Superpower

International relations as a field of study has traditionally been defined as a science whose primary purpose has been to explain the behavior of states operating in an anarchic world where power—usually measured in terms of economic resources, military strength, and moral influence—has always been unevenly spread among its various units. How to measure power, the uses to which power is put, how states acquire and lose it, and what impact its unequally distributed character has on relations between states in the wider international system have been central issues discussed by scholars of international relations ever since Thucydides wrote his classic History of the Peloponnesian War in the 4th century BCE.

Measuring the power of states has, of necessity, created its own taxonomy. Thus, different states may be defined as great, weak, imperial, regional, global, or even—more recently—failed, largely in terms of three attributes: (1) their own set of unique capabilities, (2) the distribution of capabilities in the wider international system, and (3) their capacity to exercise control over both their own affairs and those of others. Inevitably, most attention has been paid to the actions of great powers insofar as they have exercised most influence on the international system. Thus, when the Napoleonic wars ended with France's defeat in 1814, it was naturally assumed that the future of Europe would be shaped by at least five “great” powers: Great Britain, the Austrian Empire, Russia, Prussia, and France. A century later, it was taken for granted that the outcome of World War I [Page 2560]would, in the end, be determined—once again—by the policies and capabilities of the various great powers.