For much of the 20th century and the first decade of the 21st century, the United States has enjoyed the status as a dominant player in the international states system, with a “preponderance of power” not achieved by any other state from the early modern period. However, in recent years, this hegemony is increasingly brought into question. The growth of China and the BRIC countries has suggested that the global system is beginning to shift toward a multi-polar system. Although this has not necessarily taken away the US’ hegemony status, it has, to a large extent, diminished it.
To a certain extent, it can be argued that the rise of other states has indeed diminished the USA as a global hegemonic power. The first key reason links to the rapid economic expansion of China, which ultimately threatens to overtake the USA as the largest economy. Whilst the USA has a GDP of $20.54 trillion, nearly $7 trillion greater than China, however China’s growth rate of 6.6% is far lower than the USA’s 2.9%. Since its trade liberalisation strategy took precedent in 1978, China was able to sustain a remarkable record of sustained economic growth – by 2010 it became the second largest economy. Their comparative strategy now lies in manufacturing, meaning that many more international industries have diverted demand away from the US and now toward China’s productive capacity. This has led to, for example, China’s FDI increasing from $2.6 billion to $44.2 billion (1985-2001), because greater numbers of foreign investors and multi-national companies are able to forecast strong growth levels. Furthermore, alongside economic capability, China has been able to boost cultural appeal by spreading Asian customs of community to more developing parts of the globe. such as African societies. Often, global news networks such as AL Jazeera and Russia Today have pursued to the US’s human rights abuses which has all-the-more eroded its cultural hegemony. This form of China’s soft-power has meant that China has rejected ‘Americanisation’ and ‘cultural homogenisation’ and instead promoted its communitarian objectives.
Secondly, China can be seen to threaten the USA’s military superpower status. China is investing heavily in long-range bombers and submarines in order to stake it’s claim as the pre-eminent power in the Pacific. For example President Obama’s decision to to militarily focus on the Pacific rather than the Atlantic was seen as a tacit admission that the US no long has the ability to maintain a two-front war, which was seen as a defining hegemonic status. Similarly, to a certain extend, the USA failed on the ‘War on Terror’ after the 9/11 crisis and Donald Trump having to strike deals with the Taliban recently to prevent further chaos. Despite the US’s plentiful resources, these failures suggest the the the country is unable to efficiently utilise their raw hard power, and thus sheds light on the government and military’s weaknesses. Beyond China’s prevalence, other BRICS countries such as India and Brazil, through their large sums of natural resources and low fiscal deficits, pose a similar problem to the USA in the 2020’s as they gain from economic growth. As evident, through Donald Trump’s action to exit the Paris Agreement in 2019, the global role for acting on environmental changes is now more at the hands of other growing regions of the world. From a liberal perspective, this gradual move to a bi/multipolar world system will generate more peace and stability. They argue that in the absence of a global hegemony, states would be more likely to cooperate with governance institutions and provide better check and balances on one another. In sum, we have seen that through the rise of other states, there is substantiated evidence that USA’s military and economic power status has certainly been diminished. It seems as if the USA is unable to react quickly to China’s fast and accelerated growth and has led to their diminished role in co-ordinating the global system of trade, and therefore they have less of a hegemony status.
On the other hand, there are several reasons which suggest the US’ hegemony status has not been diminished, despite the rise of other states. The first reasons concerns itself with the sustainability of China’s aforementioned accelerated growth. To an extent, the inexorable rise of China and the inevitable eclipse of the USA, may prove to be a delusion. This is because whilst the the economy at one point grew by 10%, growth rates in China have fallen in recent years to more normal pace. China’s top-down growth model has invited challenges such as the need for economic restructuring to generate growth more from domestic demand, and find new ways of shifting from cheap manufacturing to more sophisticated, high-technology production. Ultimately, the debate on whether China can mange capitalism in a one-party system has become highly relevant in determining whether they truly are a threat to US’ hegemony power, since if China would have to take measures to alter the political system, this would cause great damage to their domestic and foreign economic appearance in the short-run.
Secondly, the USA still retains several strengths that many of the BRICS countries lacks. The first key trait is the US’ soft structural power. For example, the USA provides nearly $45 billion in funding to the IMF which enables them to have a 16.45% voting share for all decision taken by the IMF. On such a basis, the US still has a large say in international intervention policy since they can tailor the decisions of the IMF to achieve self -interested causes. Another form of US’ superior soft power is with Research and Development. Since it is responsible for 32% of global spending of R&D, it suggests that the economy is continually pursuing to innovate and discover new ways of enhancing their country’s productive capacity. This has been shown, for example, by the fact that US is able to provide competition to China’s microchip industry through new innovation in technology. Additionally, by being a member of the G7 and UNSC, it continues to retains a strong advisory status and power of veto that other rising states do not share. On top of structural power, the USA continues to exhibit hard power through its incomparable military size. Given that they spend $794 billion on the military, more than 3x their nearest rival, as well as over 800 military bases, it is evident that they have the option to deploy military attack when necessary. In sum, it has been made evident that the USA still retains severals aspect of hard and soft power. Although China has presented a threat to US hegemony, however as analysed, there continues to be uncertainty as to whether China can continue to maintain such rapid rates of expansion. Ultimately, the US still retains several aspects of global superpower. Since there is substantiated evidence that the US is still strong, It seems that the arguments presented in this side are stronger.
In conclusion, having analysed both side of the argument, it seems that arguments for the USA’s hegemonic power not being diminished are stronger. This is perhaps mainly due to that fact that there is uncertainty regarding how China will be able to manage capitalism in a one-party state, and that is yet to be seen. What has been assured is that China will be having to restructure the economy eventually, and the US is still the largest economy, accounting for 25% of world nominal GDP. Nevertheless, in the future, as BRICS countries begin to grow sustainably, there are definitely threats posed in USA’s hegemonic power
Economics Relate 