How Powerful Is the United States Today How Powerful Will it Remain During the 21st Century - Research Paper Example

Civilization Research Essay Topic: The United s has been the dominant superpower after World War II. Some believe that it is now in decline. Isthis the case? How powerful is the United States today? How powerful will it remain during the 21st century? What factors will determine this? Who are America’ major rivals for the title of superpower of the century? Name: Parez Walashy Course Tile: Culture Studies II Date: 10.03.14 Technical Aspects: In-text / Footnotes – Those that are made are correct. The problem is having far too few. You will need to correct this. Bibliography – This is correct. Your work is technically good. Content: Research, Structure, Cohesion You have done research, but only on the web – a weakness that is reflected in the paper. The structure is clear, following the tasks given in the topic question. This both gives clarity and at the same time disturbs the cohesion of the paper since you move from area to area with little connection between them other than a question (I suggest you replace these with headings). The major weakness of the paper is that you have written an expository essay about your opinion on the issue and gone to sources only to find the information you were already looking for to substantiate your viewpoint. Rather, this paper was to be a research paper in which you found varied opinions that existed on the issue, explained and compared them and then – and only then – came to a conclusion based on that information, which you had already provided and weighed for the reader. To improve you could 1) find some sources that can give some depth and support for the many contentions you make in your paper 2) if possible find sources that disagree with you own perspective and give them some space, 3) make sure your explain the terms and contexts to which you refer to your reader before you employ them 4) re-read the sources you have already used so you can better employ the arguments they use to make your points – as is opposed to simply referring that they express an opinion. In sum, you need to change your approach from expressing an opinion to that of providing an overview of arguments and then coming to a conclusion Language: I have corrected your English in the first two pages and your final section. It is clear that you love the language and have an excellent vocabulary. Unfortunately you let it get out of hand. You need to cut down on the sheer length of your sentences and number of words (wonderful as they might be) when you express yourself. Perhaps you can manage it in your native tongue, but not in English – yet. I’d advise you to simplify your language on the exam and concentrate on writing clear, straightforward English – as I’m sure you can. Note my corrections. When one analyzes the global system, regardless of what metric is being determined, it is almost an unavoidable fact that the United States has, and continues to exhibit a level of hegemony over the entire global system. This level of hegemony began after the Second World War; at a point when other world powers were exhausted after a lengthy period of engagement – often taking place upon their own territory. Due to the geographic isolation of the United States and the fact that the only territorial attacks that took place occurred in the Pacific, the United States was more or less insulated from the deeper economic and infrastructural destruction that many of the Great Powers suffered as a result of this conflict. Even though this is the quick to answer to whether or not the United States has and currently is a global superpower and hegemon, the following analysis will seek to delve more deeply into these issues and answer the following questions: whether the United States is in decline, whether the United States is powerful within the present era, whether or not the power of the United States will continue within the 21st century, what factors will determine this power, and what likely rivals will challenge the United States for this role as global superpower. It is the hope of this author that a level of analysis into these core questions will reveal a more nuanced understanding with regards to current events and the manner in which the future will unfold. Firstly, with respect to the question of whether or not the United States is in decline, I believe that it is. The underlying reasons for this come from a litany of different areas. The first measurement that suggests alludes that the United States is currently in decline is the financial situation of the nation. Currently, the United States GDP is around $16 trillion; approximately the same amount of money that the United States is in debt (Stein 151). Other economic analysis s has pointed to the fact dangerous levels of debt begin to exist at the point in which GDP begins to equate to the overall debt that a nation has . When nations have far exceeded this level of 100% GDP debt leverage, the long-term ramifications of such a debt are on the whole unhealthy. Could you please state your conclusion? A Discussion of the Current Power of the United States: Another metric in which the overall power of the United States can be measured is decline with regard to militarily might. During the past several years, the United States has been militarily involved in both Afghanistan and Iraq to a high degree. Moreover, the “war on terror” is not only confined to these two nations. (What is the “War on Terror” and it relationship to the two wars you mention. You don’t say.) Instead, the Central Intelligence agency, National Security Agency, Defense intelligence Agency, United States Air Force, United States Navy, United States Marines, United States Army, and a series of other American military/intelligence groups are actively involved in engaging terrorists in places as far away as Yemen, Southeast Asia, and elsewhere. Moreover, the joint NATO engagement that saw the toppling of Libya and the attempted intervention within Syria also underscores the fact that the United States military assets and resources are spread increasingly thin. (That is a contention. Do you have a source for it?) Whereas it is true that the United States continues to maintain one of the largest standing armies in the world and equips them with state-of-the-art technology, the expense and financial burden of continuing such a process and deploying them throughout the entire world has harmed the overall capacity of the United States to continue to do this into the future (Shor 163). Ultimately, in order to view the power that the United States has, one need look no further than the power of international organizations that the United States has been able to engage and ultimately control. By and large, institutions such as the international monetary fund, the World Bank, and the United Nations are all institutions that the United States has had a direct level of engagement in fostering, promoting, and many argue, in controlling. As a direct function of this, the level and extent to which the United States can control the economic and organizational development of much of the developing world allows for it to have a disproportionate level of power with regards to the way in which business engagement and strategic partnerships evolve. (Contentions again. Source?) Furthermore, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, there has not been a concerted effort on the part of several nations to address the growth of US power throughout the world. (Which and why?) Yet (?), as the level of anger and frustration with what many nations see as “hubris” on the part of the United States continues to grow, it can only be expected that such a movement is in the very nascent stages of being formulated at this very moment.Contention – Source? Another metric that can be used with regards to the overall level of global supremacy and hegemony that the United States currently exhibits is with respect to the decline in global respect for the United States (Vermeiren 248). Ultimately, at the conclusion of the Second World War, a litany of different nations around the globe saw it within their overall best interest to ally themselves with the United States as opposed to the Soviet Union. However, once the Soviet Union collapsed, and specifically once the United States began acting in a unilateral fashion around the globe, many of these formulae US allied nations determined that it was in their own best interests to seek out alternative strategic partnerships that could promote their best interest to a better degree. The loss of prestige that the United States has faced within the past several years has factored heavily into the overall power that it can continue to project. Contention – Source? What level of power can the United States to generate today?. In short, regardless of what metric is utilized, the United States remains extraordinarily powerful superpower and hegemonic within the current system. Although it is true that a host of difficulties played it and issues relating to military decay, finance, loss of respect, and other factors challenge its superiority, the United States still maintains both a financial and military superiority over all other powers within the world. (Can you give any evidence supporting this contention? Any numbers? Any measurements?) Although this is likely to change in the future, the current exhibition of power is one that invariably favors the United States as continuing to be a global hegemonic power (Misalucha 211). Of all of the information that is been discussed, it must be understood that the factors that will determine the continued hegemonic power that the United States can exert will be most concentric (?dependant?) upon economic power that it is able to generate. From even a cursory review of the current situation around the globe, is evident that a number of entities are gaining power and economic wealth and a rapid rate. A few of these powers have grown by such astronomical levels over the past several decades that the challenges to US hegemony over the course of the future is clear. With regards to America’s major rivals for the title of superpower of the century, it must be understood that China is first and foremost among these. Beginning during the chairmanship of Mao Tse Tung, China began to experience a rapid level of economic and societal growth. (No, that is incorrect. It began in the 1070s after his death. Check your sources) This growth has continued over the decades since with a renewed(?) vigor (Bozdağlıoğlu 6). Recently, the economy of China surpasses that of all other economies, except the United States, and continues to grow at a rate much faster than the United States own economy. Source? Naturally, one cannot take past performance as denoting future performance; however, the overall level of growth and development that China has exhibited over the past several decades most certainly puts it on something of a collision path with regards to development of a hegemonic power that could ultimately challenge the United States. Interestingly, is not necessarily a singular nation that might surpass the overall economic or military power that the United States could assert in the future. Rather, the development of blocks, as was seen during the Cold War, can have a powerful impact with regards to the overall economic integration and power that particular region or group of countries can exert. Through such a level of understanding, the power of the BRICS, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and south Africa, could collectively surpass the United States and provide a situation in which the overall populations of these nations, in tandem with their economic resources, could sideline hegemonic power that the United States is able to generate and project upon the remainder of the world. In many ways, closer cooperation between these nations, both in an economic and military standpoint, could radically the gate many of the strategies and economic goals that the United States is set forward over the past several decades (Mercille 1640). As with any (?) global hegemonic power, the United States has recently experienced a great shift with regards to the way in which it integrates with the world. As a bipolar world ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States was faced with a situation in which it could either shoulder the responsibility and power of being a global hegemonic power in and of itself or could seek to engage the world as a fellow stakeholder. Obviously, the path that was chosen is clearly denoted with respect to the manner through which history has unfolded since this time. However, even though the reality is that the United States has chosen to engage in a unilateral and unipolar manner, it should also be appreciated that this decision is one that has allowed the United States to gain and lose a great deal of credibility and prestige throughout the years. Could you please re-phrase the last sentence. It is rather unclear. Source? For instance, retaining the “old” structure of NATO and intervening within the Balkans in a manner reminiscent of the Cold War was one of the mechanisms through which the prestige and overall respect for the United States was diminished within Eastern Europe and the former Soviet bloc. Contention – Source? By much the same token, the dogged determination to pursue a pro-Israeli policy at each and every juncture has gone a long way in distancing the Arab world from the United States. Similarly, by pandering to Pakistan in lieu of further integration with one of the more dynamic economies of the emerging world, India, the United States has all but assured that it list of allies and partners has greatly diminished. Contention – Source? Furthermore, in wake of the September 11 attacks and the subsequent invasion to invade Iraq, even though the majority of the United Nations was fundamentally opposed to such an engagement, place the United States level of respect at an all-time low. Although efforts have been made within the past several years to reengage these partners and promote the level of respect that the United States is able to engender around the world, by and large, the impacts that had been experienced have been largely negative. As a result of the lost prestige, the list of allies as well as the list of cooperate partnerships that the United States has been able to engage over the past several years has been slowly diminishing. By means of contrast and comparison, those great powers that directly challenge the hegemony of the United States have been slowly expanding upon their international appeal by engaging the world in something of a universal manner.Source(s)? I assume the following is your conclusion. The analysis of the information confirms that even though the United States has lost a great deal of its hegemonic power over the past several years, it is unlikely that it will stumble from its place of world superpower within the immediate future. (Actually, the analysis thus far says nothing about the future, so this is a confusing contention) That being said, the ultimate measurement of whether or not this decline will take place is not predicated upon its military strength but upon its economic health. With the dollar as the international currency of exchange, the Bretton Woods system still remains intact (and what is the Bretton Woods system?) ; this links the global economy to the power of the United States and makes US domestic and foreign policy relevant to the remainder of the world. Likewise (?) the United States hegemony cannot be understood as only linked to the power of its economy. As such, the debt ratio that plagues most of the developed world, specifically the United States, is an issue that must be engaged by policymakers if the level of United States hegemony is expected to continue any time into the definitive future. Would you please re-write the previous sentence? I cannot follow it. With $16 trillion in public debt, and counting, the level and extent to which the United States can continue to promote its global dominance is seriously in question. Without the economy to back the military decisions and spending that has been directed towards defense over the past decades, the United States will find itself and it increasingly more difficult situation; required to do more with less. Source? The situation that has thus far been described is one in which the United States is the very dominant superpower that has yet to be strongly challenged within the current era. However, that being said, shortcomings and weaknesses will create a situation in which the expected length of time that the United States can continue to represent such a hegemonic superpower will ultimately be quite limited. With the global economic turn down the 2007/2008, it can reasonably be expected, in tandem with the rapid growth of economies such as India, Russia, Brazil, China, and South Africa, that the days of economic - and by extension military - hegemony are numbered for the United States. In all fairness, it is of course possible that the United States could experience a further dynamic explosion of creativity, technological progress, profitability, and business dominance that would deal with the core weaknesses which have thus far been described; propelling it to a further period of hegemony within the system. However, in order for that to occur, a notable change would have to be made with regards to the level and extent to which the current American economic system grows . A reform of the economic system providing the ability of the USA to pay off the national debt would require a period of sustained sacrifice and hardship. It is not to be expected that the United States will engage in such a process anytime within the future. (Ever?) Accordingly, a far more reasonable expectation is that the United States will consistently lose power over the coming years; ultimately ceding hegemonic supremacy to one of the nations, or a group of the nations, that has earlier been mentioned. . Bibliography Bozdağlıoğlu, Yücel. "Hegemonic (In)Stability Theory And Us Foreign Policy: The Legacy Of The Neocons In The Middle East."Anadolu University Journal Of Social Sciences 13.3 (2013): 1-12. Academic Search Complete. Web. 25 Jan. 2014. Mercille, Julien. "Violent Narco-Cartels Or US Hegemony? The Political Economy Of The ‘War On Drugs’ In Mexico." Third World Quarterly 32.9 (2011): 1637-1653. Business Source Complete. Web. 27 Jan. 2014. Misalucha, Charmaine G. "Southeast Asia-US Relations: Hegemony Or Hierarchy?." Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal Of International & Strategic Affairs 33.2 (2011): 209-228. Academic Search Complete. Web. 30 jan. 2014. Shor, Francis. "Declining US Hegemony And Rising Chinese Power: A Formula For Conflict?." Perspectives On Global Development & Technology 11.1 (2012): 157-167. Business Source Complete. Web. 02 feb. 2014. Stein, Arthur A. "Recalcitrance And Initiative: US Hegemony And Regional Powers In Asia And Europe After World War II."International Relations Of The Asia-Pacific 14.1 (2014): 147-177. Academic Search Complete. Web. 21 feb. 2014. Vermeiren, Mattias. "The Crisis Of US Monetary Hegemony And Global Economic Adjustment." Globalizations 10.2 (2013): 245-259.Academic Search Complete. Web. 24 feb. 2014. Read More