4.2 - Great powers, superpowers and emerging powers
States matter differently in global affairs because their capabilities, reach and ability to shape rules differ. This lesson explains great powers, superpowers and emerging powers, compares the USA with the five BRICS states named in the specification, and shows why no single ranking settles a state's influence.
Classifying state power
Power classifications are analytical descriptions, rather than official grades awarded by a world authority. They help explain which states can affect major security decisions, economic arrangements or international rules, but their boundaries are debated.
Great power, superpower and emerging power
A great power has substantial capabilities and influence beyond its immediate neighbours, and other major states must take its interests seriously. A superpower has exceptional reach across several dimensions and can project influence globally. An emerging power is gaining capability, recognition or influence relative to the established centres of power.
A great power may strongly influence one region or policy area without matching a superpower's worldwide military, economic and diplomatic reach. An emerging power may already be a great power. The labels therefore overlap: one describes present significance, another the scale of reach, and another a trajectory of change.
The BRICS label in this specification names Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. It does not mean that all five are equally powerful, growing at the same rate or following the same political system. Russia's established strategic position makes the label “emerging” particularly imperfect. The organisation has expanded beyond those five; keep the specified five in your comparison rather than silently replacing them with a changing membership list. The August 2023 Johannesburg declaration records the five states' cooperation and their decision to invite additional members. Johannesburg II declaration.
Measuring capability and conversion
A sound comparison separates a state's resources from its ability to turn them into influence. Different indicators reveal different strengths and limitations.
| Indicator | What it can explain | Why it is insufficient alone |
|---|---|---|
| Economic scale and trade | Capacity to fund policy and offer or deny market access | Total GDP does not show distribution, technological quality or dependence on other states. |
| Military capability | Deterrence, defence and ability to operate overseas | Spending does not directly measure readiness, logistics, local advantage or willingness to fight. |
| Population and territory | Labour, markets, strategic depth and resources | Education, infrastructure and political organisation determine how much can be used. |
| Technology and productive capacity | Innovation, infrastructure and access to critical goods | Capability in one industry may coexist with dependence in another. |
| Diplomacy and institutional position | Allies, agenda setting, vetoes and coalition building | A legal seat does not ensure that partners follow every policy. |
| Culture and legitimacy | Attraction, trust and willingness to cooperate | Popularity does not automatically create political compliance. |
Nominal GDP, converted at market exchange rates, is useful for comparing the financial size of economies internationally. Purchasing-power parity adjusts for differences in local prices and is useful for comparing real domestic output. Changing the measure can change a ranking, without suddenly changing a country's military reach. Avoid treating either as a complete index of power.
An alliance illustrates conversion. A state may mobilise partners' bases, expertise and political support, increasing its reach beyond its own resources. Conversely, domestic instability or weak administrative capacity can stop large resources being used effectively. Relative power also changes if another state grows faster, even when the first state's own resources increase.
The USA and global reach
The USA is the specification's named superpower because its influence extends across military, economic, diplomatic and cultural dimensions. The argument concerns the breadth and reach of its resources, rather than a claim that it controls every outcome.
SIPRI estimates US military expenditure in 2024 at US$997 billion, compared with US$314 billion for China. These are dated expenditure estimates, not a direct count of effective combat power. The gap supports an argument about US financial capacity; geography, equipment costs and the mission still matter. SIPRI's 2025 account of 2024 expenditure.
US alliance relationships increase reach. The July 2024 NATO declaration records collective defence commitments and cooperation among its members. Such agreements give the USA partners and institutional channels, but allies remain states with their own interests. The USA's permanent Security Council seat also gives it a veto on substantive resolutions, shared with China, Russia, France and the UK. A veto can block action; it cannot make other members adopt a US proposal. NATO's Washington declaration, UN voting rules.
Continue this lesson.
You’re previewing NovaLearn without an account. Create a free account to read the rest.
Create free account