THE TOP TEN POTENTIAL MILITARY SUPER POWER COUNTRIES

The present day governments that have been claimed to become (or to remain) a superpower within the 21st century

 

United States of America (current superpower), People's Republic of China, European Union, Republic of India, Russian Federation. A number of states have been speculated to be, or to be in the process of turning into, a superpower at some point of the 21st century. Among the most commonly mentioned are USA, China, the European Union, India, and Russia.

(1) United States Of America= Advanced Military, Largest Economy, strong internal security, special units and secret services- law & order, imperial international policy, Control on WTO, NATO, UN, IMF and the world. Presently, only the United States is considered to be superpower.

USA

The USA is the world’s, at the time, supreme superpower which has the largest industry in the World and no other nation has ever had the same amount of power alone. US military budget, arms sales, distribution, and subsidies dwarf those of every other nation.
New nations are raising as opponents to the US, for example China which has had an enormous economical growth the last years. The European Union may also become a superpower, but most as an economical and political one. It will take a long time before the EU will be able to demonstrate the same military strength as the US. But because it is an important trading partner to the American industry it will have a strong economical and political influence in the US.

“The United States military budget is larger than the military budgets of the next twenty biggest spenders combined, and six times larger than China’s, which places second. USA and its closest allies are responsible for approximately two-thirds of all military spending on Earth. Military spending accounts for more than half of the United States’ federal discretionary spending, which comprise all of the U.S. government’s money not accounted for by pre-existing obligations.”

After the First World War the prosperity grew in the American society. But in the 30’s the US was hit by a severe economic depression (which was created) after the Wall Street hit the bottom the 24th of October 1929.
During the 30’s President D. Roosevelt started the New Deal program. The New Deal included the government pushing a lot of money into the economy to create new jobs. A minimum standard of living was established and the social security system was improved. But the initiatives did not work the way they were supposed to and in 1939 18% of the American working force was still unemployed. Then the war came.
 The American army joined the allied forces. In the time between the two world wars the US had isolated themselves, but when the Second World War ended the US rose as a major power in the world along with the Soviet Union. The earlier superpowers: France, Germany and Japan were much weakened after the war.
 During the war facilities that normally produced commodities/products for peacetime started to produce wartime commodities. For example: the car industry started to produce tanks and ammunition. Many unemployed who fought for existence, volunteered for the army. And so by 1944 only 670 000 were unemployed. After the Second World War the US financial giants gave economical help to the western parts of Europe through the Marshall Plan. Through the Marshall Plan the European economy received nearly 12 billion US dollars. In connection to the process of rebuilding Europe big American companies like GM, Ford and Boeing got big contracts. This was the time when the US started its way to the top as a huge power in the world.
 The Second World War were now over. Europe was in ruins. The most powerful nations were the capitalistic United States of America and the communistic Soviet Union (even, both were totalitarian) . From 1945 to the fall of the Soviet Union in time 1991-1992 the two countries tried to spread their ideology to other parts of the world. The US “promoted” the capitalism –the Soviet Union “promoted” the communism. The nations of NATO won the Cold War. USA participated in three wars in Asia: the war in North-Chorea, the Vietnam War and the Gulf-war. Since the fall of the Soviet Union 1991-1992 the US’ power has grown rapidly up to the present time. The reason for this is that the world the last 12-13 years has not had any opponent to restrict the Americans. The nation refuses to sign international resolutions like the Kyoto-agreement, and because of their superior military power no nation dares to stand up and tell them that they have to to co-operate with the rest of the world . Some extremist groups have already taken action to remind them that they cannot do as they want in a free world where everybody depends on each other.

 

Arms Industry

US corporations lead the world in the production, sale, and distribution of weapons. In 2007 the military budget, at least five times larger than that of any other nation, will be about $550B, not including appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan. Under-reported is how much of this public money gets “awarded” to private corporations and individuals. Every year the budget includes programs soon to be canceled or obsolete, black projects that are not subject to direct congressional oversight, and the legendary overcharging by defense contractors.
While federal military spending is generally promoted as providing for domestic security, a majority is spent on international operations that benefit industry far more directly than the public. For example, Foreign Military Financing involves awarding $5B of public money to nearly 100 “developing” nations every year that can only be spent on weapons sold by US weapons contractors. The weapons are provided to factions US support in these countries based on present national security strategy.
That’s public money being spent to enrich a very few corporate executives, in a manner that will not likely improve US domestic security, and serves to benefit interests many of US citizens would not likely support. This cooperation of the military, arms industry, and US government in managing the use our tax dollars behind a veil of secrecy and media silence is a clear example of taxation without representation, and evokes many disturbing historical parallels.
Eisenhower knew there was trouble. In his farewell address to the nation he warned this country in the strongest possible terms not to allow the “military industrial complex” to exercise “unwarranted influence.” Having been the Supreme Commander of the Allied forces during WWII and then President, he was in a unique position to recognize the potential for abuse of power by members of US government having industrial and military priorities that exceeded their Constitutional oath. It was not intended by the framers of the Constitution that private industry should determine US domestic or international policy. Yet now, by any measure, Eisenhower’s worst fears have been realized.
Corporations operate solely for profit, and peace is less profitable than war. This is one of the primary reasons why US Constitution establishes a system of checks and balances that are meant to prevent misrepresentation by distributing authority and providing oversight. Conflicts of interest are poisonous to democracy, yet they can be found at every level of our government. Ask yourself who has benefited most from the War in Iraq or the War on Terror.

“Halliburton announced on Friday that its KBR division, responsible for carrying out Pentagon contracts, experienced a 284 percent increase in operating profits during the second quarter of this year. The increase in profits was primarily due to the Pentagon’s payment of “award fees” for what military officials call “good” or “very good” work done by KBR in the Middle East for America’s taxpayers and the troops…Audits conducted by the Pentagon’s Defense Contract Audit Agency determined that KBR had $1 billion in “questioned” expenses (i.e. expenses which military auditors consider “unreasonable”) and $442 million in “unsupported” expenses (i.e. expenses which military auditors have determined contain no receipt or any explanation on how the expenses were disbursed).”

Development and use of Neuclear Power

The development and use of nuclear power has led to the United States assuming a position as the true World Military Superpower.  The Unites States was the leader in planning, building, testing and actually using the most powerful nuclear weapon known to man.  This country also led the world in relatively safe production of nuclear power. 
During World War II, the United States began the research and development of the atomic bomb.  Code-named the Manhattan Project, it took place in a government built city in New Mexico called Los Alamos.  General Leslie Groves and physicist Robert Oppenheimer led the research to create this atomic bomb.  The mission was to build, test and, if necessary, unleash an atomic bomb.  With the many people working on creating and building this bomb, they completed it within the short amount of time given.  In July of 1945, they tested the nuclear bomb in New Mexico.  It was a success.  The very next month, an atomic bomb nicknamed “Little Boy” was dropped on Hiroshima.  Only a few days later, the atomic bomb “Fat Man” was dropped on Nagasaki.  It was around this time that the United States found out that nobody, not even Germany or the Soviet Union, was anywhere close to competing with the U.S. in atomic weaponry.  The atomic bomb was dropped not only to end the war with the Japanese, but to show the world, especially the Soviet Union, how powerful the United States was in its government, its military, its technology, and its people.  The fact that it was a new bomb and being the first type of its kind ever created also caused an eagerness to use the bomb and see how it would work.  These three factors are the reasons behind the United States dropping the atomic bomb on Japan, as they unknowingly and unintentionally began the nuclear age and the Cold War.
The Cold War began as World War II was ending.  The United States and the Soviet Union came out of the previous war nearly equal in strength, with the United States having the upper hand, being the first to create and use such intense nuclear power.  It was during this time that these countries were competing to become the World Superpower.  Nuclear power, for the purposes of electricity as well as weaponry, was going to be the determining factor as to who would be the greater Superpower.  The United States leadership was strong and organized.  The economy was good and growing stronger.  The Soviet Union was not doing that well. 
The Unites States led the world in nuclear technology by producing the atomic bomb, and had the courage to use it – twice.  This proved to the world that the United States was a Superpower they should fear. The United States also had leaders whom kept the people under control remained strong, and came out to be the World Military Superpower.

Information Superiority of USA

An essential aspect of Full Spectrum Dominance, our present military doctrine, is “information superiority.” This involves collecting and processing as much data as possible in order to achieve the best tactical advantage. Military strategy is adapting to the doctrine of preemption and the evolution of intelligence technologies intended to identify potential foreign and domestic security risks before they act. Data mining software is essential to this task.
Artificial Intelligence software has been designed that can penetrate and read nearly every database online, gather information about individuals, correlate all data gathered for key word association, and independently initiate searches on any related people. The software spits out red flags. And those red flags signify reasonable suspicion to investigate you further. The software can also initiate wire tapping, with speech recognition, once again for key word analysis. It can follow all your conversations, and determine whether of not your conversations represent a “potential threat”.
While the Justice Department has defensively reasserted on many occasions that this software is not being used, its revolutionary capacity in the hands of those we presently have no reason to trust offers sufficient cause for concern. Recent revelations about illegal wiretapping and surveillance by the FBI, give the public little reason to have faith that their rights are being adequately protected. The doctrine of “information superiority” may represent the greatest challenge to public privacy that this country has faced. The survival of our Constitution is at stake.

Space Dominance

The most understated and yet revolutionary component of Full Spectrum Dominance is the weaponization of space. Military research has made possible the creation of a network of spy satellites capable of orbiting at the highest altitudes, tracking anyone or anything on earth, in the air, or in space, and applying precise force with directed energy weapons. US Military and National Security policy have made this a priority. Creation of an “orbital defense net” is viewed as being key to securing global military dominance.
On September 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld announced at a news conference that the Department of Defense could not account for 2.3 trillion dollars of public money. The money went somewhere, and probably not where the public would agree it should go. Maybe they spent that money on secret programs the public might not understand or appreciate, like outer-orbital laser cannons.
What was so recently science fiction has become a reality with very challenging implications. The future of warfare will be increasingly determined by our capacity to control and strike the battlefield from space. Buildings could be incinerated. Individuals, troops, and convoys could be erased. Tanks, planes, and satellites could be tracked, targeted, and destroyed. In a literal sense, there is no higher ground to take.
Some day in the not too distant future they will publicly test these weapons, and in many respects it will signify the success of their Global Dominance Project. We may yet be able to prevent the creation of this satellite weapons system, but not until more people start to recognize that it’s not science fiction anymore. It may in fact be one of the greatest threats to our liberty. 

“Active measures will include battlespace control operations to guarantee the air, sea, space, and information superiority that is needed to gain the degree of control to accomplish the assigned tasks. Active measures will also include an integrated, in-depth theater air and missile defense that will exploit Service-unique capabilities to detect, identify, locate, track and deny enemy attacks on US joint forces.”
http://www.truthmove.org/workspace/assets/external.php?url=http://131.84.1.34/jv2010/jv2010.pdf

“The first core competency, air and space superiority, is critical in providing joint force commanders both freedom from attack as well as freedom to attack. With it, joint forces can dominate enemy operations in all dimensions – land, sea, air and space. In the 21st century, technology will make it possible to find, fix or track, and target anything that moves on the surface of the Earth.”
http://www.truthmove.org/workspace/assets/external.php?url=http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/global/nuvis.htm

“The United States must retain superiority in space. Global intelligence collection, navigation support, meteorological forecasting, and communications rely on space-based assets.....”
http://www.truthmove.org/workspace/assets/external.php?url=http://www.fas.org/man/docs/qdr/sec3.html

“But, over the longer term, maintaining control of space will inevitably require the application of force both in space and from space, including but not limited to anti-missile defenses and defensive systems capable of protecting U.S. and allied satellites; space control cannot be sustained in any other fashion, with conventional land, sea, or airforce, or by electronic warfare. This eventuality is already recognized by official U.S. national space policy, which states that the ‘Department of Defense shall maintain a capability to execute the mission areas of space support, force enhancement, space control and force application.”
http://www.truthmove.org/workspace/assets/external.php?url=http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/RebuildingAmericas Defenses.pdf
“Global Engagement is the combination of global surveillance of the Earth (see anything, anytime), worldwide missile defense, and the potential ability to apply force from space. GE addresses increasing ballistic and cruise missile threats, the need for force application, and the need for effective forward presence with reduced forward basing. By 2020, a second generation system for National Missile Defense is expected to be in place—with many of the weapons and sensors potentially moving into space. Surveillance and strike missions for land, sea, and air will improve using space systems.”
http://www.truthmove.org/workspace/assets/external.php?url=http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/usspac/lrp/ch02.htm# USSPACECOM%20VISION%20FOR%202020

“In addition to exploiting space for their own purposes, future adversaries will also likely seek to deny U.S. forces unimpeded access to space. Space surveillance, ground-based lasers and space jamming capabilities, and proximity micro satellites are becoming increasingly available. A key objective for transformation, therefore, is not only to ensure the U.S. ability to exploit space for military purposes, but also as required to deny an adversary’s ability to do so.
http://www.truthmove.org/workspace/assets/external.php?url=http://www.comw.org/qdr/qdr2001.pdf

“…. for more such deployments by developing assets such as advanced remote sensing, long-range precision strike capabilities, and transformed maneuver and expeditionary forces. This broad portfolio of military capabilities must also include the ability to defend the homeland, conduct information operations, ensure U.S. access to distant theaters, and protect critical U.S. infrastructure and assets in outer space.
http://www.truthmove.org/workspace/assets/external.php?url=http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss9.html

“…adversaries are gaining access to space-based information as well as acquiring new space-based capabilities. In view of this growing threat, DOD is taking on efforts to strengthen its ability to protect and defend space-based assets, also known as ‘space control.’”
http://www.truthmove.org/workspace/assets/external.php?url=http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02738.pdf

US global military dominance

US National Security Strategy seeks to ensure the extension of US corporate influence and security through global military dominance which is to be achieved with the development and use of satellite weapons, remote control of the battlefield, surveillance of all digital communication and transactions, and the next generation of nuclear weapons. The goal is “Full Spectrum Dominance,” or total awareness and control of the battlefield. And in their present “Global War on Terror,” the world has become their battlefield. The US is positioning itself as a unilateral and preemptive global strike force of unparalleled strength, advancing corporate interests while continuing to disregard international law and human rights.
The industrial motives behind US led wars and the destruction of human lives, communities, and ecosystems that result, continue to be obscured by a mainstream media owned by those who profit from war.
Unfortunately, the public remain critically uninformed about the scope and impact of past and present military strategy. US military history can be characterized as much by loss of life, and consumption of resources, as by the relatively hidden geo-strategic interests it has served.
The primary reason why the public is uninformed about the nature of US military industry and corporate collusion is that most mainstream news organizations are directly subservient to the interests of their corporate owners, and national security establishment.
Further, the military’s own documents reveal their intent to violate international law, and yet this receives no attention. A great deal of self-censorship can be seen, and limited journalistic credibility, as people in US mainstream press “go along to get along,” neglecting their duty to inform the public. As a result, a great deal of what the US citizens do know about war comes from whistle-blowers, Freedom of Information Act requests, lawsuits, anonymous leaks, and independent research. Through these channels the public has access to information that reveals a concerted effort by industry to control the public’s view of international conflict.

How has the US used their huge influence in the war on terror?

The US is today the world superior superpower. Since the attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon 9/11 -01 the US has chosen a more independent path than before. Instead of co-operating with the UN and Europe, they have chosen to do things more on their own.
 The Americans say that their country is the most democratic in the world. At least it seems so the way they bring their “god-blessed” democracy to new countries like Afghanistan and Iraq.
 After the attacks on the World Trade Centre, George W. Bush rallied the country behind one flag in the war on terror. After that he did the only right thing; he co-operated with the UN in the invasion of Afghanistan and the hunt for bin Laden.
What did Bush urge his supervisors to in the days after the attacks? He urged them to find a connection between the attacks and Saddam Hussein, even though his intelligence told him that it was bin Laden’s terror organization Al-Qaeda who was responsible for the attacks. In the time previous to the attacks the CIA actually told President Bush that the country was a possible target for terrorist attacks in the nearest future. In spite of this the security level wasn’t raised to highest level of security, the Special Forces were not prepared, the national air force was not ready to eliminate such a threat and the air space wasn’t secured properly for such an event. If all these preparations had been done –who knows? Maybe there wouldn’t be a 9/11 -01 so dramatic and disturbing to the world peace. Anyway what’s done cannot be undone, now we should focus on the extermination of terrorism. But how can we stop terrorists if we’re not able to find and capture a man with a dialyse machine in the mountains of Afghanistan?
 In Afghanistan the US and the United Nations have done a good job; they’ve removed the Taliban regime and brought the country on its way to democracy. Recently they held their first democratic election ever. But the brain behind the attacks on the Twin Towers, Osama bin Laden, was not arrested -although he was trapped in the mountains for the time of the invasion.
 Do you know who where the President before the election? Hamid Karzai, former director in one of the world’s largest oil-companies, the American Uno-coal. Right after he became President the company got a contract to build a gas-pipe under the Black Sea, which the Taliban regime denied. He has now been re-elected.
 The war in Iraq started with the Gulf-war where the UN and the US drove Saddam Hussein back from his invasion of Kuwait. One can look at this as the start of the terrorism in the Middle-East. Many Islamite extremists felt this as an encroachment to their freedom. After this it was quiet for a period of time before the UN-inspectors went in to search for weapons of mass destruction.
 After long lasting inspections; no one had found any weapons of mass destruction. It was during these last inspections that the US “decided” that the Iraqi dictator was possessing weapons of mass destruction. And before the inspections were finished; George W. Bush launched a big attack on Iraq. The attack came even though persons with connections to Saddam Hussein days before the attack came to the Pentagon advisor Richard Perle with an offer letting the US send inspectors and soldiers into the country to search for weapons of mass destruction. But the CIA rejected the offer. So why did the US invade Iraq? Was it because Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction or was it because the American industry depends on the oil-resources in the area and that’s why the government wants to control them?
Today 1 ¾ year later, the American Army has not found any weapons of the type “Georgie’s” intelligence claimed they had proof for. During the last 1 ¾ year the numbers of kidnappings, car bombs, suicide bombers and killed American soldiers have increased. 7/11 –04 the Iraqi government declared state of emergency. Today (8/11 –04) the reaction to the Sunni Muslim riot came. 15 000 soldiers from the American Army and the Iraqi National Guard moved into the “capital” of the rebelling groups to put down the riot.

US being the only super power in the world?

Today, as said, the United States is the world’s only superpower. But how do they use their enormous influence, especially in the war on terrorism and what are the consequences?
 “A superpower is a state with the ability to influence events or project power on a wide scale. In modern terms, this may imply an entity with a strong economy, a large population, and strong armed forces, including air power and satellite capabilities, and a huge arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.” (Definition from the online lexicon Wikipedia (wikipedia.org)). Today the US has all of these characteristics.
 Everyday the US uses its power as a superpower to influence conflicts and problems around the world and in most of the conflicts they do as it suits them. An example is in the Israel-Palestine conflict where they’re on the opposite side of Europe. One of the main reasons for this may be that a lot of the big investors in the US are Jews and if the government starts to support the Palestinians they might sell their obligations and a big part of the American population is Jewish. But I still think that they should support the Palestinians and their case. That is because 50 years ago the area which the Israeli people and the Palestinian people share today was Palestinian. The consequences of the US and Europe disagreeing on this topic leads to negative attitudes towards Americans.
 The main reason why the Israeli President Ariel Sharon and George W. Bush have not been interested in discussing a peace agreement with the Palestinians because they claim Yasir Arafat is leader in a “terrorist organization” and because he hasn’t had enough influence in the Palestinian people the recent years. Just recently Yasir Arafat died and a new president will be elected in January. Maybe we’ll see a new progress in the conflict?
 I believe that the world should have more than one superpower because they would be able to “control” each other in the way that none of them would become too powerful. For example a left-wing alternative to the capitalistic, conservative United States of America, for instance China. The Chinese industry and economy is growing with an enormous speed and China is today the country whose use of oil is growing the fastest in the world.
 With two superpowers the risk of a world war is higher, because they will most likely have different views on different topics. And so the risk for a separated world is bigger and it would put a lot of countries in a new position. In example: if China becomes a communistic superpower on the level of the US, the economic superpower Japan will have a problem. Its ideology is the opposite of China’s and so the country will have to choose if it will continue its trading with the US and become an “enemy” to China or join China and end its connections to the US. If Japan chooses to stop their business with the US, the American economy will probably collapse because it depends on loans and trading with the Japanese.
 A big part of the American industry and consumption is based on loans. Because of this and the fact that many big American companies depends on the oil from the restless areas in the Middle-East (maybe that is why the government wants control over the territories? Or so it seems) I would say that the US is no big economic superpower. But because the oil price is set in American dollars, it’s important that the American economy and industry becomes stronger and shows more positive numbers than they do today. Especially oil producing countries are dependent on that the dollar foreign exchange rate is strong. Such countries are Norway and the OPEC-members. Recent prognosis show that if the development we see today continues, the dollar exchange value will descend by 30% (!).
 When George W. Bush declared war on Iraq, it was without the support of the United Nations. There were no countries with a big army or with any major political influence international that joined in the invasion, except from Great Britain, Italy and Spain. Was it wrong to invade Iraq without the UN? Most Europeans would say “yes –that is why we didn’t join the invasion”, but if you had asked an American the same question at the time of the invasion it would have been a 75% chance that he/she would say “of course it was the right thing!”. Personally I think that George W. Bush should’ve waited for the inspectors to finish their work, but if you look at it from an American point of view, I think, you would say that it was the right thing (below you can see statistics for the international support for the Iraq war, and how the support has developed in the US). I believe that the reason why the Americans are so much more eager for war lies in the new mentality after the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon. If you experience something like 9/11 you wouldn’t take the risk of something like it happening again. The consequences of the American warmongering are that the world becomes more divided, but the US does, unfortunately, continue their strict foreign policy. They can do this because they are the only superpower in the world.
 As an ending to the project I just want to say that I hope the US is going to consider and respect other nation’s opinions in a better way. Unfortunately this will most likely happen after the change of minister of Foreign Affairs.

 

Iraq war across Europe and in the US

This one was found at: http://www.eriposte.com/war_peace/iraq/
world_support/gallup_intl_2003_by_country.gif, and were last updated 4th mars 2003

.
As one can see; in none of the European countries has there been a majority supporting the invasion of Iraq.
We can see from this table (found at: http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm last updated the 31st of October) that the support in the US has been declining the 1¾ last years:

CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll. Oct. 29-31, 2004. N=1,044 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.
"In view of the developments since we first sent our troops to Iraq, do you think the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq, or not?"
		Made a Mistake	Did Not Make a Mistake	No Opinion
		%	%	%
	10/29-31/04	44	52	4
	10/22-24/04	47	51	2
	10/14-16/04	47	52	1
	10/9-10/04	46	53	1
	10/1-3/04	48	51	1
	9/24-26/04	42	55	3
	9/3-5/04	38	57	5
	8/23-25/04	48	50	2
	7/30 - 8/1/04	47	51	2
	7/19-21/04	50	47	3
	7/8-11/04	54	45	1
	6/21-23/04	54	44	2
	6/3-6/04	41	58	1
	5/7-9/04	44	54	2
	4/16-18/04	42	57	1
	1/12-15/04	42	56	2
	11/3-5/03	39	60	1
	10/6-8/03	40	59	1
	7/7-9/03	27	72	1
	3/24-25/03	23	75	2

 Other military super powers:

• Russia
• China
• EU
• France
• UK
• Israel
• India
• Germany
• Japan