Is the United States likely to remain the economic hegemon over the next 25 years?
According to the theory of hegemonic stability, for achieving the cooperation, the hegemonic power can provide help to the states because of the presence of the dominant power the distributional conflicts is improved and the enforcement is facilitated (Miles, 2016). The broad outlines of the cooperation can be determined by the preferences given to dominant power and in particular, the dominant power is in a better position of enforcing the cooperation for different reasons. In international cooperation Firstly it is important to have the genuine interest which is enough to adopt the negative consequences of the failure of cooperation to a larger extent than the small states. Secondly, it will have the abilities to demand other states whether they should get engaged in the deliberate noncompliance.
Though these observations are found to be accurate, it is argued by other scholars that nevertheless hegemonic power within a group of states is a complicated cooperation. The reason behind this is that often systematic effects are seen on states due to international cooperation. The external options are the dependence of powerful states on the global partners will be less increased due to cooperation than the dependence of weak states (Suder & Suder, 2013).
A good reason is embedded behind the worry of weak states that on continued cooperation the most powerful partners will exploit their dependence with respect to renegotiate for distribution of profits from cooperation.
In the context of trade liberalization (Smales, 2013) has analyzed the problem. With the trade cooperation, if the large and small country is involved, then the companies of every country in maximizing the benefits from the market access have to undergo costly adjustments. When the North American free trade agreement is formed by the United States with the Canada and Mexico for example, the dependence of Mexico and Canada has increased to a greater extent on the United States than the dependence of US in Canada and Mexico (Woo, Garnaut & Song, 2013).
It was proposed by some of the scholars of hegemonic power that help can be obtained from the domestic institutions for hegemony for solving the commitment problem. For instance, by (Smales, 2013) the creation of international order has been analyzed on the major wars and it is noted that with its associates the United States was in a position to score the cooperation effectively. The United States as a democratic country is more consistent and is less prone to exploit its lower partners than a tyrannical hegemony might have been being the main reason (Suder & Suder, 2013).
In this argument, the international institutions have also played the crucial role. It has been proposed by many scholars that international agreements can help tying up the powerful hands of hegemonic and hence the profitability of exploitation can be reduced (Brown et al., 2011). By all these, it is concluded that United States rules supreme, however reluctantly the US has won over the international community on the whole. Until the time this loyalty towards the US is not broken down it will continue to remain as the absolute world’s super power. On the international stage, a power of persuasion, leadership, and influence is employed by the US which cannot be even compare or is close to any other state (Brandt & Gao, 2016).
In future, both China and the United States will get engaged in plenty of struggles with respect to power in the coming decades, but unlikely it can be noticed that China will be challenging the authority of the United States and will gather support from all the industrialized nations all over the world. Regardless of its failings the United States, its influence is held rightfully and firmly in terms of worldly values and will do open-endedly irrespective of its economy and the strength with respect to China.
Brandt, M.W. and Gao, L., 2016. Macro Fundamentals or Geopolitical Events? A Textual Analysis of News Events for Crude Oil.
Brown, T.J., Parks, M.J., Hernandez, J., Jennings, B.J., Kaplan, P.G. and Conrad, S.H., 2011. Uncertainty Quantification and Validation of Combined Hydrological and Macroeconomic Analyses. Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque.
Miles, D., 2016. Beware of concentrated risk in diversified portfolios. Professional Planner, (90), p.26.
Suder, G. and Suder, D.A., 2013. The effect of macroeconomic threats on brand value and ranking: Insights from 10 years of fluctuations. Journal of Brand Management, 20(4), pp.309-324.
Smales, L.A., 2013. Impact of macroeconomic announcements on interest rate futures: high?frequency evidence from Australia. Journal of Financial Research, 36(3), pp.371-388.
Woo, W.T., Garnaut, R. and Song, L., 2013. China's new place in a world in crisis: Economic, geopolitical and environmental dimensions (p. 461). ANU Press.