USSR – was building communism throughout Central and east Europe, the full region relieved and joyfully rejected it on the first occasion (1989).
Russian language has besides ceased to be widely utilized and understood in European countries formerly part of the Warsaw Pact. The influence of Russian culture remained mainly in Central Asia and the Caucasus, although it is becoming weaker. The regional binder is inactive Cyrillic, which is utilized in Belarus, Ukraine, Bulgaria, the Balkans and Central Asia. However, more and more Cyrillic societies are becoming Latin.
For these reasons, Russia even loses its cultural position as a regional power and cannot be qualified in this category for superpowers.
GEOPOLITICAL CONDITIONS
There will be those who find that the measurement of the power indicators of individual states does not necessarily reflect the real strategy of forces in the world. For any countries may not usage their advantages (e.g. due to mediocre leadership – that is, in our example, the driver of the car) and others may effectively play above their capabilities. Which could truly affect reality. It seems that specified a situation – which would origin a crucial separation of political realities from nonsubjective geopolitical conditions – may theoretically exist, but cannot be permanent. For sooner or later there must be a correction that verifies the real capacity of that country, which blaffs or uses a circumstantial arrangement of events in its favour, despite the weakness of that country. Moreover, countries undervalued in the political arena, in relation to their real potential, sooner or later are beginning to benefit from this potential.
However, assuming that the global order may look completely different from the actual arrangement of forces based on a comparatively nonsubjective force resulting from the above-mentioned categories, and thus assuming that the indicators mentioned in the survey do not prejudge the existence of a single-polar world, it is essential to indicate in which this single-polar architecture has collapsed and to prove that there have been significant, noticeable changes in planet order.
If we agree that for more than 2 decades (between 1990 and 2013) we have lived in the planet of hegemony, then to say that present it is different to mention the diametric changes on the global phase that have decided to transform planet order.
The event, which was undoubtedly the 1 which so far changed the reality after 2013, was the second invasion of Ukraine from 2022 (which was the consequence of the 2014 invasion). How much did the Russian-Ukrainian war affect global governance?
- It did not change the arrangement of forces in the context of atomic potential, but its consequence was to decision distant from the US and Russia's atomic treaties, which strengthened these states (they ceased to restrain their hands) towards countries that did not contain specified restrictive treaties (e.g. China).
- It weakened Russia militarily and engaged it in conflict, tying the instrument of force in a peculiar direction. It stimulated NATO's military development.
- It politically reinforced NATO (especially in the European part), and the North Atlantic Pact was extended to include Finland and Sweden, which increased the de facto American alliance network and weakened Russia. At the same time, the Russian threat to Europe increased the dependency of the second on the United States. Moreover, Russia became more dependent on China, which strengthened Beijing.
- It weakened Russia's finances and economy and proved to have no impact on US and Chinese finances and economies.
- It affected the technological improvement of the Russian civilian economy, as well as stimulated technological improvement – on military grounds – of the United States and China (war experience in Ukraine, arms race).
- It supported the US arms manufacture (increased exports and hence production capacity), forced the start of reconstruction of the European arms manufacture and led to the expansion of the Russian military sector.
- It supported the American expansion in the energy market, limited Russia's export opportunities.
- It made Russia dependent on maritime trade routes (oil and LNG exports), thereby expanding much of the US Navy.
- It did not importantly affect access to strategical natural materials of any of the comparative powers.
- It had a negative impact on Russia's cultural impact.
It follows from the above that the Russians tested American hegemony, however, as a consequence of this test, strengthened the possible of the US, as well as any China, weakening themselves. Consequently, it concludes that The Russian attack on Ukraine not only did not undermine the U.S. position, but even strengthened it.
Another condition identified as crucial in the context of the change in the planet order was the increase in Chinese potential. This 1 is consistent, but measured, and has been going on for respective decades. However, as indicated above, this possible inactive seems insufficient to qualify for superpowers. At the same time, the People's Republic of China has not yet taken 1 more action that could be identified as proving Beijing's position (as a superpower) and at the same time has completely changed the global power arrangement. On the contrary, the stronger China pushes, the more neighbouring countries are oriented towards the United States. The Chinese have not yet decided on any serious test of American hegemony, so there is no reason to find whether it has actually been completed.
SUMMARY AND TRENDA
Of course, the discussion on the form of the global arrangement of forces besides concerns a closer or further future. And the fact that hegemony inactive exists at the beginning of 2026 does not mean that it cannot fall apart later in 2026 or in 2027. It so requires that the present survey deals with the current situation and it would be worth updating it periodically, for example, all 2-3 years or after applicable events.
In particular, on the basis of the above analysis, it can be assumed that the People's Republic of China, with the consequence of 4.5/11 and an expanding trend in respective categories, has a chance to become a superpower in any time. Theoretically, China could, in about a decade, gain the position of a atomic superpower and possibly even a technological superpower. If this had happened, it might have translated into political possible in a fewer years. Then with the consequence of 7/11 – unless China loses elsewhere – Beijing could gain superpower position and become a separate pole in a fresh global order. This kind of script is not excluded and it seems that the Beijing authorities are moving in this direction.
In turn, the United States should focus on maintaining its current advantages. Especially in the political (network of alliances), financial (dominating the dollar and fin institutions), economic, technological, and to keep the ability to task force anywhere in the world. As you can see, there are many challenges. From the US perspective, the Chinese dominance of access to critical natural materials should besides be broken down. Which seems completely feasible in the position of up to 1 decade.
Russia has ceased to number in all this and is alternatively in a downward trend. It is not expected to make any force pole based on Moscow. Moreover, the creation of the Beijing-Moscow duo seems unrealistic due to differences in interests and a large imbalance in the possible of these partners.
Time origin is besides crucial in all of this. In the short word (a fewer years) there will most likely be many perturbations and tests of the global system. Changing the US geopolitical strategy will make a field for fresh local struggles and armed conflicts in various regions of the world. Americans will be able to engage in them or not, depending on their interests. Any U.S. mistakes could be utilized by China, for example, to strengthen political position at the expense of the US.
In the average word (several years) there may be a shuffle in the global arena and a change in its architecture. 3 scenarios are most likely. The first – the least real – is that in time we will return to the bipolar planet order (which the Chinese number quietly on, knowing that this would be at the expense of Russia). The second is that the US will make fresh conditions for the functioning of the planet system, which, while serving American interests better, will let the United States to keep hegemony while building China's glass ceiling.
Finally, the 3rd script – the most likely 1 in my opinion – is the failure of all 3 countries compared. Russia, which will be affected by the effects of war and many interior problems (another sadness). China, which also, due to interior problems and external constraints, will not be able to emergence to the superpower position. The United States, which, due to interior problems, will lose the position of superpowers in financial and economical layers, and possibly besides political, and consequently besides in the control of global supply chains and force projections. Falling into the function of 1 of many powers, though possibly inactive the strongest.
The description of these forecasts should be treated as a signal to the author, in terms of his predictions, alternatively than as part of extended analytical work. The justification for the scenarios outlined above would be besides extended and would go beyond the scope of the study. However, these predictions are not based on empty conviction, but on analyses published in the book: “Third Decade. planet present and in 10 years” (publ. 2021), where the interior problems of the U.S., China, and Russia have been described in detail, as well as much more developed forecasts. Many of which have already worked (war in Ukraine, seizure of Mountain Karabach, Israel's war with Lebanon and bombing of Iran).
Ending. We will surely have very intense years ahead of us, which will find the form of the emerging fresh global order or the maintenance of the inactive existing U.S. hegemony – although functioning on a changed basis.
In doing so, it is worth keeping calm and not knowing the fall of the U.S. or planet War III all 2 months, or alternatively focusing on the survey of the real image in the existing minute of power. In the context of early 2026, the United States is undoubtedly the only superpower with unique possible on many different levels. These capabilities can aid Washington authorities model reality in a way that serves American interests. The U.S. simply has the most tools and that's why Donald Trump was able to recover the strategical initiative so easily. To impose developments as well as the mad pace of changes in the existing structure of forces. For these reasons, announcing the fall of hegemon seems premature, although it can be seen to the bare eye that it is mainly facing many structural interior problems. And they, alternatively than geopolitical opponents, can find the destiny of the world.
Krzysztof Wojchal
