Next Superpower ?

[Puryong]

Oh come on if you genuinely believe each and every citizen is at gunpoint you really have been sucked in by Western propaganda.

You realise when you see the 'depravity' in North Korea you're watching re-runs from the famine in the 90's caused by the collapse of the soviet bloc. I mean, when your only major trading partners collapse, you're going to have difficulties.

[Stormwrath]

Personally I don't think America will lose its title. Maybe its influence compared to the 1990s, but not to the point of it disqualifying itself as a superpower. America could still retain it into the 21st century, provided that they can maintain their economy and their power projection for that long; however their influence relative to the rest of the world will decline. I have my doubts for China (because of its current issues with its own influence, the lack of immigrants or of Nobel prizes coming from China, external pressures and abysmal inequality), Russia (because its economy has spiraled downward ever since the USSR was no more, plus the Kremlin still has Cold War mentality), and India (because of its neighbors, decentralized government, widespread poverty, the caste system and external pressures). Don't even get me started with the EU (which lacks the necessary military might and power projection of superpower status, and has an unstable currency at the moment) and the Gulf States (oil won't last forever).

[Stormwrath]

Oh come on if you genuinely believe each and every citizen is at gunpoint you really have been sucked in by Western propaganda.

You realise when you see the 'depravity' in North Korea you're watching re-runs from the famine in the 90's caused by the collapse of the soviet bloc. I mean, when your only major trading partners collapse, you're going to have difficulties.

China may not be wanting to keep up the Norks for long.

[Puryong]

Oh come on if you genuinely believe each and every citizen is at gunpoint you really have been sucked in by Western propaganda.

You realise when you see the 'depravity' in North Korea you're watching re-runs from the famine in the 90's caused by the collapse of the soviet bloc. I mean, when your only major trading partners collapse, you're going to have difficulties.

China may not be wanting to keep up the Norks for long.

I don't believe that.

[Rentalla]

Ooh, one of my favorite geo-political topics.

Sadly it's often simplified by the media and any conversations I try to have with friends are usually "China's gonna conquer the world, everyone hide!" Well, no. And I'm glad there's this forum to discuss and argue ideas

As we all know, the US is the current hegemon of the world as the sole remaining superpower which is due to an all but miraculous combination of economic, military, political and geographical factors that all combine to make it the most powerful country on Earth and in history.

Now, let's look at the other contenders.

China is the most commonly mentioned as a future superpower, with people always citing it as the reason for the US's supposed decline from its position, which isn't necessarily the case and basically talking to most people about superpowerdom always comes around to this. Now, although their economy is growing at a frightening pace and on track to become the largest in the world in terms of PPP later this year, this does not a superpower make. This is due to the economy developing and, as we saw with the U.S, this is rapid and leads to the economy developing at a high rate. However, this has been largely driven by infastructure projects and that is starting to show with a massive property bubble and masses of buildings nobody wants or can afford to move in to. In addition, the country basically functions as a giant factory for the more developed nations of the world, with weak domestic purchasing power being one of the nation's biggest problems. Indeed, the Chinese government is working on these problems but as it is now, and for the foreseeable future, China is no superpower and will likely not overtake the U.S during our lifetime.

Another factor to consider is Chinese history. People usually make the assumption that as a superpower China will act just as the U.S does now, only it will be worse, because it is a communist state. This is not necessarily the case as we make these presumptions based on Western history. Whilst the west always excelled at building power by projecting force overseas, as seen in the era of European colonies with the British Empire becoming the superpower of its time and the U.S, itself the child of European colonists, following this idea by exerting its political and military influence worldwide, China has always been focused on domestic affairs. The West builds power through expanding outwards, China builds power by looking inwards. In addition, the nation is massive and diverse, so the government's primary focus is one governing their own country. The people believe China to be the greatest country in the world and see no reason to exert their will over far fetched nations. This means that although it will likely attempt to pull Asian countries under its influence, much of the world will likely remain untouched by China.

Now, onto Russia, the country that everyone inexplicably thinks is a superpower. And by everyone I mean the non political nerds. The reason for this is likely leftover Cold War paranoia and mind sets. Russia is a great power, but with a debt crisis, economic issues, a declining population, rampant corruption and threats facing it from all sides it's no superpower, nor is it ever likely to gain the position again. One often overlooked fact about the Soviet Union's power was the geography of it. During its existence, the Soviet Union's borders extended past the Northern European Planes, a large stretch of land that is almost indefensible, since it is essentially a massive stretch of flat land. Now, NATO is capable of, at any time, rolling troops across it and eventually conquering Russia. Obviously it's more complex than that but, even as technology has advanced, geography plays a massive role in warfare and a massive strategic liability like that could cripple Russia. In addition, the cost of moving goods across the nation means that it has to remain centralized, although plans to develop the east are being put in place to defend from growing Chinese influence, yet another one of the issues facing Russia.

India has potential, but with a population that's spiraling out of control, tackling poverty will be incredibly difficult and it will not be a superpower within a foreseeable timeframe. A great power, yes, but not a superpower.

The Middle East is no superpower, shale oil in the U.S is leading to a lesser dependance upon the countries for oil and as the world moves towards renewable resources, their influence will begin to dry up.

Now, the EU is an intersting one. Some argue that it already is a superpower, albeit a new kind not yet seen. They argue that its soft power makes it a superpower in its own right. Well, I'd argue that the U.S still has more soft power than Europe, due to the overwhelming amount of American products and culture that permeates through even Europe itself. In addition, this type of 'modern' superpower is arguably sustained only by the existence of a 'traditional' or 'true' superpower. Without a huge military, and by natureeconomic and political, force in the world to balance out other nations, no such power could exert that much force, due to lower stability worldwide. Coupled with European economic trouble (although this may be coming to a close) and a lack of actual power or centralization, the EU is no superpower.

Now, onto something interesting. In addition to the reasons the above nations will not become superpowers, there are several reasons the U.S is poised to remain not only one, but potentially the only superpower. As it is now, no nation is capable of projecting force on anywhere near the scale of America. Their military might is roughly equal to the remainder of the world. For example, the U.S has ten active aircraft carriers. The rest of the world have ten, combined. China has only just begun work on its first aircraft carrier. Coupled with the most advanced military tech in the world and military spending projected to remain ahead of even China's, who is attempting to catch up in terms of power, (the reasons for that come later) until 2050, which is where the forecast ends. Furthermore, despite the Chinese economy being incredibly large as an entity, individual income and GDP per capita remain abysmal. U.S workers are far more productive than their Chinese counterparts and the purchasing power of America is much higher.

In terms of soft power, American culture permeates through most other nations and they are the global leader. After all, who do the countries of the world look to in the event of a worldwide crisis?

There is also the factor of geography to consider. All one needs to do is look at a map with the Americas at the centre to see why the U.S is so powerful. They are positioned between Europe and Asia, the two largest economic areas in the world and with the engine of globalization, where goods are much cheaper to ship by sea than land and all trade travels through the U.S. In addition to that, the U.S has their navy positioned along all of the world's major trade routes, that's right, they can cut off any nation in the world from global trade, effectively crippling their economy if it lasts too long. Even China would suffer massively, without raw materials coming in for them to use or anywhere to ship their goods, even they would be forced to bend to the U.S's will. Hence the military, particualrly naval buildup of the nation. Of course, this would also damage the U.S, but if they chose to try and destroy a nation, they could.

This is also coupled with technological innovation, powerhouse Universities, influence worldwide, a growing population (while China's will begin to decline, although this isn't necessarily a bad thing and may speed up development), excellent economic recovery and the fact invasion is nearly impossible. The U.S's navy and airforce could match all of the world's while massive ground forces in Texas would prevent invasion by land from the south. Canada would also be easy to deal with.

So yeah.

TLDR; The U.S is on top and will remain there for the conceivable future.

That sir was beautiful.

[Othelos]

Oh come on if you genuinely believe each and every citizen is at gunpoint you really have been sucked in by Western propaganda.

I never said that each and every citizen is at gunpoint. Just most of them, since they have absolutely no power or way to defend themselves.

You realise when you see the 'depravity' in North Korea you're watching re-runs from the famine in the 90's caused by the collapse of the soviet bloc. I mean, when your only major trading partners collapse, you're going to have difficulties.

First, if North Korea was anywhere near as well off as you claim, then that famine wouldn't have happened in the first place.

Second, I've seen plenty of films from the last decade. If NK wasn't so horrible, and was an open society, people like you wouldn't have to claim that independent journalists are creating propaganda.

[The Conez Imperium]

TLDR; The U.S is on top and will remain there for the conceivable future.

That was a good post and I don't want to ruin your opinion but the OP did say next. Next referring to a super power other than the current one (USA).

Its like saying who's the next president of the USA and saying the answer is Obama...who is the current president.

[Rentalla]

TLDR; The U.S is on top and will remain there for the conceivable future.

That was a good post and I don't want to ruin your opinion but the OP did say next. Next referring to a super power other than the current one (USA).

Its like saying who's the next president of the USA and saying the answer is Obama...who is the current president.

He did state that he didn't think that any of the contenders have a chance, and that the U.S. will not only keep the superpower title, but also keep other nations from achieving it. Besides Murica is on the poll.

[Puryong]

Oh come on if you genuinely believe each and every citizen is at gunpoint you really have been sucked in by Western propaganda.

I never said that each and every citizen is at gunpoint. Just most of them, since they have absolutely no power or way to defend themselves.

You realise when you see the 'depravity' in North Korea you're watching re-runs from the famine in the 90's caused by the collapse of the soviet bloc. I mean, when your only major trading partners collapse, you're going to have difficulties.

First, if North Korea was anywhere near as well off as you claim, then that famine wouldn't have happened in the first place.

Second, I've seen plenty of films from the last decade. If NK wasn't so horrible, and was an open society, people like you wouldn't have to claim that independent journalists are creating propaganda.

When have I claimed NK was well off? I have repeatedly said they are in a poor financial situation. My point was they are doing fantastic considering that.

I also never claimed NK was open, it's not, it's very wary and secretive because it should be. Every western nation would be happy to see it's destruction. The capture of the USS Pueblo proved how desperate the USA was to destroy NK and the people's government.

[Othelos]

TLDR; The U.S is on top and will remain there for the conceivable future.

That was a good post and I don't want to ruin your opinion but the OP did say next. Next referring to a super power other than the current one (USA).

Its like saying who's the next president of the USA and saying the answer is Obama...who is the current president.

The OP included the US as a poll option and part of the discussion; he or she just didn't clearly phrase the title question so as to easily lend to the idea of the US remaining the sole superpower.

[Herargon]

USA, EU and PRC will be the great powers of our time.
India soon will follow.

[Othelos]

I never said that each and every citizen is at gunpoint. Just most of them, since they have absolutely no power or way to defend themselves.


First, if North Korea was anywhere near as well off as you claim, then that famine wouldn't have happened in the first place.

Second, I've seen plenty of films from the last decade. If NK wasn't so horrible, and was an open society, people like you wouldn't have to claim that independent journalists are creating propaganda.

When have I claimed NK was well off? I have repeatedly said they are in a poor financial situation. My point was they are doing fantastic considering that.

eh, no.

I also never claimed NK was open, it's not, it's very wary and secretive because it should be. Every western nation would be happy to see it's destruction. The capture of the USS Pueblo proved how desperate the USA was to destroy NK and the people's government.

Westerners are more interested in the liberation of its people and improving the quality of life than 'destroying' the country. I couldn't care less if North Korea stays North Korea, but there needs to be a change so that regular people can live with basic rights and be lifted out of poverty.

[Mike the Progressive]

USA, EU and PRC will be the great powers of our time.
India soon will follow.

This is true. They already control our 7/11. Next: the world!

[Seraven]

Ooh, one of my favorite geo-political topics.

Sadly it's often simplified by the media and any conversations I try to have with friends are usually "China's gonna conquer the world, everyone hide!" Well, no. And I'm glad there's this forum to discuss and argue ideas

As we all know, the US is the current hegemon of the world as the sole remaining superpower which is due to an all but miraculous combination of economic, military, political and geographical factors that all combine to make it the most powerful country on Earth and in history.

Now, let's look at the other contenders.

China is the most commonly mentioned as a future superpower, with people always citing it as the reason for the US's supposed decline from its position, which isn't necessarily the case and basically talking to most people about superpowerdom always comes around to this. Now, although their economy is growing at a frightening pace and on track to become the largest in the world in terms of PPP later this year, this does not a superpower make. This is due to the economy developing and, as we saw with the U.S, this is rapid and leads to the economy developing at a high rate. However, this has been largely driven by infastructure projects and that is starting to show with a massive property bubble and masses of buildings nobody wants or can afford to move in to. In addition, the country basically functions as a giant factory for the more developed nations of the world, with weak domestic purchasing power being one of the nation's biggest problems. Indeed, the Chinese government is working on these problems but as it is now, and for the foreseeable future, China is no superpower and will likely not overtake the U.S during our lifetime.

Another factor to consider is Chinese history. People usually make the assumption that as a superpower China will act just as the U.S does now, only it will be worse, because it is a communist state. This is not necessarily the case as we make these presumptions based on Western history. Whilst the west always excelled at building power by projecting force overseas, as seen in the era of European colonies with the British Empire becoming the superpower of its time and the U.S, itself the child of European colonists, following this idea by exerting its political and military influence worldwide, China has always been focused on domestic affairs. The West builds power through expanding outwards, China builds power by looking inwards. In addition, the nation is massive and diverse, so the government's primary focus is one governing their own country. The people believe China to be the greatest country in the world and see no reason to exert their will over far fetched nations. This means that although it will likely attempt to pull Asian countries under its influence, much of the world will likely remain untouched by China.

Now, onto Russia, the country that everyone inexplicably thinks is a superpower. And by everyone I mean the non political nerds. The reason for this is likely leftover Cold War paranoia and mind sets. Russia is a great power, but with a debt crisis, economic issues, a declining population, rampant corruption and threats facing it from all sides it's no superpower, nor is it ever likely to gain the position again. One often overlooked fact about the Soviet Union's power was the geography of it. During its existence, the Soviet Union's borders extended past the Northern European Planes, a large stretch of land that is almost indefensible, since it is essentially a massive stretch of flat land. Now, NATO is capable of, at any time, rolling troops across it and eventually conquering Russia. Obviously it's more complex than that but, even as technology has advanced, geography plays a massive role in warfare and a massive strategic liability like that could cripple Russia. In addition, the cost of moving goods across the nation means that it has to remain centralized, although plans to develop the east are being put in place to defend from growing Chinese influence, yet another one of the issues facing Russia.

India has potential, but with a population that's spiraling out of control, tackling poverty will be incredibly difficult and it will not be a superpower within a foreseeable timeframe. A great power, yes, but not a superpower.

The Middle East is no superpower, shale oil in the U.S is leading to a lesser dependance upon the countries for oil and as the world moves towards renewable resources, their influence will begin to dry up.

Now, the EU is an intersting one. Some argue that it already is a superpower, albeit a new kind not yet seen. They argue that its soft power makes it a superpower in its own right. Well, I'd argue that the U.S still has more soft power than Europe, due to the overwhelming amount of American products and culture that permeates through even Europe itself. In addition, this type of 'modern' superpower is arguably sustained only by the existence of a 'traditional' or 'true' superpower. Without a huge military, and by natureeconomic and political, force in the world to balance out other nations, no such power could exert that much force, due to lower stability worldwide. Coupled with European economic trouble (although this may be coming to a close) and a lack of actual power or centralization, the EU is no superpower.

Now, onto something interesting. In addition to the reasons the above nations will not become superpowers, there are several reasons the U.S is poised to remain not only one, but potentially the only superpower. As it is now, no nation is capable of projecting force on anywhere near the scale of America. Their military might is roughly equal to the remainder of the world. For example, the U.S has ten active aircraft carriers. The rest of the world have ten, combined. China has only just begun work on its first aircraft carrier. Coupled with the most advanced military tech in the world and military spending projected to remain ahead of even China's, who is attempting to catch up in terms of power, (the reasons for that come later) until 2050, which is where the forecast ends. Furthermore, despite the Chinese economy being incredibly large as an entity, individual income and GDP per capita remain abysmal. U.S workers are far more productive than their Chinese counterparts and the purchasing power of America is much higher.

In terms of soft power, American culture permeates through most other nations and they are the global leader. After all, who do the countries of the world look to in the event of a worldwide crisis?

There is also the factor of geography to consider. All one needs to do is look at a map with the Americas at the centre to see why the U.S is so powerful. They are positioned between Europe and Asia, the two largest economic areas in the world and with the engine of globalization, where goods are much cheaper to ship by sea than land and all trade travels through the U.S. In addition to that, the U.S has their navy positioned along all of the world's major trade routes, that's right, they can cut off any nation in the world from global trade, effectively crippling their economy if it lasts too long. Even China would suffer massively, without raw materials coming in for them to use or anywhere to ship their goods, even they would be forced to bend to the U.S's will. Hence the military, particualrly naval buildup of the nation. Of course, this would also damage the U.S, but if they chose to try and destroy a nation, they could.

This is also coupled with technological innovation, powerhouse Universities, influence worldwide, a growing population (while China's will begin to decline, although this isn't necessarily a bad thing and may speed up development), excellent economic recovery and the fact invasion is nearly impossible. The U.S's navy and airforce could match all of the world's while massive ground forces in Texas would prevent invasion by land from the south. Canada would also be easy to deal with.

So yeah.

TLDR; The U.S is on top and will remain there for the conceivable future.

One Child Policy is a problem for China's declining population.

[Othelos]

TLDR; The U.S is on top and will remain there for the conceivable future.

One Child Policy is a problem for China's declining population.

True, and that's not going away any time soon.

[Seraven]

One Child Policy is a problem for China's declining population.

True, and that's not going away any time soon.

Does China already abolish One Child Policy?

[Draconikus]

Tch. In 2020, the British Commonwealth with reform as a federated state, just so it can prove all your predictions wrong.

[Puryong]

[Cetacea]

True, and that's not going away any time soon.

Does China already abolish One Child Policy?

as of 2013 couples are allowed to have two children if one of the parents is an only child.

also the policy does not apply in Xinjiang and Tibet

[Herargon]

Ooh, one of my favorite geo-political topics.

Sadly it's often simplified by the media and any conversations I try to have with friends are usually "China's gonna conquer the world, everyone hide!" Well, no. And I'm glad there's this forum to discuss and argue ideas

As we all know, the US is the current hegemon of the world as the sole remaining superpower which is due to an all but miraculous combination of economic, military, political and geographical factors that all combine to make it the most powerful country on Earth and in history.

Now, let's look at the other contenders.

China is the most commonly mentioned as a future superpower, with people always citing it as the reason for the US's supposed decline from its position, which isn't necessarily the case and basically talking to most people about superpowerdom always comes around to this. Now, although their economy is growing at a frightening pace and on track to become the largest in the world in terms of PPP later this year, this does not a superpower make. This is due to the economy developing and, as we saw with the U.S, this is rapid and leads to the economy developing at a high rate. However, this has been largely driven by infastructure projects and that is starting to show with a massive property bubble and masses of buildings nobody wants or can afford to move in to. In addition, the country basically functions as a giant factory for the more developed nations of the world, with weak domestic purchasing power being one of the nation's biggest problems. Indeed, the Chinese government is working on these problems but as it is now, and for the foreseeable future, China is no superpower and will likely not overtake the U.S during our lifetime.

Another factor to consider is Chinese history. People usually make the assumption that as a superpower China will act just as the U.S does now, only it will be worse, because it is a communist state. This is not necessarily the case as we make these presumptions based on Western history. Whilst the west always excelled at building power by projecting force overseas, as seen in the era of European colonies with the British Empire becoming the superpower of its time and the U.S, itself the child of European colonists, following this idea by exerting its political and military influence worldwide, China has always been focused on domestic affairs. The West builds power through expanding outwards, China builds power by looking inwards. In addition, the nation is massive and diverse, so the government's primary focus is one governing their own country. The people believe China to be the greatest country in the world and see no reason to exert their will over far fetched nations. This means that although it will likely attempt to pull Asian countries under its influence, much of the world will likely remain untouched by China.

Now, onto Russia, the country that everyone inexplicably thinks is a superpower. And by everyone I mean the non political nerds. The reason for this is likely leftover Cold War paranoia and mind sets. Russia is a great power, but with a debt crisis, economic issues, a declining population, rampant corruption and threats facing it from all sides it's no superpower, nor is it ever likely to gain the position again. One often overlooked fact about the Soviet Union's power was the geography of it. During its existence, the Soviet Union's borders extended past the Northern European Planes, a large stretch of land that is almost indefensible, since it is essentially a massive stretch of flat land. Now, NATO is capable of, at any time, rolling troops across it and eventually conquering Russia. Obviously it's more complex than that but, even as technology has advanced, geography plays a massive role in warfare and a massive strategic liability like that could cripple Russia. In addition, the cost of moving goods across the nation means that it has to remain centralized, although plans to develop the east are being put in place to defend from growing Chinese influence, yet another one of the issues facing Russia.

India has potential, but with a population that's spiraling out of control, tackling poverty will be incredibly difficult and it will not be a superpower within a foreseeable timeframe. A great power, yes, but not a superpower.

The Middle East is no superpower, shale oil in the U.S is leading to a lesser dependance upon the countries for oil and as the world moves towards renewable resources, their influence will begin to dry up.

Now, the EU is an intersting one. Some argue that it already is a superpower, albeit a new kind not yet seen. They argue that its soft power makes it a superpower in its own right. Well, I'd argue that the U.S still has more soft power than Europe, due to the overwhelming amount of American products and culture that permeates through even Europe itself. In addition, this type of 'modern' superpower is arguably sustained only by the existence of a 'traditional' or 'true' superpower. Without a huge military, and by natureeconomic and political, force in the world to balance out other nations, no such power could exert that much force, due to lower stability worldwide. Coupled with European economic trouble (although this may be coming to a close) and a lack of actual power or centralization, the EU is no superpower.

Now, onto something interesting. In addition to the reasons the above nations will not become superpowers, there are several reasons the U.S is poised to remain not only one, but potentially the only superpower. As it is now, no nation is capable of projecting force on anywhere near the scale of America. Their military might is roughly equal to the remainder of the world. For example, the U.S has ten active aircraft carriers. The rest of the world have ten, combined. China has only just begun work on its first aircraft carrier. Coupled with the most advanced military tech in the world and military spending projected to remain ahead of even China's, who is attempting to catch up in terms of power, (the reasons for that come later) until 2050, which is where the forecast ends. Furthermore, despite the Chinese economy being incredibly large as an entity, individual income and GDP per capita remain abysmal. U.S workers are far more productive than their Chinese counterparts and the purchasing power of America is much higher.

In terms of soft power, American culture permeates through most other nations and they are the global leader. After all, who do the countries of the world look to in the event of a worldwide crisis?

There is also the factor of geography to consider. All one needs to do is look at a map with the Americas at the centre to see why the U.S is so powerful. They are positioned between Europe and Asia, the two largest economic areas in the world and with the engine of globalization, where goods are much cheaper to ship by sea than land and all trade travels through the U.S. In addition to that, the U.S has their navy positioned along all of the world's major trade routes, that's right, they can cut off any nation in the world from global trade, effectively crippling their economy if it lasts too long. Even China would suffer massively, without raw materials coming in for them to use or anywhere to ship their goods, even they would be forced to bend to the U.S's will. Hence the military, particualrly naval buildup of the nation. Of course, this would also damage the U.S, but if they chose to try and destroy a nation, they could.

This is also coupled with technological innovation, powerhouse Universities, influence worldwide, a growing population (while China's will begin to decline, although this isn't necessarily a bad thing and may speed up development), excellent economic recovery and the fact invasion is nearly impossible. The U.S's navy and airforce could match all of the world's while massive ground forces in Texas would prevent invasion by land from the south. Canada would also be easy to deal with.

So yeah.

TLDR; The U.S is on top and will remain there for the conceivable future.

One Child Policy is a problem for China's declining population.

That, sir, was a beautiful and eccentric composition of poetry you've just wrote.
I couldn't ve said it better myself.
I could be called a geopolitic expert too, given that I never got a grade lower than a 7 or 8 for my social science, history and gepgraphy. This is to any one's opinion, of course.

Yes, you are correct. But also, remember that history has taught us that before every superpower came to 'awaken', there was a moment for them that was dangerous, a sort of 'fall to be able to rise', and before that, a moment of immense glory for them.

China:
- Fall:A property or demographic bubble will burst, very likely. The crisis that follows will create a national identity.
- Rise: Deng Xiaoping's market policy that let their economy be liberalised and grow extremely fast.

USA:
- Fall: The Great Depression
- Rise: Conquest of the last Spanish colonies in Asia and America, co-victory in WWI and WWII

EU:
-Rise: ???
I myself suspect that the Ukraine crisis between the EU and Russia marks this, but I am unsure.
-Fall: The European debt crisis

[Stormwrath]

(Image)

Meh, that's just Pyongyang.

[Traxa]

The USA will remain the sole world Super power, IE having means to impose its foreign policy anywhere in the globe. China is already a super power but it can't really project itself outside of Asia, and doesn't want/need to. Europe and Russia are essentially secondary players at this point and there's no real reason why this status quo will be changing anytime soon.

[Seraven]

(Image)

Celebration!

But their ground vehicles looks old...

One Child Policy is a problem for China's declining population.

That, sir, was a beautiful and eccentric composition of poetry you've just wrote.
I couldn't ve said it better myself.
I could be called a geopolitic expert too, given that I never got a grade lower than a 7 or 8 for my social science, history and gepgraphy. This is to any one's opinion, of course.

Yes, you are correct. But also, remember that history has taught us that before every superpower came to 'awaken', there was a moment for them that was dangerous, a sort of 'fall to be able to rise', and before that, a moment of immense glory for them.

China:
- Fall:A property or demographic bubble will burst, very likely. The crisis that follows will create a national identity.
- Rise: Deng Xiaoping's market policy that let their economy be liberalised and grow extremely fast.

USA:
- Fall: The Great Depression
- Rise: Conquest of the last Spanish colonies in Asia and America, co-victory in WWI and WWII

EU:
-Rise: ???
I myself suspect that the Ukraine crisis between the EU and Russia marks this, but I am unsure.
-Fall: The European debt crisis

EU is lacking in military.

[Kubra]

The capture of the USS Pueblo proved how desperate the USA was to destroy NK and the people's government.

lol this guy
i'm not sure if you're aware, but the pueblo was not important
at all

[Constaniana]

(Image)

Does China already abolish One Child Policy?

as of 2013 couples are allowed to have two children if one of the parents is an only child.

also the policy does not apply in Xinjiang and Tibet

Aka the two places with those darn pesky ethnic minorities who keep making trouble with such unreasonable demands like "civil rights" and "Oi, bitch, we don't want to be part of China." Those regions will get the one-child policy once the area's 100% Han like the Party wants.