The WORSP that Could Happen

We have all had ten-plus years since the end of the Cold War to get used to the idea that the US is the World’s Only Remaining Superpower—the WORSP. It’s a concept for which the political science textbooks, with their demarcation between bipolar and multipolar systems, barely prepared us.

This “monopolar” world we’re in—first, of all, is it really that way, or do we just see it that way? Secondly, are there precedents for it in history? If so, how did those prior “End of History” worlds evolve to the next level? Evolve they did; contrary to what you youngsters may think, things haven’t always been this way.

To help us to assess superpotency, we will lean upon that favorite crutch, a homemade index. In honor of the website where this was first posted (and in honor of one of my favorite childhood games of battling superpowers), we will call it “eRISQ”, for “eRaider Index of Superpower-ness Quotient.”

eRISQ starts from the premise that a superpower is not measured by bread alone, or sword alone, but demonstrates its potency as a multi-dimensional combination of political, cultural, military, and economic strength. These dimensions are not independent of each other—economic influence over other societies tends to bring cultural and political influence, for example—but some powers do show tendencies to favor one dimension over the other. A true global power would be strong in all categories, and at least influential, if not dominant, everywhere.

The next thing we have to get straight is that this rating system is purely amoral—power is the only object here. Cultural influence is cultural influence; it doesn’t matter whether the culture is highbrow, lowbrow, or nobrow (ie Baywatch). Military strength is the ability to defeat everybody else’s armies, navies, or whatever; political strength is the ability to impose your nation’s will on those other governments. The two are not necessarily the same (I have to thank eRaider co-founder Aaron Brown for reminding me of the distinction, through an ancient posting on the Global Affairs board which made indirect reference to the oft-forgotten War of 1812 invasion of Washington). Defining economic power is trickier; let’s call it the extent to which the nation controls global trade, thereby influencing the basis of local economies.

How do you rate in your neighborhood, Mr. Rogers?

The categories, then, are political/cultural/military/economic, weighted equally. Dominance means the form is directly transferred from the more powerful country to the dominated one; influence means what goes on in the influential country shows up, modified, in the influenced one. Ranking is 1-6 in each category, based on the extent of impact beyond the borders of the rated society.

Just to make it interesting, we take each category rating, subtract it from the maximum possible (6), and square that result (to penalize the one-sided superpowers as compared to the ones with balanced effects across categories). We sum the category results and divide by four. Why four? Whyfore, indeed… we promised a quotient, didn’t we?

Because we’re subtracting the rating from the maximum possible, a lower number indicates a greater superpower. Does God get a 0 (maximum in all categories)? Let’s not discuss that one now, but hopefully you get the idea. A country which rated 5 in each category (dominating most, influencing the rest) would get 1.00, while one which rated a 2 in each category (dominating very few, influencing some; in other words, a minor regional player) would get (six minus two, squared, times four, divided by four) an eRISQ of 16.The rating could be applied on a regional basis, to see which nation rates as a superpower in its part of the world. One could even rate the various states of the US to see which one dominates, but the military part of the rating system doesn’t work so well.

“Streetsmart” people could compare their neighbors’ eRISQ ratings to their own as they walk by to determine whether it’s safe to spit on the sidewalk (though that rating tends to be basically a “military” one, from what I’ve seen). By the way, the best example of an all-around neighborhood superpower I can think of was the title character of the movie Superfly, who induced people to dress weirdly (and you better believe nobody messed with him).

A final point of definition: in terms of cultural and political power, all parts of the world count; however, in military or economic terms, only the parts of the world that really have some significance in global terms are important. Whether or not Japan exerts its military or trading influence on Cameroon doesn’t effect Japan’s status as a superpower, but if it were a real global power its influence would be felt, even there, on the local politics and culture.

Getting (finally) to cases
Let’s start with Japan, a real lopsided contender (all hook, no jab). In the political/cultural/military/economic categories (your mnemonic: “PC-me, please”), Japan gets 2-4-1-4, respectively, which earns it an eRISQ of 12.25.

China’s influence is mostly regional, earning it a balanced 3-3-3-3, or an eRISQ of 9.0. It is perhaps unfair that China doesn’t get much credit for coercing all its own people, as compared to a less populous nation, but, again, this is about power, not justice; besides, what self-respecting superpower can’t control those within its own borders?

Now, the US. We propose that the US gets a 4-5-6-5, for an eRISQ of 1.5. Its cultural dominance reaches to the farthest points of the world, though some (principally Islamic societies) resist, so it gets a 5. Militarily, there’s not much doubt about its superiority to any other armed forces; though some nations could resist an invasion (and Russia could still assure mutual destruction), we shall round up to a 6. Politically, America is relatively weak compared to the influence it exerts in the other dimensions; a fair number of nations have demonstrated they can go against US will and get away with it; few, though, go so far as to totally ignore it. Economically, everybody trades with the US (or wants to), and the trade deficit does not indicate a lack of economic potentcy.

To see how the mighty have fallen, let’s start with Britain. The UK still has strong, wide-ranging cultural influence—three little items called football (in most countries), its versions of rock’n’roll (Spice Girls, Oasis), and the English language help get it a ‘4’ in the culture category. Otherwise, it’s just a regional power militarily and economically, and not even a strong political influence on all of Europe (forget about the Commonwealth), earning a 2 politically: a 2-4-3-3, or an eRISQ of 9.5—just below China’s current rating. At its peak in the early 20th century, though, the UK sported an eRISQ of 2.5 on 4-4-5-5 ratings—not far from today’s rating for the “World’s Only Remaining Superpower”.

Russia today, though it has fallen fast, is not totally chopped liver: a 3-2-4-1 set of ratings earns it a 13.5 eRISQ, a little below Japan’s. At its geopolitical peak (Khrushchev’s time) the Soviet Union would’ve gotten a 4-4-5-3, or 4.5 (and that’s being generous on the economic measure—outside of Eastern Europe and Cuba, which it dominated economically, there weren’t any areas where it was very influential). As a superpower, it was a bit thin, historically speaking.

No soy marinero, soy “El Capitan”
The biggest fall that I can find anywhere, the Yosemite of cliff diving, has to be Spain’s. Its peak was in the mid-1500s, when it had toppled the two greatest empires of pre-Columbian America (the Aztecs and the Incas) and had gold running out of its huazu (could that be an Incan term originally?). On the big-time playing fields of Europe, its forces were all over, Spain making a run in those days at trying to reinstate the Holy Roman Empire with its own monarch as emperor. The Spanish were even messing around in places like the East Indies, China, Japan, and the Philippines. Culturally, apart from the language and religious imperialism in the New World, in that period Spain had a golden age of poetry and painting, Don Quixote, and Spanish revenge drama (Shakespeare’s formal inspiration for his more bloody tragedies). So, before the Spanish departure from the heights, they would’ve rated 5-5-5-5 in my book, an eRISQ of 1.0. There’s none rated higher, ever, that I can identify. (Ancient Rome, around 300 AD, might’ve been its equal.)After losing the top spot (basically to the French and English, who kicked it back and forth for nearly 300 years), the Spanish kept falling and falling. After the Dutch sent them packing the next century, they were basically finished as a superpower. By the time Napoleon made the country one of his favorite battlefields, Spain didn’t even rate too highly as a regional power. Anyway, just within Europe Spain’s a 3-3-1-3, an eRISQ of 13 (but rising); we won’t embarrass the country by rating it on the global level.

Hertz is to US as Avis is to….?
Spain’s history gives your first hint of what happens to a monopole: hit-and-run tactics—think of piracy’s heyday on the Spanish Main, which was the I-95 of its day on the Atlantic Ocean for Spanish ships loaded with gold, instead of today’s handgun runners—then someone knocks you off your pedestal. Spain didn’t have very long on top by itself, either; just under 100 years elapsed from the climactic victory over the Moors in Granada until the big upset of the Armada off England’s shores.

So, who’s the Chief Contenda?
We’ve covered most of the usual suspects; in Europe, compared to the UK’s 2-4-3-3 (9.5) we have France’s 2-4-2-2 (13.0) or Germany’s 3-3-1-3 (13.0): on their own, middle-level powers. But what about the combined power of Euroland? The countries sharing the continental currency, once they add the UK (look for it to occur around 2003) and build a military force of their own (believe it or not, it’s happening), could earn a respectable 3-4-3-4 rating, or an eRISQ of 6.5. Not quite up to the Soviet Union’s old level, but a cut above the rest. We shall see; Japan could address its weak areas—political and military influence beyond its shores—and rise up to the top rank. Otherwise, the ratings suggest that it’s a pretty close race for Number Two between China and the UK, but a long gap from them to ol’ Number One.

News Flash: US Body Language Getting More WORSP All the Time
America’s behavior on the world stage is beginning to show some signs of recognition of that status. Anytime you hear about the US being “indispensable,” or special rules that apply only for the US, that’s WORSP at work. Not entirely a bad thing; after all, it is the reality. America has always had a sense of being unique, with its aspirations noble and idealistic. This state of affairs, alone on Mount Everest, may not last for long, but history will know that “Kilroy was here.” Apart from the World War II graffiti, there’s a flag or two on the moon to make that point, and the nation was not even the WORSP then.

Here’s a quick guide to whether an American spokesperson, politician, diplomat, journalist, etc. is living up to the responsibilities of the nation’s “special status”: when the rules, which apply uniquely to the US, mean America doesn’t have to do something, they’re not being used properly. A few examples will suffice: paying its UN dues, participating in peacekeeping, ratifying or living up to a treaty its representatives agreed to, stopping nuclear proliferation, protecting intellectual property, sharing encryption technology. Some of those tasks are tough to do—the last two are basically self-contradictory—but you knew the job was dangerous when you took it, America. If it were easy to be a superpower, you’d have every two-bit nation bidding for the glory. In other words, in the global arena, the US should be doing everything the other nations have to do, and then doing something more that only the US can do.


(orig. 2000?: eraider.com)