University Name: Changing Balance of Global Power Analysis

This essay provides a comprehensive analysis of the changing balance of global power, with a specific focus on the United States. It begins with an introduction to the influence of powerful countries in the international system and highlights the unprecedented dominance of the US. The discussion section explores the historical evolution of US power, tracing its rise after World War II and its impact on international relations. The essay then delves into international relations theories, examining US hegemony and its challenges. Furthermore, it analyzes the shift in the global economic balance of power, considering the rise of emerging economies and the implications for long-term stability. The essay concludes with an assessment of the US's role in a multipolar world, drawing on various scholarly perspectives.

Running head: CHANGING BALANCE OF GLOBAL POWER
Changing balance of global power
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author’s Note:

1CHANGING BALANCE OF GLOBAL POWER
Table of Contents
Introduction:....................................................................................................................................1
Discussion:.......................................................................................................................................2
Historical evolution of power of United States:..............................................................................3
Explanation of US power in relation to international relation theories:..........................................4
US Dominance in Global power:.....................................................................................................7
Shift in the global economic balance of power:............................................................................10
Analysis for long term:..................................................................................................................11
Conclusion:....................................................................................................................................13

2CHANGING BALANCE OF GLOBAL POWER
Introduction:
The international system of which any county is a part can be influenced by the desire
and capacity of powerful countries. The remarkable point in the contemporary year is that in
regard to any other countries, United States is far more influential. It is so because the
regulations and rules governing the interconnected international system can be governed by
United States1. An unprecedented dominance was assumed by the domestic and foreign policies
of America in the affairs of region and other nations for seeking to accommodate the evolution of
hegemony of country2. In the aftermath of World War II, the hegemony of America became clear
and the measurement of power was done by political, economical, military and cultural factors.
For placing the development of hegemony of US in the historical context, it is required to make a
sense of impact and extent of its power3. For this purpose, the first part of paper demonstrates the
description of influence and power of US by providing theoretical justification using hegemony.
Discussion:
As a new discipline, International relations came into being as initiative of government in
the United States. It was an effort on part of government to make an enhancement in the research
for identifying the original of international conflicts and providing for solution for benefitting
along with providing training to analytically knowledgeable persons and qualified diplomats at
the middle and higher level of government departments4. For the United States, the era of
hegemonic stability was established after the World War II because the country posses the
capability to manage the international system and act unilaterally to stabilize the economies of
1 Gilpin, Robert. The political economy of international relations. Princeton University Press, 2016.
2 Mingst, Karen A., and Ivan M. Arreguín-Toft. Essentials of International Relations: Sixth International Student
Edition. WW Norton & Company, 2013.
3 Hart, Jeffrey A., and Joan Edelman Spero. The politics of international economic relations. Routledge, 2013.
4 Geeta, Chowdhry, and Sheila Nair. Power, postcolonialism and international relations: Reading race, gender and
class. Routledge, 2013.

3CHANGING BALANCE OF GLOBAL POWER
Japan and Europe. The hegemony of United States after World War II was attributable to factors
such as unmatched economic, cultural, political and military influence in global affairs. The
global order of US was characterized by free capital and liberalist domestic economy5. Different
scholars have presented different presented the hegemonic power in the aftermath of World War
II. It is noteworthy to mention that the economy of advanced nations and that of US must be
concerned about the risks arising out of events due to emerging markets and China. It is implied
by the global shifts that of how the management of such problem should be done. Global
economic problems faced by different nations would be managed neither by US nor China. The
dominance of US in the Western Alliance was pushed through the vision how the structuring of
international financial and global should be done. Despite the fact that there was no willingness
on part of other countries, US provided free access to their foreign capitals. However, no
intrinsic reasons were provided for US to remain at the top and dominant indefinitely. Another
global shift was witnessed in the second half of the twentieth century; however such shift was
less dramatic. During such period, the gap in the productivity and per capital income of US and
East Asia and Japan was becoming close. In year 1992, there was a fall in share of US in the
global gross domestic product to lower than twenty percent which was prior to the rise of
emerging economies and China6. Such shift does not let any country to exert unilaterally
influence in adequate stability because international cooperation is required for such stability.
There was interruption in the shift away from the dominance of US and toward a multi polar in
year 1990s. Such interruption was attributable to two factors that are series of financial and
economic crisis in emerging countries and difficulties faced in Soviet Bloc transition along with
its collapse. Nonetheless, there was resumption of shift in global political and economic power
5 Desai, Radhika. Geopolitical economy: After US hegemony, globalization and empire (the future of world
capitalism). London: Pluto Press, 2013.
6 Jacques, Martin. When China rules the world: The rise of the middle kingdom and the end of the western world
[Greatly updated and expanded]. Penguin UK, 2012.

4CHANGING BALANCE OF GLOBAL POWER
due to subsequent growth in emerging Asia7. Such growth was resumed because of factors such
as elimination of bottlenecks, high saving rates, export orientation, educated labor forces. The
dominance of US in the International monetary fund was highly complained with the role of US
could not be diminished by any form of voting rights, executive board composition and reform of
quotas significantly8.
Historical evolution of power of United States:
An unprecedented dominance to US in the international politics was brought after the end
of World War II. Allied forces defeated and occupied Japan and Germany. An emergence of two
superpowers that is Soviet Union and United States was witnessed by world after the era of Pax
Britannica was ended. The capitalist bloc and community bloc was divided by the world after the
cold war was started between these two superpowers9. Soviet Union headed the community bloc
while capitalist bloc headed by the US. A new world order was designed by US after World War
II on the liberalism and democracy based on style of US, multilateral institution establishment,
US network global collaboration and decolonization. Establishment of international financial
institutions was done under the Breton wood agreements where each super power through their
military alliances intended to expand their sphere of influences10. The leadership of US created
unity between Western Europe and Japan due to spread of communism and common economic
interests. Rapid growth was witnessed by world economy during cold war due to adoption of
containment of communism policy by Soviet Union and USA and relative peace in Japan and
Europe. There was disintegration of Soviet Union in year 1991 and the sole world power was left
7 Cohn, Theodore H. Global political economy: Theory and practice. Routledge, 2016.
8 Ravenhill, John. Global political economy. Oxford University Press, 2017.
9 Spykman, Nicholas J. America's strategy in world politics: the United States and the balance of power. Routledge,
2017.
10 Galbraith, John. American capitalism: The concept of countervailing power. Routledge, 2017.

5CHANGING BALANCE OF GLOBAL POWER
in the hand of United States. The policy of unilateralism was adopted by US after the cold war
ended due to its military superiority that was unmatched from any country11. Furthermore, major
wars including Yugoslavia, Gulf War, Iran and Afghanistan were fought by the US.
Explanation of US power in relation to international relation theories:
Many scholars were attracted by the US hegemony and the study of international orders
in global affairs during the 1970s and 1980s. The international order dominated by US was
challenged by many factors such as financial crisis, economic recession, exchange rate crisis, oil
crisis, China rise, emergence of Japan economically and Europe integration. Global order of US
was further complicated by growing threats to military by Soviet Union and spread of
communism12.
A broader picture of emergence and decline of hegemony of US was provided by
Wallerstein and such picture was presented in various phases after the end of Second World War.
It is argued by him that after the second world was, the politics of world has undergone through
three main phases. The era of hegemony of US and global dominance was identified for the
period from 1945-1970. However, due to emergence of competitors, there was decline of
hegemony from 1970 to 200113. Thereafter, the process of decline of hegemony was accelerated
from year 2001 due to intimidation and unilateralism of policy of US. The global leadership of
US was unmatched from any other countries from 1945 to 1967 resulting from unprecedented
military superiority, economic growth, cultural and political influence. It was after year 1967 that
US experienced decline due to emergence of economic competitors such as Japan and Europe
11 Hattam, Victoria C. Labor visions and state power: The origins of business unionism in the United States. Vol.
141. Princeton University Press, 2014.
12 Miller, Lynn H. Global Order: Values and Power in International Relations. Routledge, 2018.
13 Burley, Anne-Marie Slaughter. "International law and international relations theory: a dual agenda." The Nature of
International Law. Routledge, 2017. 11-46.

6CHANGING BALANCE OF GLOBAL POWER
and economic stagnation. US hegemony decline was initiated due to the two factors that is
economic change of stagnation that occurred from the end of phase of Kondratieff and cultural
and political changes in during 1968s14. It is said by Wallerstein that in the next two decades, the
rise of multiple small nuclear powers, nuclear non proliferation breakdown, emergence of
multiple center powers, multiple currency system emergence, dollar being disappeared as
international dominance currency and decline of US power in the next two decades15.
It is argued by another scholar named Stephen Gill who focuses on change in structure of
international politics in the aftermath of World War II that the structural power of US is intact
and there has not been any decline in US hegemony. It is suggested by Gill that the era of non
hegemonic in the global politics started after 1970s and such ear is described as hegemony crisis
which should not be linked to global power of US16. It is further argued by Gill that during 1970s
and 1980s, there was no decline in hegemony of America. Rather, it can be said that there was
transformation in hegemony due to globalization and the hegemony of US became more
powerful due to cultural and ideological aspects. The hegemony of US has direct and cumulative
quality and was from ever during 1980s17. The contemporary international political economy was
changed due to the market and trade liberalization, global economy trans-nationalization, change
in communication and low cost of transporting transborder. Therefore, the decline of US after
Second World War was refuted by Gill after examining the role of country where the concept of
transitional hegemony was presented and the term hegemony was redefined18.
14 Jackson, Robert H., and Georg Sørensen. Introduction to international relations: theories and approaches. Oxford
university press, 2016.
15 Roskin, Michael G., et al. Political science: An introduction. Pearson, 2014.
16 Amin, Samir. Beyond US hegemony: Assessing the prospects for a multipolar world. Zed Books Ltd., 2013.
17 Behringer, Ronald M. The human security agenda: how middle power leadership defied US hegemony.
Bloomsbury Publishing USA, 2012.
18 Roberts, Sue, Anna Secor, and Matthew Zook. "Critical infrastructure: Mapping the leaky plumbing of US
hegemony." Antipode 44.1 (2012): 5-9.

7CHANGING BALANCE OF GLOBAL POWER
It has been also argued that there was no decline in the United States hegemony and the
world is still dominated by the US structural power in terms of its economy, military and
economy. It is said by scholar that there are two kinds of power in political economy that is
structural power and political power where former is more important than latter and refers to
customs and rules that helps in governing economic relations at international level19. There are
several areas in which the dominance of US is imminent such as leading in the production of
world, strongest military force, aircraft industries, control over international credit, dominance
over service industries, manufacturing of consumer goods in masses, biggest share in banking
industries and education system predominance20. Therefore, the main focus of Susan is on
structural power and it is argued by her that such structural power of US will remain intact
despite certain political and economic setbacks.
US Dominance in Global power:
It is worthy to highlight a number of points about the American homogeny nature and its
impact on East Asia. The hegemony of US has been shaped by the complex interplay of different
factors such as strategic, economic, universal and contingent and agency and structure. As a
consequence of this, their hegemony has impacted different parts of world differently. For
underpinning the development of Western Europe than East Asia, they have not been more
reliant on markets of America21. However, the distinctive course of development in East Asia has
been influenced by American homogeny by pronouncement of regional accent. The highly
truncated post war international order consideration in the relationship of US is another aspect of
19 McDonald, Matt. "US hegemony, the ‘war on terror’and security in the Asia-Pacific." Critical Security in the
Asia-Pacific. Manchester University Press, 2018.
20 Ryan, David. US foreign policy in world history. Routledge, 2014.
21 Wohlforth, William C., and Stephen G. Brooks. "American primacy in perspective." Paradoxes of Power.
Routledge, 2015. 29-38.

8CHANGING BALANCE OF GLOBAL POWER
hegemony. United sates are the inventor of modern corporate form and by the end of the 1800s;
it emerged as the dominant industrial power of world. The global colonial rule of Europe was
replaced with the American hegemony resulting from the most massive and destructive wars in
human history22. It is due to this the leadership position of US in the international system was
dependent upon the stealthy interventions and countless overt across the world for making sure
that the country stays on top of the list. There may be disintegration in the global orders that is
led by structure of America. A winding of the cracks in the global leadership position of America
is signified by the lack of legitimacy in the US president at both international and domestic level
along with the emerging and reemerging of powers and rise of China. The transitionary stage due
to change in the ruling person in the face of Trump whose emergence is considered to be the
historical illusion has led to defending of his genius which is fueled by the sexism and right wing
white supremacy and its infinite mirage in the perception of financial elites has risked the US to
bring to closer to the global conflict23. The military power of US still remains dominant in the
short run, however for sustenance of hegemony, the effectiveness of power compared to Vietnam
and Iraq is not clear. The development and research facilities of US can be surpassed by China
and other countries across world with Silicon Valley still absorbing the highly educated
brainpower from across the world. Some tentative answers have been offered in the book of
“American hegemony and the rise of emerging powers: Cooperation and conflict”. The
Interpretation of international change and their position of political power form the basis of
determining the prospects of peace and war. This has been said in context of material
underpinning of power of America based on theme ideological. Nevertheless, saying that the
homogeny of US is decline would be an overstatement in the short run at least. United States are
22 Panetta, Leon. "Sustaining US global leadership: priorities for 21st century defense." Washington, DC: US
Department of Defense (2012).
23 Evans, Peter. "Counter‐Hegemonic Globalization." The Wiley‐Blackwell Encyclopedia of Globalization (2012).

9CHANGING BALANCE OF GLOBAL POWER
taking every possible efforts to limit the emerging powers ability in light of rising powers and
building of new relations across the globe and transformation of world power due to rise of
China24.
It is said that the United States no reasons have been found to say that the country is
heading toward the skids. The idea of hegemony of US heads its root from the World War II.
During the war, US was the only combatant that successes in avoiding serious damage to its
housing stocks, infrastructure and its demographic profile and emerged as the dominant political,
economic and technological power. The war was ended with the greatest naval order and became
the home of World Bank, International Monetary Fund and United nations after the war. US was
considered as hegemony.
It appears that the world appears to shift into an era that is of intensified uncertainty due
to rise of independent powers along with the factor that the president of US lacks an articulated
grasp of reality. Such factors are suggestive of the fact that there is tendency of progressing
decline on the world stage. It can be said on a broader scale that the major bouts of international
conflicts have gone hand in hand with the shift in world power at larger scale25. The only global
rival of US in the twentieth century was Soviet Union which had the power to resist the
hegemony of former. However, they did not have the power to displace the hegemony of US.
The hegemony of US was completed with disintegration of Soviet Union in year 1991.
For the global leadership position, US were at the top in the international system. Such unipolar
moment did not last for more than fewer decades due to the emergence of threat to the global
stability along with reemergence of Russia and rise of China26. There have been deadlock of
24 Lieberthal, Kenneth, and Wang Jisi. Addressing US-China strategic distrust. Vol. 4. Washington, DC: Brookings,
2012.
25 Beauregard, Robert A. Voices of decline: The postwar fate of US cities. Routledge, 2013.
26 Miller, Lynn H. Global Order: Values and Power in International Relations. Routledge, 2018.

10CHANGING BALANCE OF GLOBAL POWER
internal politics of America and the costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has led to substantial
degradation of military capabilities of US. The expression about the bankruptcy of US
government was created due to the repeated crisis of debt ceiling, negative reports by credit
agency and the shutdown of government of 2013.
The Countries lying on the South border of China are hugely populous, large and poor
making so that they cannot go beyond that exploitation of the mineral resources. Some profit
opportunities are sought by the companies in Myanmar, Cambodia and China and the strategic
dominance over region would not provide any gain to country. The strategic engagement of
China with Latin America and Africa and the capital of China could not be accessed by
investment starved countries in China. The future economic growth of China formed the basis of
building hegemony of China and the economy of China would account for more than half to total
global output by year 2050 at 7% rate of growth. It is assumed reasonably that economic growth
of China would eventually settle down to the global rates27. The working age population China
from year 2014 to 2034 will fall by eighty seven million along with rise in elderly population.
Contrary to this, the population of US is growing and is young and the population of US
comprises of productive and immigration of talented people and it is projected that it would grow
at the rate of 0.6% per year. One of the surprising trend is that there is narrowing down of
demographic gap between US and China. The domination of America in the global affairs
extends well beyond the hegemony and it is believed by major powers that they could
independently engage in global statecraft.
27 Nolan, Peter. "China and the global economy." Charting China's Future. Routledge, 2012. 55-64.

11CHANGING BALANCE OF GLOBAL POWER
Shift in the global economic balance of power:
The political landscape of the world looks considerably different as against the present
scenario. The central players will be the nation states and there would be a handful of countries
such as China, US, Russia, Japan and Germany where hegemonic force will not be enjoyed by
single force. There would be wide distribution of power across non state networks along with
regressive ones and greater influence will be exerted by vast contributions of mega cities and
their peripheries28.
There is prediction that the economy of China will surpass the economy of US by the late
2020s with the continued growth in economies of BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China). The
major advanced nations will be transcending by the combined economic power of BRICS by the
early 2030s. Rising of the emerging economies such as India, China, Russia and Brazil is
signaled by the summit of BRICS in Xiamen. The role of BRICS and their governance in local
economy is believed to be weakening by the recovery of the major advanced nations. However,
the reality seems to be quite different. Often, comparison is made between the major advanced
economies and BRIC economies29. The economy of China in year 2000 was barely one tenth of
the economy of US whereas the gross domestic product of Japan is considered largest as the
largest economies of Europe. For achieving stability, countries such as UK, Germany and France
was struggling. The US led reforms have crushed the economy of Russia and Brazil. By the early
2010s, stagnation has penalized the Japan and the economy of US was double of that of China.
Europe was ruled by president of France and chancellor of Germany. A dramatic catch up was
brought in Brazil in the era of Lula where the size of economy was multiplied. Size of economy
of China would surpass the economy of US if China stays on the course. Until the late 2030s,
28 Hoge Jr, James F. "A global power shift in the making." Paradoxes of Power. Routledge, 2015. 62-68.
29 Layne, Christopher. "The Global Power Shift from West to East." The National Interest 119 (2012): 21-31.