Superpower

This article is about the geographic and political term. For the fictional superhuman abilities, see Superpower (ability). For other uses, see Superpower (disambiguation).

A superpower is a sovereign state or supranational union that holds a dominant position characterized by the ability to exert influence and project power on a global scale. ^{[1] [2] [3]} This is done through the combined means of economic, military, technological, political, and cultural strength as well as diplomatic and soft power influence. Traditionally, superpowers are preeminent among the great powers. While a great power state is capable of exerting its influence globally, superpowers are states so influential that no significant action can be taken by the global community without first considering the positions of the superpowers on the issue. ^[1]

In 1944, during World War II, the term was first applied to the British Empire, the Soviet Union, and the United States. ^[4] During the Cold War, the British Empire dissolved, leaving the United States and the Soviet Union to dominate world affairs. At the end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States became the world's sole superpower, ^{[5] [6]} a position sometimes referred to as that of a "hyperpower". ^[7] In the 2020s, China has increasingly been described as a superpower along with the United States. ^{[8] [9] [10] [11] [12]}

History

Origin

A world map in 1945. According to William T. R. Fox, the United States (blue), the Soviet Union (red), and the British Empire (teal) were superpowers.

Prime Minister Winston Churchill, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and General Secretary Joseph Stalin, meeting at the Yalta Conference in Crimea in February 1945, near the end of World War II

No agreed definition of what a superpower is exists and may differ between sources. ^[7] However, a fundamental characteristic that is consistent with all definitions of a superpower is a nation or state that has mastered the seven dimensions of state power, namely geography, population, economy, resources, military, diplomacy, and national identity. ^[13]

The term was first used to describe nations with greater than great power status as early as 1944, but only gained its specific meaning with regard to the United States and the Soviet Union after World War II. This was because the United States and the Soviet Union had proved themselves to be capable of casting great influence in global politics and military dominance. The term in its current political meaning was coined by Dutch-American geostrategist Nicholas Spykman in a series of lectures in 1943 about the potential shape of a new post-war world order. This formed the foundation for the book The Geography of the Peace, which referred primarily to the unmatched maritime global supremacy of the British Empire and the United States as essential for peace and prosperity in the world.^{[ citation needed ]}

A year later, William T. R. Fox, an American foreign policy professor, elaborated on the concept in the book The Superpowers: The United States, Britain and the Soviet Union – Their Responsibility for Peace which spoke of the global reach of a super-empowered nation. ^[14] Fox used the word superpower to identify a new category of power able to occupy the highest status in a world in which—as the war then raging demonstrated—states could challenge and fight each other on a global scale. According to him, at that moment, there were three states that were superpowers, namely the United States, the Soviet Union, and the United Kingdom. The British Empire was the most extensive empire in world history and considered the foremost power, holding sway over 25% of the world's population ^[15] and controlling about 25% of the Earth's total land area, while the United States and the Soviet Union grew in power before and during World War II. The UK would face serious political, financial, and colonial issues after World War II that left it unable to match Soviet or American power. Ultimately, Britain's empire would gradually dissolve over the course of the 20th century, sharply reducing its global power projection.

According to Lyman Miller, "[t]he basic components of superpower stature may be measured along four axes of power: military, economic, political, and cultural (or what political scientist Joseph Nye has termed 'soft power')". ^[16]

In the opinion of Kim Richard Nossal of Queen's University in Canada, "generally, this term was used to signify a political community that occupied a continental-sized landmass; had a sizable population (relative at least to other major powers); a superordinate economic capacity, including ample indigenous supplies of food and natural resources; enjoyed a high degree of non-dependence on international intercourse; and, most importantly, had a well-developed nuclear capacity (eventually, normally defined as second strike capability)". ^[7]

In the opinion of Professor Paul Dukes, "a superpower must be able to conduct a global strategy, including the possibility of destroying the world; to command vast economic potential and influence; and to present a universal ideology", although "many modifications may be made to this basic definition". ^[17] According to Professor June Teufel Dreyer, "[a] superpower must be able to project its power, soft and hard, globally". ^[18] In his book Superpower: Three Choices for America's Role in the World , Dr. Ian Bremmer, president of the Eurasia Group, argues that a superpower is "a country that can exert enough military, political, and economic power to persuade nations in every region of the world to take important actions they would not otherwise take". ^[19]

Apart from its common denotation of the foremost post-WWII states, the term superpower has colloquially been applied by some authors retrospectively to describe various preeminent ancient great empires or medieval great powers, in works such as Channel 5 (UK)'s documentary Rome: The World's First Superpower or the reference in The New Cambridge Medieval History to "the other superpower, Sasanian Persia". ^[20]

During the Cold War

Further information: Cold War

See also: Soviet Union–United States relations

This map shows two global spheres during the Cold War in 1980:

   NATO member states

  Other NATO and United States allies

× Anti-communist guerrillas

   Warsaw Pact member states

  Socialist states allied with the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact

  Other allies of the Soviet Union

× Communist guerrillas

  Socialist states not allied with the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact

  Neutral nations

× Other conflicts

The 1956 Suez Crisis suggested that Britain, financially weakened by two world wars, could not then pursue its foreign policy objectives on an equal footing with the new superpowers without sacrificing convertibility of its reserve currency as a central goal of policy. ^[21] As the majority of World War II had been fought far from its national boundaries, the United States had not suffered the industrial destruction nor massive civilian casualties that marked the wartime situation of the countries in Europe or Asia. The war had reinforced the position of the United States as the world's largest long-term creditor nation ^[22] and its principal supplier of goods; moreover, it had built up a strong industrial and technological infrastructure that had greatly advanced its military strength into a primary position on the global stage. ^[23] Despite attempts to create multinational coalitions or legislative bodies (such as the United Nations), it became increasingly clear that the superpowers had very different visions about what the post-war world ought to look like and after the withdrawal of British aid to Greece in 1947, the United States took the lead in containing Soviet expansion in the Cold War. ^[24]

The two countries opposed each other ideologically, politically, militarily, and economically. The Soviet Union promoted the ideology of Marxism–Leninism, planned economy, and a one-party state while the United States promoted the ideologies of liberal democracy and the free market in a capitalist market economy. This was reflected in the Warsaw Pact and NATO military alliances, respectively, as most of Europe became aligned with either the United States or the Soviet Union. These alliances implied that these two nations were part of an emerging bipolar world, in contrast with a previously multipolar world. ^[25]

The idea that the Cold War period revolved around only two blocs, or even only two nations, has been challenged by some scholars in the post–Cold War era, who have noted that the bipolar world only exists if one ignores all of the various movements and conflicts that occurred without influence from either of the two superpowers. ^[26] Additionally, much of the conflict between the superpowers was fought in proxy wars, which more often than not involved issues more complex than the standard Cold War oppositions. ^[27]

After the Soviet Union disintegrated in the early 1990s, the term "hyperpower" began to be applied to the United States as the sole remaining superpower of the Cold War era. ^[7] This term, popularized by French foreign minister Hubert Védrine in the late 1990s, is controversial and the validity of classifying the United States in this way is disputed. One notable opponent to this theory is Samuel P. Huntington, who rejects this theory in favor of a multipolar balance of power. Other international relations theorists such as Henry Kissinger theorize that because the threat of the Soviet Union no longer exists to formerly American-dominated regions such as Western Europe and Japan, American influence is only declining since the end of the Cold War because such regions no longer need protection or have necessarily similar foreign policies as the United States. ^[28]

Current superpowers

United States

See also: American decline

Countries with United States military bases and facilities

The New York Stock Exchange trading floor. Economic power such as a large nominal GDP and a world reserve currency are important factors in the projection of hard power.

After the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 which ended the Cold War, the post–Cold War world was considered to be a unipolar world, ^{[29] [30]} with the United States as the world's sole remaining superpower. ^[31] In 1999, political scientist and author Samuel P. Huntington wrote: "The United States, of course, is the sole state with preeminence in every domain of power – economic, military, diplomatic, ideological, technological, and cultural – with the reach and capabilities to promote its interests in virtually every part of the world". However, Huntington rejected the claim that the world was unipolar, arguing: "There is now only one superpower. But that does not mean that the world is unipolar", describing it instead as "a strange hybrid, a uni-multipolar system with one superpower and several major powers". He further wrote that "Washington is blind to the fact that it no longer enjoys the dominance it had at the end of the Cold War. It must relearn the game of international politics as a major power, not a superpower, and make compromises". ^[32]

Experts argue that this older single-superpower assessment of global politics is too simplified, in part because of the difficulty in classifying the European Union at its current stage of development. Others argue that the notion of a superpower is outdated, considering complex global economic interdependencies and propose that the world is multipolar. ^{[33] [34] [35] [36]}

A 2012 report by the National Intelligence Council predicted that the United States superpower status will have eroded to merely being primus inter pares (first among equals) by 2030, but that it would remain the highest among the world's most powerful countries because of its influence in many different fields and global connections that the great regional powers of the time would not match. ^[37] Additionally, some experts have suggested the possibility of the United States losing its superpower status completely in the future, citing speculation of its decline in power relative to the rest of the world, economic hardships, a declining dollar, Cold War allies becoming less dependent on the United States, and the emergence of future powers around the world. ^{[38] [39] [40]}

According to a RAND Corporation paper by American diplomat James Dobbins, Professor Howard J. Shatz, and policy analyst Ali Wyne, Russia in the breakdown of a disintegrating unipolar world order, while not a peer competitor to the United States, would still remain a player and a potential rogue state that would undermine global affairs. The West could contain Russia with methods like those employed during the Cold War with the Soviet Union, though this would be tested by Russia's overt and covert efforts to destabilize Western alliances and political systems. On the other hand, China is a peer competitor to the United States that cannot be contained, and will be a far more challenging entity for the West to confront. The authors state that China's military dominance in the Asia-Pacific is already eroding American influence at a rapid pace, and the costs for the US to defend its interests there will continue to rise. Moreover, China's economic influence has already broken out of its regional confines long ago and is on track to directly contest the US role as the center for economic trade and commerce. ^{[41] [42] [43] [44]}

In After the Empire: The Breakdown of the American Order ^[45] (2001), French sociologist Emmanuel Todd predicts the eventual decline and fall of the United States as a superpower. "After years of being perceived as a problem-solver, the US itself has now become a problem for the rest of the world." Since the 2010s, as a result of asymmetric polarization within the United States, as well as globally perceived U.S. foreign policy failures, and China's growing influence around the world, some academics and geopolitical experts have argued that the United States may already be experiencing a decay in its soft power around the world. ^{[46] [47]}

China

Further information: Chinese Century and China's peaceful rise

The People's Republic of China emerged as a superpower by the 2020s. ^{[48] [49] [50] [51]} According to former U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, China represents the "biggest geopolitical test of the 21st century" to the United States, as it is "the only country with enough power to jeopardize the current global order". ^[52] Academic Jennifer Lind notes that "China today is already more powerful than the Soviet Union was during the Cold War. Modern China, then, is not just a great power but a superpower". ^[8]

China started being identified as a potential future superpower in the 2000s and 2010s by many academics and other experts. ^{[53] [54] [55] [56] [57]} Some commentators at the time disagreed, suggesting China might simply be an emerging power rather than a potential superpower, ^{[58] [59]} due to China's ageing and shrinking population and long-term effects of pollution, ^{[60] [61] [62]} lack of skilled immigration, ^[63] and lack of soft power. ^{[64] [65] [66] [67]}

In 2020, a new UBS survey found that 57% of global investors predicted that China would replace the U.S. as the world's biggest superpower by 2030. ^{[68] [69]} In 2026, a poll by Carnegie Endowment, a top ranked US think-tank, found that nearly two-thirds majority (64%) of Americans think China's power already equals or exceed's American's power, and majority (74%) believe China will surpass the U.S. in power and influence globally. ^[70] A majority (63%) of Americans believes China has technological superiority over U.S., and 42% believe China has economic advantage over U.S. ^[70]

There has been great focus on China's growing economic activity on the global stage, in particular where it has been in competition with the United States: for example, the establishment and large-scale expansion in countries joining the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank in contrast to traditional western institutions, along with the Belt and Road Initiative and China's role in the worldwide groundings of the Boeing 737 MAX. ^{[71] [72]} It has also been argued that there is likely to be growing competition in future between two highly dominant countries, the United States and China, while others begin to lag behind economically. ^[73] It has also been predicted that China may overtake the United States as the world's largest economy in the 2020s. ^[74] Due to the country's rapidly developing AI industry, China has also been referred to as an "AI superpower". ^{[75] [76] [77]}

The United States military planners considers China as the US' most capable and formidable adversary. ^[78] There has been argument that its ties with Russia and Central Asia could see the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation become the "NATO of the East". ^[79] It has also been argued that American absence from the Indo-Pacific region during the war on terror has allowed the Chinese to actively challenge the United States as the pre-eminent power in the region. ^[80]

Potential future superpowers

Extant superpowers

  United States

  China

Potential future superpowers—supported in varying degrees by academics

  European Union

  India

Former superpower

  Russia

The term potential superpowers has been applied by scholars and other qualified commentators to the possibility of several political entities achieving superpower status.

Due to their large markets, growing military strength, economic potential, and influence in international affairs, the European Union ^[2] and India ^[81] are among the political entities most cited as having the potential of achieving superpower status in the 21st century. In 2012, historian Ramachandra Guha expressed doubts about whether India would ever emerge as a new superpower. ^[82] In 2020, the European Union has been called a "regulatory superpower" due to the Brussels effect. ^{[83] [84] [85]}

In the 1980s, some political and economic analysts predicted that Japan would eventually accede to superpower status due to its large population, growing economic, military, industrial, technological and cultural influence, large gross domestic product, and high economic growth at that time. ^{[86] [87] [88]} Japan's economy was expected to eventually surpass that of the United States. ^{[89] [90] [87]} However, this prediction failed to materialise following a stock market crash and the resulting "Lost Decades", where Japan has suffered a flat to negative economic outlook, ^[91] while its population has been aging since the late 1980s before suffering real decline in total population starting in 2011. ^{[57] [92]}

European Union

See also: Eurosphere and Paneuropean Union

The European Union (EU) has been called a potential superpower, mainly due to its economic power and global political influence. Factors highlighted have included its large population, the size and global reach of its combined economy, and the comparative unpopularity of US foreign policy. ^{[93] [94]}

Despite lacking a cohesive military of its own, with military capabilities still in the hands of individual member states, it has been argued that this is irrelevant when considering the status of the EU as a potential superpower. ^{[95] [96]} Others disagree, saying that its lack of a unified military structure compared to the United States undermines its claim to be a potential superpower. ^{[97] [98]}

There have also been conflicting views about the EU's lack of political integration. Some have argued that its "lower profile" diplomacy and emphasis on the rule of law represent a new kind of geopolitical influence that fulfills the political requirements for consideration as a superpower, rather than simply failing to meet them. ^{[94] [99]} Others however argue that its lack of a centralised foreign or defence policy leaves its effectiveness uncertain when compared to that of a more politically integrated union of states such as the United States, ^{[100] [55]} and it has even been argued that the EU is little more than an extension of a Europe reliant on or dominated by the United States. ^[101]

The European Union has been called a "regulatory superpower" due to the Brussels effect, which suggests that regulations and standards applicable in the EU will also be adopted by numerous countries outside the EU over time. ^{[102] [103] [104]}

India

Further information: Indian Century, Indianisation, Greater India, Indosphere, and Indomania

India has seen considerable coverage of its potential of becoming a superpower. Multiple opinions have pointed towards India's rapid economic development as a reason for it to be considered a potential superpower, in particular during the 2010s when it was predicted to outpace China's growth into the future. ^{[105] [106] [107] [108]}

Some commentators made the prediction of India becoming a superpower by 2020, most notably based on A. P. J. Abdul Kalam's book India 2020 . ^{[109] [110]} In 2019, BJP politician Amit Shah claimed that India would emerge as a superpower in the next 5 years under the rule of Narendra Modi. ^[111]

Economists and researchers at Harvard University have projected India's 7% projected annual growth rate through 2024 would continue to put it ahead of China, making India the fastest growing economy in the world. ^{[112] [113]} Over and above, India also has the advantage of having a very large and growing young population with a median age of 28, compared to China's median age of 39. ^[114] In 2003 Goldman Sachs predicted that India would become an economic superpower by 2050. ^[115] In a 2024 interview with The Independent, former UK PM Tony Blair predicted that by 2050 India would be a 'global superpower' along with the United States and China. ^[116] In 2025 Former UK PM Rishi Sunak suggested India is an 'economic superpower'. ^[117]

While India’s economic growth has continued, some analysts note that inequality remains high and that its trade potential is more limited compared to regional competitors such as China. Although India briefly became the world’s fastest-growing major economy in 2015, its growth rate has fallen below China’s since 2018. ^{[118] [119] [120] [121] [122]} From 2021, India has grown more than China, and remains the fastest growing major economy. ^{[123] [124] [125] [126] [127] [128]}

It has also been argued that India's government and bureaucracy is geared against emerging as a superpower, with it being argued that it "does very little collective thinking about its long-term foreign policy goals, since most of the strategic planning that takes place within the government happens on an individual level". ^[129]

Former superpowers

Russia / Soviet Union

Further information: Russia as an energy superpower and History of the Russian Federation

Russia, since its imperial times, has been considered both a great power and a regional power. Throughout most of the Soviet-era, the Soviet Union was one of the world's two superpowers. However, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Russian Federation as its successor state lost its superpower status. ^[130]

Dramatic changes occurred in the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc during the 1980s and early 1990s, with perestroika and glasnost , the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989, and finally the dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991. As early as 1970, Andrei Amalrik had made predictions of Soviet collapse, and Emmanuel Todd made a similar prediction in 1976. ^[131] Due to Russia's capabilities of conventional warfare during the Russian invasion of Ukraine Russia was compared to a "Potemkin Superpower" by Paul Krugman. ^[132] Russia is a nuclear-weapon state. ^[133]

In his 2005 publication entitled Russia in the 21st Century: The Prodigal Superpower, Steven Rosefielde, a professor of economics at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, predicted that Russia would emerge as a superpower before 2010 and augur another arms race. However, Rosefielde noted that such an end would come with tremendous sacrifice to global security and the Russian people's freedom. ^{[134] [ page needed ]}

Others however have put forward more pessimistic views towards Russia's ability to regain its superpower status. A mixed opinion has been offered by Matthew Fleischer of the Los Angeles Times , contending that severe climate change would be necessary for much of Russia's inherent natural resources to become viable. ^[135]

Several analysts commented on the fact that Russia showed signs of an aging and shrinking population. Fred Weir said that this severely constricts and limits Russia's potential to re-emerge as a central world power. ^[136] In 2011, British historian and professor Niall Ferguson also highlighted the negative effects of Russia's declining population, and suggested that Russia is on its way to "global irrelevance". ^[137] Russia has, however, shown a slight population growth since the late 2000s, partly due to immigration, quickly rising birth rates, slowly declining death rates. ^[138]

In the 21st century, many scholars view Russia's global influence as being in decline. ^{[139] [140]} Russia's ability to project hard power was also questioned following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, with the Russian military's poor performance prompting economist Paul Krugman to suggest Russia was little more than a "Potemkin Superpower". ^[132]

Increasing doubts have emerged in 2022 around the potential of Russia to gain superpower status given its declining economy, severe military underperformance during the invasion of Ukraine, and its loss of influence in Central Asia, a region once dominated by Moscow for centuries. ^{[141] [142] [143]}

British Empire

The Suez Crisis of 1956 is considered by some commentators to be the beginning of the end of Britain's period as a superpower, ^{[144] [145] [146]} but other commentators have pointed earlier such as the postwar Age of Austerity, the Anglo-American loan of 1946, the Winter of 1946–47, and the independence of British India as other key points ^{[147] [ failed verification ]} in Britain's decline and loss of superpower status.

The Suez Crisis in particular is regarded by historians to be a political and diplomatic disaster for the British Empire, as it led to large-scale international condemnation, including extensive pressure from the United States and Soviet Union. This forced the British and the French to withdraw in embarrassment and cemented the increasingly-bipolar Cold War politics between the Soviet Union and United States. In the 1960s, the movement for decolonization reached its peak, with remaining imperial holdings achieving independence, accelerating the transition from the British Empire to the Commonwealth of Nations. As the Empire continued to crumble, the home islands of the United Kingdom later experienced deindustrialization throughout the 1970s, coupled with high inflation and industrial unrest that unraveled the postwar consensus. This led to some economists to refer to Britain as the Sick Man of Europe. In 1976, the United Kingdom had to seek assistance from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) which it had previously ironically helped create, receiving funding of $3.9 billion, the largest-ever loan to be requested up until that point. ^{[148] [149]} In 1979, the country suffered major widespread strikes known as the Winter of Discontent. All these factors were seen by academics, economists and politicians as symbolising Britain's postwar decline. Lastly, the Handover of Hong Kong to China in July 1997 was seen by experts as the definitive end of the British Empire.

Nevertheless, the United Kingdom today has retained global soft power in the 21st century. Its capital city, London, continues to be regarded as one of the pre-eminent cities in the world, being ranked as a global city by the Mori Foundation. ^[150] In 2022, the United Kingdom was ranked the foremost European country in terms of soft power by Brand Finance. ^[151] The United Kingdom also retains a formidable military and is one of the recognized nuclear-weapons states.

Comparative statistics

Country/Union	Population [152] [153]	Area (km2)	GDP (nominal) [154]		GDP (PPP) [154]		Military expenditures (Int$ billion) [155]	HDI [156]	UN Security Council veto power
			(USD million)	Per capita ($)	(Int$ million)	Per capita (Int$)
China	1,411,778,724	9,596,961	19,231,705	13,687	39,440,000	21,291	314	0.797 (high)	Yes
European Union	449,206,209	4,233,262	19,991,535	44,387	28,044,742	53,960	337.8 [157]	0.915 (very high)	(France)
Russia	144,458,123	17,125,191	2,076,396	14,258	7,130,000	49,383	149	0.832 (very high)	Yes
India	1,456,604,163	3,287,263	4,187,017	2,878	17,360,000	10,475	86.1	0.685 (medium)	No
United States	346,238,081	9,525,067	30,507,217	89,105	30,337,162	75,180	997	0.938 (very high)	Yes

Superpower disengagement

Superpower disengagement is a foreign policy option whereby the most powerful nations, the superpowers, reduce their interventions in an area. Such disengagement could be multilateral among superpowers or lesser powers, or bilateral between two superpowers, or unilateral. It could mean an end to either direct or indirect interventions. For instance, disengagement could mean that the superpowers remove their support of proxies in proxy wars to de-escalate a superpower conflict back to a local problem based on local disputes. Disengagement can create buffers between superpowers that might prevent conflicts or reduce the intensity of conflicts.^{[ citation needed ]}

The term usually refers to various policy proposals during the Cold War which attempted to defuse tensions between the Soviet Union and the United States, largely because of the risk of any superpower conflict to escalate to nuclear war. Examples of one-sided disengagement include when Joseph Stalin decided to end Soviet support for the communist guerrillas in Greece during the Greek Civil War, and when Richard Nixon withdrew US troops from Vietnam in the early 1970s.^{[ citation needed ]}

The more important candidates for disengagement were where Soviet and US forces faced each other directly such as in Germany and Austria. The Austrian State Treaty is an example of formal, multilateral, superpower disengagement which left Austria as neutral for the duration of the Cold War, with Austria staying out of the Warsaw Pact, NATO, and the European Economic Community. The 1952 Stalin Note is perhaps the most controversial proposal of superpower disengagement from Germany. ^{[158] [159]}

Proposed early superpowers

These are proposed examples of ancient or historical superpowers, taking into account that the knowledge of what the "known world" comprised was extremely limited in past eras (for example, Europeans became aware of the existence of the Americas and Australia only after the Age of Discovery, which began in the late 15th century, and prior to this era, they had a very limited knowledge about East Asia as well). ^[160]

Archaic globalization (before 1500)

Main article: Archaic globalization

Many of the nations of this historical period were never superpowers, however they were regional powers with influence in their respective regions.

Note: Does not take into account city-states and stateless nomadic peoples.

Bronze Age

Fertile Crescent in the Early Bronze Age

In the early history of both regions contact between these civilization was very limited, long distance trade definitely occurred but primarily through long chains of intermediaries rather than directly.

• Akkadian Empire (isolated civilization; first empire recorded in history)
• Old Kingdom of Egypt (isolated civilization)

Fertile Crescent in the Middle Bronze Age

Regular contact between Egypt, Mesopotamia and Anatolia dates from this period. Mitanni was an important intermediary in the trade between these civilizations.

• Old Assyrian Empire
• Old Babylonian Empire
• Middle Kingdom of Egypt
• Kingdom of Mitanni
• Hittite Empire

Fertile Crescent and Mediterranean Sea in the Late Bronze Age

Known by the Minoans and Mycenaean Greeks:

• New Kingdom of Egypt ^[161]
• Hittite Empire ^[162]

Indian subcontinent

Contact with other civilizations was very limited; long distance trade with Mesopotamia definitely occurred but primarily through long chains of intermediaries rather than directly.

• Indus Valley Civilisation (isolated civilization, no consensus on whether it was a unified state or not)

East Asia

• Shang Kingdom (isolated civilization)
• Zhou Kingdom (isolated civilization)

Mesoamerica

• Olmec civilization (isolated civilization, little information about their type of government)

Andes

• Caral–Supe civilization (isolated civilization, little information about their type of government)

Classical antiquity

Indian subcontinent

• Magadha Empire (one of the 16 Mahajanapadas, isolated civilizations before contact with the Persians)

Known world by the ancient Greeks before the Hellenistic period

• Kushite Empire (Twenty-fifth Dynasty of Egypt)
• Neo-Assyrian Empire ^{[163] [164]}
• Neo-Babylonian Empire ^[165]
• Achaemenid Empire (Persia) ^[166]
• Macedonian Empire ^[167]

Known world by the ancient Romans in their republican era

The Drachma, minted by many states, most notably in the Ptolemaic Egypt was the reserve currency in the Mediterranean and Near East

• Carthaginian Republic ^[168]
• Roman Republic ^[169]
• Ptolemaic Egypt
• Seleucid Empire
• Parthian Empire (Persia)
• Maurya Empire (not fully known by Europeans, that only known frontier regions and later northern regions) ^{[170] [171]}

Known world by the ancient Romans in their imperial era

Main reserve currency in the Mediterranean and Near East: Roman Denarius, later replaced by the Roman Solidus.

• Roman Empire
• Parthian Empire (Persia)
• Sasanid Empire (Persia)
• Aksumite Empire
• Gupta Empire ^[172]

East Asia

Not fully known outside East Asia. The West knew of these powers because of the Silk Road, although little information reached them.

• Han Empire ^[173]
• Xiongnu Empire

Mesoamerica

Isolated civilizations in relation to the Afro-Eurasia.

• Olmec civilization (little information about their type of government)
• Zapotec civilization (little information about their type of government in this time period)
• Teotihuacán (little information about their type of government)

Andes

Isolated civilization in relation to Afro-Eurasia.

• Chavín Civilization (little information about their type of government)

Post-Classical Age

Known world by Medieval Europeans and Middle Easterners

Main reserve currency in the Mediterranean and Near East: Roman Solidus, later replaced by the Dinar, minted by the Caliphates.

• Eastern Roman Empire
• Carolingian Empire (Arabs, Persians, East Asians used "Franks" as a generic name for Europeans. Due to feudalism, Western European powers with influence outside Europe did not emerge in the remainder of the Middle Ages)
• The Caliphates: Rashidun Caliphate, Umayyad Caliphate, ^[174] Fatimid Caliphate and Abbasid Caliphate
• Sultanate of Mogadishu (Known by Arabs, Europeans and East Asians)
• Persia (Sassanid Empire, Ilkhanate and the Timurid Empire) (known by Europeans, Indians and East Asians)
• Ethiopian Empire (known by the Arabs, Indians, Europeans and later by the Chinese)
• Indian empires: Chola Empire and Delhi Sultanate
• Mongol Empire (known by Eurasians)
• Chinese empires: Tang Empire (known by East Asians, Indians and Middle Easterners but not by Europeans in detailed way), ^[175] Song Empire (known by the Europeans in its very last years), ^[176] Yuan Empire, Ming Empire

Sub-Saharan Africa

During the Middle Ages the region was known by Arab merchants. Europeans were aware that the region existed (to the point that Mansa Musa was mentioned in the Catalan Atlas), but little information about the place reached Europe.

• Ghana Empire (known by Arabs)
• Mali Empire (known by Arabs and Europeans)
• Songhai Empire (known by Arabs)
• Kingdom of Zimbabwe and Kingdom of Mutapa (known by Arabs and Asians. Contact with Europeans only after 1500)

Mesoamerica

Isolated civilization in relation to the Afro-Eurasia.

• Toltec Empire
• Purépecha Empire
• Aztec Empire

South America

Isolated civilizations in relation to the Afro-Eurasia.

• Wari Empire
• Tiwanaku Empire
• Inca Empire

Proto-globalization (1500–1800)

Main article: Proto-globalization

The  Age of Discovery  brought a broad change in globalization, being the first period in which previously isolated parts of the world became connected to form the  world system, and the first colonial empires of the early modern age emerged, such as the Portuguese, Spanish, Dutch and French empires. ^{[177] [178] [179]} The British Empire, after its Glorious Revolution in 1688 and its pioneering role in the industrialization process in the 18th century would lead to its global hegemony in the 19th century and early 20th century (before the World War I). ^{[14] [180]}

The contact between distant civilizations was highly facilitated as well as the mapping of a large part of the planet, with people in this historical period having a better understanding of the global map of the Planet Earth. ^[181]

• Portuguese Empire (main reserve currency from c.1450 to 1530: Portuguese real)
• Spanish Empire (main reserve currency from 1530 to 1640: Spanish dollar) ^{[182] [183]}
• Dutch Empire (main reserve currency from 1640 to 1720: Dutch guilder)
• French colonial Empire ^{[184] [185]} (main reserve currency from 1720 to 1815: Livre tournois and French franc) ^[186]
• British Empire ^[187]
• Ottoman Empire ^[188]
• Habsburg empire during the reign of Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor ^[189]

Modern globalization (1800–1945)

Main article: Modern globalization

• British Empire (main reserve currency from 1815 to 1920: Pound sterling) ^{[190] [191]}
• First French Empire of Napoleon I and Second French Colonial Empire ^[192]

According to historical statistics and research from the OECD, until the early modern period, Western Europe, China, and India accounted for roughly two thirds of the world's GDP. ^[193]

See also

• Politics portal
• World portal

• American Century
• ASEAN
• Asian Century
• BRIC (economics term)
• BRICS
• Chinese Century
• Emerging power
• Energy superpower
• Eurasian Economic Union
• Great power
• Group of Two
• Historic recurrence
• Hyperpower
• Indian Century
• International relations theory
• List of countries in Europe by military expenditures
• List of modern great powers
• Megacorporation (the business equivalent of a powerful nation)
• Mercosur
• Microstate
• Middle power
• Post–Cold War era
• Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership
• Regional power
• Second Cold War
• Second superpower
• Small power
• Soviet empire
• South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation
• Superpower collapse

References

1. Munro, André. "superpower". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 2 May 2023.
2. Leonard, Mark (18 February 2005). "Europe: the new superpower". Irish Times . Archived from the original on 27 March 2009. Retrieved 31 May 2015.
3. McCormick, John (2007). The European Superpower. Palgrave Macmillan.
4. Hall, H. Duncan (October 1944). "The Super-Powers; The United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union—Their Responsibility for Peace. By William T. R. Fox. (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company. 1944. Pp. 162. $2.00.)" . American Political Science Review . 38 (5). cambridge.org: 1013–1015. doi:10.2307/1949612. ISSN   0003-0554. JSTOR   1949612 . Retrieved 2 September 2013.
5. Bremer, Ian (28 May 2015). "These Are the 5 Reasons Why the U.S. Remains the World's Only Superpower". Time . Archived from the original on 9 June 2019. Retrieved 18 November 2024.
6. Herring, George C. (2008). From colony to superpower. Internet Archive. Oxford University Press. ISBN   978-0-19-507822-0.
7. Nossal, Kim Richard. Lonely Superpower or Unapologetic Hyperpower? Analyzing American Power in the post–Cold War Era. Biennial meeting, South African Political Studies Association, 29 June-2 July 1999. Archived from the original on 7 August 2012. Retrieved 28 February 2007.
8. Lind, Jennifer (12 December 2025). "The Multipolar Mirage: Why America and China Are the World's Only Great Powers" – via Foreign Affairs.
9. "The Debate – Macron in the middle? French president in China amid superpower showdown". France 24 . 5 April 2023. Retrieved 9 April 2023.
10. Simon, Kuper. "There are only two global superpowers left". Financial Times .
11. Eaglen, Mackenzie (6 June 2023). "It's Time to Retire the Term "Near-Peer" Competitor When It Comes to China". AEI.
12. "China poses "biggest geopolitical test" for the U.S., Blinken says". NBC News. 3 March 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2024.
13. Paul Kennedy (1987), The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers
14. Dellios, Rosita. "China: The 21st Century Superpower?" (PDF). Casa Asia. Retrieved 27 August 2010.
15. Maddison, Angus (2001). The World Economy: A Millennial Perspective. Paris: OECD. pp. 98, 242.
16. Miller, Lyman. "www.stanford.edu". stanford.edu. Archived from the original on 11 May 2014. Retrieved 27 August 2010.
17. "The Superpowers – A Short History". 8 December 2008. Archived from the original on 8 December 2008.
18. Dreyer, June Teufel (February 2007). "Chinese Foreign Policy" (PDF). Footnotes. Vol. 12, no. 5. Foreign Policy Research Institute. Archived from the original (PDF) on 30 September 2023. Retrieved 31 May 2015.
19. Bremmer, Ian (2015). Superpower: Three Choices for America's Role in the World. New York: Portfolio (Penguin Group). ISBN   978-1591847472. Archived from the original on 29 April 2018.
20. Cambridge (1995). The New Cambridge Medieval History. Vol. 1: c.500 – c.700. Cambridge University Press. p. 323. ISBN   9780521362917 – via Google Books.
21. Adam Klug and Gregor W. Smith, 'Suez and Sterling', Explorations in Economic History, Vol. 36, No. 3 (July 1999), pp. 181–203.
22. "Getting Serious About the Twin Deficits "by Author: Menzie D. Chinn – September 2005 by Council on Foreign Relations Press Archived 2 April 2012 at the Wayback Machine
23. The Cold War: The Geography of Containment Gary E. Oldenburger by Oldenburger Independent Studies; December 2002
24. Robert Frazier, 'Did Britain Start the Cold War? Bevin and the Truman Doctrine', Historical Journal, Vol. 27, No. 3 (Sep. 1984), pp. 715–727.
25. "Ideology and the Cold War", by Mark Kramer 1999
26. Conflicts of Superpower by Signal Alpha News Achieve Press 2005
27. Economic Interests, Party, and Ideology in Early Cold War Era U.S. Foreign Policy Archived 28 September 2012 at the Wayback Machine Benjamin O. Fordham by World Peace Foundation; Massachusetts Institute of Technology April 1998
28. Henry Kissinger, Diplomacy , pp. 24, 26
29. Charles Krauthammer, The Unipolar Moment, Foreign Policy Magazine (1991).
30. "www.gaikoforum.com" (PDF). Retrieved 27 August 2010.
31. Country profile: United States of America, BBC News. Retrieved 11 March 2007.
32. Huntington, Samuel P. (27 April 2006). "The Lonely Superpower". Foreign Affairs. Archived from the original on 27 April 2006.
33. Schwenninger, Sherle (5 December 2003). "The Multipolar World Vs. The Superpower". The Globalist. Archived from the original on 13 June 2006. Retrieved 10 June 2006.
34. Von Drehle, David (5 March 2006). "The Multipolar Unilateralist". The Washington Post. Retrieved 10 June 2006.
35. "No Longer the "Lone" Superpower" . Retrieved 11 June 2006.
36. Henry C K Liu (5 April 2003). "The war that may end the age of superpower". Asia Times. Archived from the original on 6 April 2003. Retrieved 11 June 2006.
37. Burrows, Mathew (December 2012). Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds (PDF) (Report) (5th ed.). National Intelligence Council. p. 8. ISBN   978-1-929667-21-5. NIC 2012-001. Archived (PDF) from the original on 13 January 2026. Retrieved 18 January 2026.
38. Unger J (2008), U.S. no longer superpower, now a besieged global power, scholars say Archived 29 June 2010 at the Wayback Machine University of Illinois
39. Almond, Steve (22 August 2007). "Seizing American supremacy". Salon.com. Retrieved 27 August 2010.
40. Martinez-Diaz, Leonardo (28 April 2007). "U.S.: A Losing Superpower?". Brookings.edu. Archived from the original on 2 June 2010. Retrieved 27 August 2010.
41. Dobbins, James; Shatz, Howard; Wyne, Ali (2018). Russia Is a Rogue, Not a Peer; China Is a Peer, Not a Rogue: Different Challenges, Different Responses (Report). RAND Corporation.
42. Maher, Paul J; Igou, Eric R; van Tilburg, Wijnand A.P. (16 January 2018). "Brexit, Trump, and the Polarizing Effect of Disillusionment". Social Psychological and Personality Science. 9 (2). Sage Journals: 205–213. doi:10.1177/1948550617750737. hdl: 10344/6667 . S2CID   149195975.
43. Janjevic, Darko (18 September 2018). "Vladimir Putin and Viktor Orban's special relationship". Deutsche Welle.
44. King, Winnie (22 March 2019). "Italy joins China's Belt and Road Initiative – here's how it exposes cracks in Europe and the G7". The Conversation.
45. Todd, Constable, 2001
46. French, Howard W. "America Is Losing Its Value Proposition". Foreign Policy. Retrieved 1 November 2022.
47. Kokas, Aynne (15 January 2021). "The Soft War That America Is Losing". Stanford University. Retrieved 1 November 2022.
48. Cordesman, Anthony (1 October 2019). "China and the United States: Cooperation, Competition, and/or Conflict". Center for Strategic and International Studies. Retrieved 22 March 2021. Seen from this perspective, such trends clearly that show that China already is a true economic superpower with growing resources and a steadily improving technology base. Its military structure is evolving to the point where China can compare or compete with the U.S. — at least in Asia.
49. Silver, Laura; Devlin, Kat; Huang, Christine (5 December 2019). "China's Economic Growth Mostly Welcomed in Emerging Markets, but Neighbors Wary of Its Influence". Pew Research Center. Retrieved 22 March 2021. China has emerged as a global economic superpower in recent decades. It is not only the world's second largest economy and the largest exporter by value, but it has also been investing in overseas infrastructure and development at a rapid clip
50. Lendon, Brad (5 March 2021). "China has built the world's largest navy. Now what's Beijing going to do with it?". CNN. Retrieved 22 March 2021. In 2018, China held 40% of the world's shipbuilding market by gross tons, according to United Nations figures cited by the China Power Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, well ahead of second place South Korea at 25%. Put in a historical perspective, China's shipbuilding numbers are staggering – dwarfing even the U.S. efforts of World War II. China built more ships in one year of peace time (2019) than the U.S. did in four of war (1941–1945).
51. Lemahieu, Herve (29 May 2019). "Five big takeaways from the 2019 Asia Power Index". Lowy Institute. Archived from the original on 24 July 2021. Retrieved 22 March 2021. China, the emerging superpower, netted the highest gains in overall power in 2019, ranking first in half of the eight Index measures. For the first time, China narrowly edged out the United States in the Index's assessment of economic resources. In absolute terms China's economy grew by more than the total size of Australia's economy in 2018. The world's largest trading nation has also paradoxically seen its GDP become less dependent on exports. This makes China less vulnerable to an escalating trade war than most other Asian economies.
52. "China poses "biggest geopolitical test" for the U.S., Blinken says". NBC News. 3 March 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2024.
53. "From Rural Transformation to Global Integration: The Environmental and Social Impacts of China's Rise to Superpower – Carnegie Endowment for International Peace". 9 February 2006. Archived from the original on 16 March 2012. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
54. Uckert, Merri B. (April 1995). "China As An Economic and Military Superpower: A Dangerous Combination?" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 15 January 2013. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
55. Buzan, Barry (2004). The United States and the Great Powers. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Polity Press. p. 70. ISBN   0-7456-3375-7.
56. "Visions of China – Asian Superpower". CNN. 1999. Archived from the original on 27 July 2001. Retrieved 19 July 2014.
57. "China's military presence is growing. Does a superpower collision loom?". The Guardian. 1 January 2014. Retrieved 19 July 2014.
58. "China as a global power". China.usc.edu. 13 November 2007. Archived from the original on 31 March 2009. Retrieved 27 August 2010.
59. Minxin Pei (20 March 2012). "The Loneliest Superpower". Foreign Policy. Archived from the original on 5 May 2021. Retrieved 28 June 2014.
60. Beardson, Timothy (28 June 2013). "I don't see China becoming a superpower in this century". The Times Of India. Archived from the original on 5 March 2016.
61. Susan Shirk (2008). China: Fragile Superpower . Oxford University Press. ISBN   978-0-19-537319-6.
62. Economy, Elizabeth C. (2010). The River Runs Black: The Environmental Challenge to China's Future. A Council on Foreign Relations Book. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. ISBN   978-0-8014-7613-6.
63. Amy Chua (2007). Day of Empire: How Hyperpowers Rise to Global Dominance – and Why They Fall. Random House. ISBN   978-0-385-51284-8.
64. Swain, Ashok (21 January 2021). "China's economy and military can overtake US, but it still won't become global superpower". ThePrint. Retrieved 12 July 2024.
65. "Today's China will never be a superpower". www.ft.com. 27 May 2019. Retrieved 12 July 2024.
66. Bekkevold, Jo Inge. "Why China Is Not a Superpower". Foreign Policy . Retrieved 9 April 2023.
67. Schuman, Michael (5 October 2020). "What Happens When China Leads the World". The Atlantic . Retrieved 9 April 2023.
68. Saloway, Scott (24 January 2020). "China will replace the US as the world's biggest superpower by 2030: UBS survey". Yahoo Finance (UBS).
69. Yuanan, Zhang (31 July 2013). "Why China Is Still No Superpower". Archived from the original on 14 March 2014. Retrieved 14 March 2014.
70. "What Americans Think About American Power Today". Carnegie Endowment. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Retrieved 2 February 2026.
71. Allen-Ebrahimian, Bethany (1 April 2015). "Obama Is Sitting Alone at a Bar Drinking a Consolation Beer". Foreign Policy .
72. Aboulafia, Richard (20 March 2019). "Boeing's Crisis Strengthens Beijing's Hand". Foreign Policy .
73. Tunsjø, Øystein (27 February 2018). The Return of Bipolarity in World Politics: China, the United States, and Geostructural Realism. Columbia University Press. ISBN   9780231546904.
74. Thair Shaikh (10 June 2011). "When Will China Become a Global Superpower?". CNN. Archived from the original on 11 March 2012. Retrieved 28 June 2014.
75. Lee, Kai-Fu (25 September 2018). AI Superpowers: China, Silicon Valley, and the New World Order . Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
76. Westerheide, Fabian. "China – The First Artificial Intelligence Superpower". Forbes. Retrieved 19 July 2024.
77. Milmo, Dan (8 December 2021). "TechScape: how China became an AI superpower ready to take on the United States". Global technology. The Guardian. ISSN   0261-3077 . Retrieved 19 July 2024.
78. Sullivan, Ian (8 May 2025). "How China Fights in Large-Scale Combat Operations". U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC).
79. Khanna, Parag (27 January 2008). "Waving Goodbye to Hegemony". The New York Times . Retrieved 19 July 2014.
80. Ashley Townshend, Brendan Thomas-Noone, Matilda Steward (19 August 2019). Averting Crisis: American strategy, military spending and collective defence in the Indo-Pacific. United States Studies Centre (Report).
81. Meredith, R (2008) The Elephant and the Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What it Means for All of Us, "W.W Norton and Company" ISBN   978-0-393-33193-6
82. Biswas, Soutik (13 March 2012). "Why India Will Not Become a Superpower". BBC India . Retrieved 29 April 2012.
83. dmalloy (15 June 2023). "The world's regulatory superpower is taking on a regulatory nightmare: artificial intelligence". Atlantic Council. Retrieved 15 September 2023.
84. kdaponte (24 May 2023). "Meta fine shows EU is 'regulatory superpower,' Northeastern expert says". College of Social Sciences and Humanities. Retrieved 15 September 2023.
85. Bradford, Anu (1 March 2020). "The Brussels Effect: How the European Union Rules the World" . Faculty Books. doi:10.1093/oso/9780190088583.001.0001. ISBN   978-0-19-008858-3.
86. Smith, Dennis B. (1995), Smith, Dennis B. (ed.), "The Emergence of the Economic Superpower: 1980 to the Present" , Japan since 1945: The Rise of an Economic Superpower, London: Macmillan Education UK, pp. 138–169, doi:10.1007/978-1-349-24126-2_6, ISBN   978-1-349-24126-2 , retrieved 10 July 2024
87. "Japan From Superrich To Superpower". Time . 4 July 1988.
88. Kreisberg, Paul (11 December 1988). "Japan: A Superpower Minus Military Power". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 10 July 2024.
89. Zakaria, Fareed (2008). The Post-American World . W. W. Norton and Company. p.  210. ISBN   978-0-393-06235-9.
90. "Land of the setting sun". The Economist. 12 November 2009.
91. Leika Kihara (17 August 2012). "Japan eyes end to decades long deflation". Reuters. Retrieved 7 September 2012.
92. "Japan was the future but it's stuck in the past". 20 January 2023. Retrieved 10 July 2024.
93. "Europe: the new superpower". CER. 18 February 2005. Retrieved 28 May 2014.
94. John McCormick (14 November 2006). The European Superpower. Macmillan Education UK. ISBN   978-1-4039-9846-0.
95. Europe in the New Century: Visions of an Emerging Superpower . Lynne Rienner Publishers. 2001. ISBN   9781555878528 . Retrieved 10 February 2012. Europe emerging superpower.
96. Trevor Williams (29 October 2008). "Danish Envoy: Economic Strength Makes EU a 'Rising Superpower'". Globalatlanta. Retrieved 19 July 2014.
97. Robert Lane Greene (18 July 2003). "EU Constitution: A 'Superpower Europe' It Won't Be". Globalpolicy.org. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
98. Colin S. Gray, "Document No. 1: The Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), 2006, and the Perils of the Twenty-First Century," Comparative Strategy, 25/2, (2006): p 143.
99. Adrian Hyde-Price (23 October 2004). "The EU, Power and Coercion: From 'Civilian' to 'Civilising' Power" (PDF). ARENA Centre for European Studies. Archived from the original (PDF) on 26 March 2009.
100. "Europe vs. America by Tony Judt". The New York Review of Books. 10 February 2005. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
101. Zbigniew Brzezinski, Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power, (New York: Basic Books, 2012), p 22, 126.
102. dmalloy (15 June 2023). "The world's regulatory superpower is taking on a regulatory nightmare: artificial intelligence". Atlantic Council. Retrieved 15 September 2023.
103. kdaponte (24 May 2023). "Meta fine shows EU is 'regulatory superpower,' Northeastern expert says". College of Social Sciences and Humanities. Retrieved 15 September 2023.
104. Bradford, Anu (1 March 2020). "The Brussels Effect: How the European Union Rules the World" . Faculty Books. doi:10.1093/oso/9780190088583.001.0001. ISBN   978-0-19-008858-3.
105. Dingman, Michael (9 January 2011). "India 2025: What kind of superpower?". The Economic Times . Bennett, Coleman & Co. Ltd. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
106. "India will be the biggest superpower". Rediff. 2006. Retrieved 19 July 2014.
107. Subramanian, Samanth (1 May 2012). "The Outlier:The inscrutable politics of Subramanian Swamy". The Caravan: A Journal of Politics & Culture. Retrieved 29 March 2018.
108. Zakaria, Fareed (5 March 2006). "India Rising". Newsweek. Retrieved 2 August 2014.
109. "India and the World: Looking into 2021". OpenAxis. 10 December 2020. Retrieved 9 May 2025.
110. Bhagat, Chetan. "Let this be India's goal for this decade — $5,000 per capita income by 2030". The Times of India. ISSN   0971-8257 . Retrieved 9 May 2025.
111. "India will become 'superpower' if Modi becomes PM again: Shah". www.business-standard.com. Business Standard. Archived from the original on 11 October 2024. Retrieved 9 May 2025.
112. "New Growth Projections Predict the Rise of India, East Africa and Fall of Oil Economies". Harvard Kennedy School. 7 May 2015. Archived from the original on 8 May 2016. Retrieved 12 April 2016.
113. Zhong, Raymond (1 January 2016). "India Will Be Fastest-Growing Economy for Coming Decade, Harvard Researchers Predict". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 12 April 2016.
114. Silver, Laura; Huang, Christine; Clancy, Laura (9 February 2023). "Key facts as India surpasses China as the world's most populous country". Pew Research Center. Retrieved 23 February 2024.
115. "Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to 2050". www.goldmansachs.com. Archived from the original on 14 February 2025. Retrieved 9 May 2025.
116. "Can India become the world's third superpower?". The Independent. 1 January 2025. Retrieved 9 May 2025.
117. "'India clearly an economic superpower': Former UK PM Rishi Sunak on US tariffs, trade, and global power shifts". The Financial Express. 18 October 2025. Retrieved 21 October 2025.
118. Khanna, Parag (27 January 2008). "Waving Goodbye to Hegemony". The New York Times . Retrieved 10 February 2012.
119. Khanna, Parag (18 May 2008). "The Rise of Non-Americanism". New America Foundation. Archived from the original on 29 June 2011. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
120. Pritchett, Lant (2009). "A Review of Edward Luce's 'In Spite of the Gods: The Strange Rise of Modern India'". Journal of Economic Literature. 47 (3): 771–081. doi:10.1257/jel.47.3.771.
121. "India to beat China again as fastest-growing economy in 2016: IMF". The Economic Times . Bennett, Coleman & Co. Ltd. 9 July 2015. Archived from the original on 17 July 2015. Retrieved 20 November 2015.
122. "India loses place as world's fastest-growing economy". BBC News. 31 May 2019. Retrieved 18 October 2020.
123. "https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDP_RPCH@WEO/IND/CHN". www.imf.org. Retrieved 1 November 2025.{{cite web}}: External link in |title= (help)
124. "India vs. China: a growth perspective". CaixaBank Research. 16 July 2025. Retrieved 14 December 2025.
125. "India | World Bank Group". www.worldbank.org. Retrieved 14 December 2025.
126. "Client Challenge". www.ft.com. Retrieved 14 December 2025.
127. "India Remains The Fastest Growing Economy: Morgan Stanley". www.ndtv.com. Archived from the original on 1 August 2025. Retrieved 14 December 2025.
128. Hernandez-Vila, Ivan (13 November 2025). "India Will be World's Fastest Growing Economy in 2026: Analysts" . Retrieved 14 December 2025.
129. Miller, Manjari Chatterjee (May–June 2013). "India's Feeble Foreign Policy". Foreign Affairs. 92 (3): 14–18. Retrieved 27 June 2013.
130. Minkina, Mirosław (30 September 2019). "Russia's return to the superpower status". Security and Defence Quarterly. 26 (4): 34–50. doi:10.35467/sdq/110335. hdl: 11331/2402 . ISSN   2300-8741.
131. The final fall, Todd, 1976
132. Paul Krugman (28 February 2022). "Russia Is a Potemkin Superpower". New York Times . Archived from the original on 1 March 2022. Retrieved 1 March 2022.
133. William H, Boothby (10 March 2016). "13 Nuclear Weapons" . Weapons and the Law of Armed Conflict: 208–216. doi:10.1093/law/9780198728504.003.0013. ISBN   978-0-19-872850-4.
134. Steven Rosefielde (February 2005). Russia in the 21st Century. UNC Press. ISBN   978-0-521-54529-7.
135. Matthew Fleischer (12 March 2014). "How curbing climate change can prevent Russia from becoming a superpower". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 7 July 2014.
136. Fred Weir (3 November 2011). "Despite huge cash bonuses to mothers, Russia's population is shrinking". GlobalPost. Retrieved 8 July 2014.
137. Niall Ferguson (12 December 2011). "In Decline, Putin's Russia Is On Its Way to Global Irrelevance". Newsweek . Retrieved 2 August 2014.
138. Mark Adomanis (11 May 2013). "Russia's Population Isn't Shrinking (It's Growing Very, Very Slowly)". Forbes. Archived from the original on 9 June 2013. Retrieved 8 July 2014.
139. Taylor, Brian D. (2024). "Power, status, and greatness". Russian Politics: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. pp. 21–40. doi:10.1093/actrade/9780197516027.003.0002. ISBN   978-0-19-751602-7. Although the lines sometimes can be blurry, there are only three countries in the world that international relations experts typically classify as having been a great power for the past 300 years: Britain, France, and Russia... Russia's geographic size, nuclear weapons, and permanent UN Security Council seat guarantee its continuing great power status... Yet the greater economic power of the United States, the European Union, and China, as well as rising countries... meant that Russia's future standing in the world remained in doubt even before the Russo-Ukraine War.
140. Šćepanović, Janko (22 March 2023). "Still a great power? Russia's status dilemmas post-Ukraine war". Journal of Contemporary European Studies. 32 (1). Informa UK Limited: 80–95. doi:10.1080/14782804.2023.2193878. ISSN   1478-2804. Drezner, as well as others like Dan Depetris, agrees that, on principle, Russia can still be counted among the great powers... At the same time, scholars rightly wonder what rank within the great power club Russia belongs to...
141. Gamble, Hadley (20 May 2017). "EU foreign policy chief dismisses Russia's superpower status, doubts Trump will pay Syria bill". CNBC. Retrieved 3 August 2023.
142. Krugman, Paul (1 March 2022). "View: Russia is a Potemkin superpower. The Ukrainian invasion has made that clear". The New York Times. The Economic Times. Retrieved 3 August 2023.
143. Von Drehle, David (15 March 2022). "War proves that Russia is no longer a superpower". The Washington Post. Retrieved 3 August 2023.
144. Brown, Derek (14 March 2001). "1956: Suez and the end of empire". The Guardian. London.
145. Reynolds, Paul (24 July 2006). "Suez: End of empire". BBC News.
146. History's worst decisions and the people who made them, pp. 167–172
147. "United Kingdom | History, Geography, Facts, & Points of Interest". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 17 April 2019.
148. "National Archives" . Retrieved 17 December 2015.
149. "Sterling devalued and the IMF loan". The National Archives. Retrieved 17 December 2015.
150. "Global Power City Index 2020". The Mori Memorial Foundation. Retrieved 2 June 2021.
151. "Global Soft Power Index 2022: USA bounces back better to top of nation brand ranking". brandfinance.com. 15 March 2022. Retrieved 1 April 2022.
152. Population by country on July 2017 Est. The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency , Retrieved 10 May 2018
153. Population in EU (28) on 1 January 2017 Eurostat
154. "World Economic Outlook Database, April 2021". IMF. Retrieved 23 July 2021.
155. "Trends in world military expenditure-2022" (PDF). SIPRI. April 2023.
156. Nations, United (6 May 2025). Human Development Report 2025 (Report). United Nations.
157. "EU defence spending hits new records in 2023, 2024". eda.europa.eu. Retrieved 12 February 2025.
158. Layne, Christopher (1989). "Superpower Disengagement" . Foreign Policy (77): 17–40. doi:10.2307/1148767. ISSN   0015-7228. JSTOR   1148767 . Retrieved 2 February 2024.
159. Schwarz, Benjamin (11 July 2018). "It's Time to Disrupt NATO". The Nation . Retrieved 2 February 2024.
160. "Age of Discovery". Google Arts & Culture. Retrieved 5 July 2024.
161. McDonald, Angela (10 January 2017). Ancient Egypt. National Geographic Books. ISBN   978-1-4654-5753-0. OCLC   966861438.
162. Giusfredi, Federico (11 January 2016). "Hittite Empire" . The Encyclopedia of Empire. Oxford, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. pp. 1–7. doi:10.1002/9781118455074.wbeoe265. ISBN   9781118455074 . Retrieved 27 December 2022.
163. "The rise of the Neo-Assyrian empire" , The Ancient Near East, Routledge, pp. 499–520, 4 December 2013, doi:10.4324/9781315879895-41, ISBN   978-1-315-87989-5 , retrieved 27 December 2022
164. Siddall, Luis R. (13 November 2019), "The Nature of Siege Warfare in the Neo-Assyrian Period" , Brill's Companion to Sieges in the Ancient Mediterranean, BRILL, pp. 35–52, doi:10.1163/9789004413740_004, ISBN   9789004413740, S2CID   214558514 , retrieved 27 December 2022
165. Fantalkin, Alexander (1 December 2017). "In Defense of Nebuchadnezzar II the Warrior" . Altorientalische Forschungen. 44 (2). doi:10.1515/aofo-2017-0014. ISSN   2196-6761. S2CID   165967543.
166. Kuhrt, Amélie (14 February 2014), "State Communications in the Persian Empire" , State Correspondence in the Ancient World, Oxford University Press, pp. 112–140, doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199354771.003.0006, ISBN   978-0-19-935477-1 , retrieved 27 December 2022
167. "Alexander and his empire" , Conquest and Empire, Cambridge University Press, pp. 229–258, 26 March 1993, doi:10.1017/cbo9780511518539.006, ISBN   9780521406796 , retrieved 27 December 2022
168. Miles, Richard (2011). "Carthage: A Mediterranean Superpower" . Historically Speaking. 12 (4): 35–37. doi:10.1353/hsp.2011.0059. ISSN   1944-6438. S2CID   162227777.
169. "How Rome fell: death of a superpower". Choice Reviews Online. 47 (7): 47–3968-47-3968. 1 March 2010. doi:10.5860/choice.47-3968 (inactive 1 July 2025). ISSN   0009-4978.
170. Kulke, Hermann; Rothermund, Dietmar (26 August 2004). A History of India. doi:10.4324/9780203391266. ISBN   9781134331918.
171. Raza, Ahmed (16 August 2021). "Vajpayee: The Years that Changed India ShaktiSinha, Vajpayee: The Years that Changed India, Penguin/Vintage Books, New Delhi, 2020, 368 pp., Rs.599.00 (Hardback), ISBN: 9780670093441" . Strategic Analysis. 45 (5): 444–445. doi:10.1080/09700161.2021.1965348. ISSN   0970-0161. S2CID   243093620.
172. Sinha, Kanad (2019). State, Power and Legitimacy: The Gupta Kingdom. Primus Books. ISBN   9789352902798.
173. Lockard, Craig A. (4 February 2013). "Chinese emigration to 1948" . The Encyclopedia of Global Human Migration. doi:10.1002/9781444351071.wbeghm130. ISBN   9781444334890.
174. Burbank, Jane (5 July 2011). Empires in world history : power and the politics of difference. Princeton University Press. ISBN   978-0-691-15236-3. OCLC   751801141.
175. Lockard, Craig. ""Tang Civilization and the Chinese Centuries"" (PDF).
176. "Conclusion" , The Crimes of Empire, Pluto Press, pp. 241–248, doi:10.2307/j.ctt183p1d6.13 , retrieved 27 December 2022
177. Aldrich, Robert (1996). Greater France: A History of French Overseas Expansion. p. 304.
178. Page, Melvin E., ed. (2003). Colonialism: An International Social, Cultural, and Political Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO. p. 218. ISBN   9781576073353 – via Google Books.
179. Englund, Steven (2005). Napoleon: A Political Life. Harvard University Press. p. 254.
180. Spiezio, K. Edward (1990). "British Hegemony and Major Power War, 1815–1939: An Empirical Test of Gilpin's Model of Hegemonic Governance" . International Studies Quarterly. 34 (2): 165–181. doi:10.2307/2600707. ISSN   0020-8833. JSTOR   2600707.
181. "European exploration – Age of Discovery, Voyages, Expansion | Britannica". www.britannica.com. 18 June 2024. Retrieved 16 July 2024.
182. H, Kamen. Spain's Road To Empire: The Making Of A World Power, 1492–1763. pp. 640p.
183. "The Spanish Armada" , A History of the English-Speaking Peoples, Cassell & Company Ltd, 1956, doi:10.5040/9781472582362.ch-009, ISBN   978-1-4725-8236-2 , retrieved 27 December 2022
184. Aldrich, Robert (1996), "The French Overseas" , Greater France, London: Macmillan Education UK, pp. 122–162, doi:10.1007/978-1-349-24729-5_6, ISBN   978-0-333-56740-1 , retrieved 27 December 2022
185. "Colonialism: an international, social, cultural, and political encyclopedia". Choice Reviews Online. 41 (7): 218. 1 March 2004. doi:10.5860/choice.41-3809 (inactive 1 July 2025). ISSN   0009-4978.
186. Jordan, David P. (June 2007). "Napoleon: A Political Life . By Steven Englund. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004. Pp. xiv+575. $18.95" . The Journal of Modern History. 79 (2): 438–440. doi:10.1086/519344. ISSN   0022-2801.
187. Suciu, Peter (5 March 2022). "Turkey Could Be a Naval Power in Europe Again". The National Interest. Retrieved 9 March 2022.
188. Stone, Norman (2017). Turkey : a short history. Thames & Hudson. ISBN   978-0-500-29299-0. OCLC   986757557.
189. Mitchell, A. Wess (1 October 2019), "The Habsburg Puzzle" , The Grand Strategy of the Habsburg Empire, Princeton University Press, pp. 1–18, doi:10.23943/princeton/9780691196442.003.0001, ISBN   9780691196442 , retrieved 27 December 2022
190. "World Reserve Currencies Since 1450". 6 January 2021.
191. Clayton, Anthony (1986). The British Empire as a Superpower, 1919–39. doi:10.1007/978-1-349-08609-2. ISBN   978-1-349-08611-5.
192. "Second French Colonial Empire". WorldAtlas. 1 December 2021. Retrieved 5 July 2024.
193. Maddison, Angus (2006). The World Economy – Volume 1: A Millennial Perspective and Volume 2: Historical Statistics. OECD Publishing by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. p. 656. ISBN   9789264022621.

Bibliography

• Belt, Don (2004). "Europe's Big Gamble". National Geographic. pp. 54–65.
• Brzezinski, Zbigniew (1997). The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. New York: Basic Books. ISBN   0-465-02726-1.
• Fox, William (1944). The Super-powers: the United States, Britain, and the Soviet union—their responsibility for peace. Harcourt, Brace a. Co.
• Litwin Henryk, Central European Superpower, BUM Magazine, October 2016.
• Kamen, Henry (2003). Spain's Road To Empire: The Making Of A World Power, 1492–1763. Penguin Books.
• Kennedy, Paul (1988). The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers. Knopf Doubleday Publishing. ISBN   0-679-72019-7.
• McCormick, John, John (2007). The European Superpower. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Rosefielde, Steven (2005). Russia in the 21st Century: The Prodigal Superpower (PDF). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN   0-521-83678-6 . Retrieved 7 October 2007.
• Erik Ringmar, "The Recognition Game: Soviet Russia Against the West," Cooperation & Conflict, 37:2, 2002. pp. 115–36. – an explanation of the relations between the superpowers in the 20th century based on the notion of recognition.
• Sicilia, David B.; Wittner, David G. Strands of Modernization: The Circulation of Technology and Business Practices in East Asia, 1850–1920 (University of Toronto Press, 2021) online review
• Todd, Emanuel (200X). After the Empire – The Breakdown of the American Order.
• Védrine, Hubert. France in an Age of Globalization, Brookings Institution Press, 2001. ISBN   0-8157-0007-5.
• Li, Bo; Zheng Yin (Chinese) (2001) 5000 years of Chinese history, Inner Mongolian People's publishing corp, ISBN   7-204-04420-7.

External links

• Centre for Rising Powers, University of Cambridge Archived 2019-05-04 at the Wayback Machine
• China on the World Stage from the Dean Peter Krogh Foreign Affairs Digital Archives
• Blast off: India hopes Mars rocket will enhance its superpower status by The Times
• China and India: The Power of Two by Harvard Business Review
• The End of Pax Americana: How Western Decline Became Inevitable by The Atlantic
• Why The U.S. Remains The World's Unchallenged Superpower

• Superpower at the Encyclopædia Britannica