Space control and global hegemony
Abstract This article argues that in addition to ideology and an ensuing discourse, one—if not the only—effective grand strategic means for a great power to establish global hegemony is through space control. Today, the sole power with both the will and the capability to achieve the grand strategic end of hegemony is the United States, which spends nearly as much on space and armaments as all other countries combined. However, time is not on the side of the United States. Unless it proves able to secure control of space in the coming few years, the European Union and Russia will hardly consent to U.S. domination of space—and through it world politics. Thus, military space control is not the only way ahead.
A Bear with Teeth?
the result of several factors; the most obvious of which has been the desire of a series of political leaders – from Mikhail Gorbachev to Dimitri Medvedev – to reduce spending on the military. Amid the general fall from grace, however, there have been instances of positive reform – patchy, and introduced at a glacial pace – but observable, nonetheless. Such improvements were on display in Georgia. However, by the same token, so were several other factors that do point to a military that has been sorely neglected.
The Internet and the Changing Beijing-Taipei Relations: Toward Unification or Fragmentation?
Information and its technologies facilitate the exercise of what has been called “soft power,” a concept that differentiates information from the conventional dimensions of “hard power,” which is mainly associated with military force and economic influence. Soft power, according to Nye, a former Assistant Secretary of Defense of the United States, means that “A country may obtain the outcomes it wants in world politics because other countries want to follow it, admiring its values, emulating its example, aspiring to its level of prosperity and openness. In this sense it is just as important to set the agenda in world politics and attract others as it is to force them to change through the threat or use of military or economic weapons.”1