NationStates Jolt Archive

Right.
Scenario.

America suffers a depression at the hands of the Soviets and doesnt arise to be a superpower.
America suffers a massive depression.
The soviets colllapse.

Which country arises to fill the power vaccuum?

Say, in modern day, george bush atttacks one too many islamic groups and America is shamed so everyone ignores it and treats it like a wounded puppy, with a sneer and a kick. ;)
And america loses its hyperpower status.
Who arises to fill the gap?

France takes USA's spot and China takes USSR's.

Second Scenario...
China.

look at britan when it lose its empire. didn't colapse entirely. just learned some mannors. bout u.s. did.

all things come and go. why assume anything more powerful then councils of village elders are entirely neccessary.

regeonal infrastructure administrations.

and a world govenment that exists only to keep villages from preventing anyone from moving from one to the next and representing the planet to the galactic united nations.

sure you need to keep people from beating each other over the head, but for the most part this can be done best at the local level.

a peacefully balkanized u.s.? potentialy an improvement, but quite a ways down the road would be my guess.

no one gets away with being a spoiled bully for ever. america's core values do need an attitude adjustment. long overdue. it'll come. at the hands of its own thoughtlessness. no one else will likely be invoulved. and no one else will need to be.

europe is full of has been empires, and people go there because the're cool. u.s. will get that way eventualy when it happens.

running out of oil and colapse of the dollar will both help. both are eventual certainties with an uncertain schedule.

=^^=
.../\...

*Invades Cameroi*

I second that. That post had way too few capital letters and way too little point to make sense.

France takes USA's spot and China takes USSR's.

Second Scenario...
China.


France?!? Not unless the calendar reads 1934.
After they began construction of the Maginot Line and abandoned their allies they became a second tier power.

a peacefully balkanized u.s.? potentialy an improvement, but quite a ways down the road would be my guess.

no one gets away with being a spoiled bully for ever. america's core values do need an attitude adjustment. long overdue. it'll come. at the hands of its own thoughtlessness. no one else will likely be invoulved. and no one else will need to be.

europe is full of has been empires, and people go there because the're cool. u.s. will get that way eventualy when it happens.

running out of oil and colapse of the dollar will both help. both are eventual certainties with an uncertain schedule.

=^^=
.../\...

The US can never Balkanize, that was decided back in 1865. :)

BTW, if the dollar DOES ever collapse, it's taking the Pound Sterling, Yen, and Euro with it along with every other currency. Since the late 1800s (when globalization began in earnest) currencies became interrelated. The amount of US investment in the planet and many nations in the US would ruin the world economy if that happened.
Consider: the US alone is 20% of the planetary economy. And that's just Product! If you consider the trillions invested, the economic bang of such a thing would make the Interwar Depression (post WW1/pre WW2) look like a bad afternoon of golf.

No one country would replace the USA. When the USSR collapsed, it left America as the only remaining superpower, which has continued for 15 years. Different nations and groups, namely EU, China, Japan, S Korea, India, Saudi Arabia(oil), and Israel(weapons tech), would take on some, but not all roles currently played by the US.

No one country would replace the USA. When the USSR collapsed, it left America as the only remaining superpower, which has continued for 15 years. Different nations and groups, namely EU, China, Japan, S Korea, India, Saudi Arabia(oil), and Israel(weapons tech), would take on some, but not all roles currently played by the US.

South Korea and Israel only exist because of the US.

South Korea and Israel only exist because of the US.
And the US only exists because of the UK, France and all those other countries.. what's your point?

If any country is going to take on the US's job it wil be an asian country like China or India or Pakistan maybe.. The countries that don't particulary have socialistic tendencies..

And the US only exists because of the UK, France and all those other countries.. what's your point?

No no, what he means is that if the US suddenly ceased to exist, North Korea would cross the 38th parallel and the Israelis would get pushed out by surrounding arabic nations and groups. If the UK stopped existing, the US would still be fine.

Which power vacuum? Are we talking about the biggest, baddest army, or the most powerful economy, or the most cultural influence, or what? Because they don't always go together.

Meh. If the USA collapsed we all know who would take over.

Western Samoa.

Seriously, they have some really great fighters there (As long as you're willing to go hand to hand, sumo style!)

And the US only exists because of the UK, France and all those other countries.. what's your point?

My point is that both SK and Israel wouldn't exist without US military presence and aid. The same is NOT true regarding the US and any other nation. Thus I was pointing out that if the US fell, those other countries would fall, NOT take up the position of the US as the poster made out.
(Note: I'm taking this from a 20th/21st century perspective. That Britian fought in the French & Indian Wars or France fought in the American Revolution has no real bearing on modern military power.)
After all, the combined German, Italian and French fleets are still smaller than a single US Naval Battle Group. And the US has (I believe) 12 of those.
Economically, the whole EU is about equal to the US, but that's not a country. It's NAFTA with open borders and the same currency.

If any country is going to take on the US's job it wil be an asian country like China or India or Pakistan maybe.. The countries that don't particulary have socialistic tendencies..

Perhaps China or India in time. Both are going to have massive bills for their environmental clean up, and both are very likely to go though a period of civil unrest that will make the US in the 60s look like the US in the 50s. Large disenfrancised masses of middle class people without representation tend to be troublesome.

Pakistan is the France of the region: strong enough to stay sovereign, weak enough to never be a major player.

No no, what he means is that if the US suddenly ceased to exist, North Korea would cross the 38th parallel and the Israelis would get pushed out by surrounding arabic nations and groups. If the UK stopped existing, the US would still be fine.

Thanks, that's exactly right.

Maybe not fine, but it would be bearable. Just.

Not to be controvertial, however, the EU could readily fill a power vacuum.

Meh. If the USA collapsed we all know who would take over.

Western Samoa.

Seriously, they have some really great fighters there (As long as you're willing to go hand to hand, sumo style!)
Samoans are funny. They make up like 20%(ish) of my school. Good times.

The US can never Balkanize, that was decided back in 1865. :)

BTW, if the dollar DOES ever collapse, it's taking the Pound Sterling, Yen, and Euro with it along with every other currency. Since the late 1800s (when globalization began in earnest) currencies became interrelated. The amount of US investment in the planet and many nations in the US would ruin the world economy if that happened.
Consider: the US alone is 20% of the planetary economy. And that's just Product! If you consider the trillions invested, the economic bang of such a thing would make the Interwar Depression (post WW1/pre WW2) look like a bad afternoon of golf.


Yep. For all those people that wish the US ill will and a kick in the rear, just imagine what will happen if the US were to default on its debt. I am quite sure that it would cause not only worldwide economic destabilization, but cause worldwide military conflict as well.

Oh, and consider that we still grow a substantial percentage of the world's food, and that in the years to come the US will be the Saudi Arabia of coal...

I'm sitting here in the UK right now, in one of the "better" ends of London, and staying in a place that costs six times what it's worth - and the state of disrepair of both public and private services in London is at at atrocity level.

I've been to a lot of places in the US, and you would have to go to some really rotten places to have things this bad. Everytime I go to an elevator, or take public transport, or try to get any kind of service, I am sharply reminded of how the government of the UK in the 1960s and early 1970s took the UK to third world economic status.

Not to be controvertial, however, the EU could readily fill a power vacuum.

If they saw it coming and started building up their military, perhaps. Right now, with countries spending less than 2% on military (except for UK) they'd be hard pressed to counter Russia or China.
The European nations have virtually no airlift capability. Only France and the UK have nukes, and it's not like the UK would even consider sharing those (and I doubt France would, either).
Only the British have any sort of fleet capable for air operations (the French have a single carrier, Spain and Italy each have two.) NONE of these are catapult launch... they are VTOL or helicopters only, which makes many of the missions the US Navy performs difficult if not impossible.

Could the EU fill a power vacuum? Sure. If they Federalized or at least (say) tripled their military spending for a couple of decades.

If they saw it coming and started building up their military, perhaps. Right now, with countries spending less than 2% on military they'd be hard pressed to counter Russia or China.
The European nations have virtually no airlift capability. Only France and the UK have nukes, and it's not like the UK would even consider sharing those (and I doubt France would, either).
Only the British have any sort of fleet capable for air operations (the French have a single carrier, Spain and Italy each have two.) NONE of these are catapult launch... they are VTOL or helicopters only, which makes many of the missions the US Navy performs difficult if not impossible.

Could the EU fill a power vacuum? Sure. If they Federalized or at least (say) tripled their military spending for a couple of decades.

They could do it with ease. If the US falls, a recession will occur, extreme politics will become prominent, and a succession of right wing administrations will form and ally towards a common end. Military spending would increase exponentially, as would the rate of federalisation.

n.b. I truly do want a federalized EU.

France takes USA's spot and China takes USSR's.

Second Scenario...
China.
FRACE TAKE USs POSITION. u gotta be fucking crazy

If they saw it coming and started building up their military, perhaps. Right now, with countries spending less than 2% on military (except for UK) they'd be hard pressed to counter Russia or China.
The European nations have virtually no airlift capability. Only France and the UK have nukes, and it's not like the UK would even consider sharing those (and I doubt France would, either).
Only the British have any sort of fleet capable for air operations (the French have a single carrier, Spain and Italy each have two.) NONE of these are catapult launch... they are VTOL or helicopters only, which makes many of the missions the US Navy performs difficult if not impossible.

Could the EU fill a power vacuum? Sure. If they Federalized or at least (say) tripled their military spending for a couple of decades.
The EU could build up it's military pretty quickly if there was danger from China or Russia. Germany went from the depression to world war starter in 6 years. I think that when Germany started being a threat the other countries had to militarise quickly as well, in the case of france not quickly enough. The EU wouldn't need to federalise it would just need a Common Military Policy.

The EU could build up it's military pretty quickly if there was danger from China or Russia. Germany went from the depression to world war starter in 6 years. I think that when Germany started being a threat the other countries had to militarise quickly as well, in the case of france not quickly enough. The EU wouldn't need to federalise it would just need a Common Military Policy.

Yeah, but Germany in the 30s is NOT Europe in the 2000s. A CMP (as you call it) already exists on some level, but Europe in general has become so reliant on NATO that it is an alliance among unequals. The US foots the largest chunk of the bill, meanwhile Germany (and most of the other countries) are cutting their military spending. The massive social spending in Western Europe has been a major factor in this. As the US discovered in the 60s with "The Great Society", one can't arm/fight a war (Viet Nam) and have massive social programs at the same time.

Also, warfare has changed an awful lot since WW2. The German Army of 1937 was much stronger vs. the potential allies than the Army of 1943. Timing is important: at this point, it would take a nascent European Army a few DECADES of spending at (say) 10-15% to get half-way to where the US is right now. At this point, most EU members spend less than 2%.

I'm not saying that it is impossible. However, in the US/Russia/China/EU world, the EU is vastly underarmed. If not for the UK (and to a lesser degree France), it is unable to do very much militarily.

Japan and China, probably, unless the EU can cooperate more and function with a unified foreign policy. Germany is an "almost", as is the UK and perhaps France.

Yeah, but Germany in the 30s is NOT Europe in the 2000s. A CMP (as you call it) already exists on some level,
Small Rapid reaction forces.


but Europe in general has become so reliant on NATO that it is an alliance among unequals. The US foots the largest chunk of the bill, meanwhile Germany (and most of the other countries) are cutting their military spending. The massive social spending in Western Europe has been a major factor in this. As the US discovered in the 60s with "The Great Society", one can't arm/fight a war (Viet Nam) and have massive social programs at the same time.

Also, warfare has changed an awful lot since WW2. The German Army of 1937 was much stronger vs. the potential allies than the Army of 1943. Timing is important: at this point, it would take a nascent European Army a few DECADES of spending at (say) 10-15% to get half-way to where the US is right now. At this point, most EU members spend less than 2%.

I'm not saying that it is impossible. However, in the US/Russia/China/EU world, the EU is vastly underarmed. If not for the UK (and to a lesser degree France), it is unable to do very much militarily.
The EU has a technological advantage it's about equal to the US's, it would take decades if there is no common drive and necessity to build up, faced with Russian military interference into the eastern EU states things would get done a lot quicker, also we're ignoring that Russia needs a military build up as well and they have major internal problems (http://www.channel4.com/more4/documentaries/doc-feature.jsp?id=43)

China needs a technology build up and also needs to sort out problems.

Small Rapid reaction forces.

...Which can't actually leave Europe without US airpower. The Europeans really do lack air transport.

The EU has a technological advantage it's about equal to the US's, it would take decades if there is no common drive and necessity to build up, faced with Russian military interference into the eastern EU states things would get done a lot quicker, also we're ignoring that Russia needs a military build up as well and they have major internal problems (http://www.channel4.com/more4/documentaries/doc-feature.jsp?id=43)

China needs a technology build up and also needs to sort out problems.

All true. I'm just pointing out that the Euros have made no move to do so, and that it would take a while for them to build up to a point where they could fulfill America's role. Quality is important, but so is quantity.

Cuba and Venezuela...just to throw them out there 'cause no one's mentioned them yet.

...Which can't actually leave Europe without US airpower. The Europeans really do lack air transport.
Hopefully we'll actually build transport and air support to go with them so that they are actually worth having. (in real life not the hypothetical situation)


All true. I'm just pointing out that the Euros have made no move to do so, and that it would take a while for them to build up to a point where they could fulfill America's role. Quality is important, but so is quantity.
Well really it just depends on what type of leaders the EU would have at the time of a US collapse and also who buys US equipment that would be going cheaper then it's worth.

EDIT:
Cuba and Venezuela...just to throw them out there 'cause no one's mentioned them yet.
Cuba would benefit but it's still only a small island but the price of oil would go down which would harm Venezuela

France?!? Not unless the calendar reads 1934.
After they began construction of the Maginot Line and abandoned their allies they became a second tier power.
I stand by it.
Britain is too prissy.
Germany doesn't want to be called Nazi and Chirac has been warning the world of Frances Nukes.
It would also be a good oppurtunity to purge some of the Africans living in France.-Send them off to some god forsaken land to Win France an Empire just like Napolean and the Polish in Haiti...

Who would fill the gap if the USA and USSR both collapsed would depend greatly on when they did so.

Right now, if the US collapsed, China and India would be at the top. The EU would be if they had more military.

The Plutonian Empire would gladly take the USA's place. ;)

the concept of a so called power vacume, presupposes such power to be a natural condition rather then one nature simply tollerates. this is absurd on the face of it. today in america we have a government the average joe has no more REAL representation in then if it WAS being run out of some other part of the world.

a world government to keep nations from closing their borders and making wars and representing the planet to some sort of galactic united nations would be an infinite improvement over the absurd excesses of national soverignty.

so that localy every village and neighborhood could go their own way on economics and idiology.

regeonal authorities to regulate and possibly provide infrastructure.

that's all the political 'power' there needs to be.

=^^=
.../\...

At the end of world war two there were 3 superpowers.

USA
USSR
and the limping British Empire.

After the events in Eygypt and the canal crisis, the British Empire lost its status but its not that far behind.

Now the youth of Europe are very largely pro-Federal Europe.
Whether this will change with age or not is debateable, however i hope not.

A federal E.U would have an economy to rival the USA and probobly exceed it when you take into consideration they would be working together instead of against eachother.
Red-Tape would be cut allowing more profits too.
The Commonwealth and E.U however cause controversy, what will probobly happen is the E.U joins the Commonwealth.

At the end of world war two there were 3 superpowers.

USA
USSR
and the limping British Empire.

After the events in Eygypt and the canal crisis, the British Empire lost its status but its not that far behind.

Now the youth of Europe are very largely pro-Federal Europe.
Whether this will change with age or not is debateable, however i hope not.

A federal E.U would have an economy to rival the USA and probobly exceed it when you take into consideration they would be working together instead of against eachother.
Red-Tape would be cut allowing more profits too.
The Commonwealth and E.U however cause controversy, what will probobly happen is the E.U joins the Commonwealth.
britain was pretty much gone immediatly after WWII and India was lost in '48.

I don't think there is another potential superpower right now. Europe has relied on the US too long. Russia still has major problems. And China's growing economy could also be its downfall as people who aren't starving tend to want some freedoms.

I take it you mean the if this had happened in the late 70s or the 80s. If it had happened, without a doubt, the most powerful nation in the world would have been France, but she, like an ecconomically crippled Britian at the time, China and India, would have been fairly isolationist. Realistically, the world would have broken down into speres of influence arround specific countries. Africa would have been dominated by Egypt in the North East, Algeria in the North West, Nigeria in the West, Tanzania in the East and SA and/or Zimbabwe in the South. South America would have been dominated by either Argenina or Brazil, The Middle east would have been any mans guess. India and Pakistan would have been at it again, and only India could have one that battle. The South East Asian region would have been reduced to a "balance of power" situation. No doubt America would have been balkanised along racial devides, would have been very messy. Russia's collapse pretty much would have been a copy of what happened in the ten years that followed the collapse of the Berlin wall. The only real positive would have been the UN would have been much stronger at the end of the process.

At the end of world war two there were 3 superpowers.

USA
USSR
and the limping British Empire.

After the events in Eygypt and the canal crisis, the British Empire lost its status but its not that far behind.

Now the youth of Europe are very largely pro-Federal Europe.
Whether this will change with age or not is debateable, however i hope not.

A federal E.U would have an economy to rival the USA and probobly exceed it when you take into consideration they would be working together instead of against eachother.
Red-Tape would be cut allowing more profits too.
The Commonwealth and E.U however cause controversy, what will probobly happen is the E.U joins the Commonwealth.

The Empire was bankrupt and its dimise was on the wall from '48 because of India, but in the imideate aftermath, the Empire was particularly strong militarialy as was France's empire (there is a reason France has a veto) both were to last into the 60s and, had there been no US or Soviet influence, would probably still be dominat over much of Africa and the world's seas. Granted, Vietnam and Algeria would have broken away from France, Malaysia
and Ghana from Britain, but it may have taken much longer and been less chaotic.