NationStates Jolt Archive

I found this just now, and it's kinda interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_national_power

Apparently the Chinese use a variety of factors to come up with a number measuring the power a nation has. Here's a ranking from 2006:

United States --- 90.62
Britain --- 65.04
Russia --- 63.03
France --- 62.00
Germany --- 61.93
China --- 59.10
Japan --- 57.84
Canada --- 57.09
South Korea --- 53.20
India --- 50.43

What do you think? Would your list of the 10 most powerful countries look different?

Britain and Russia must be stopped, separately, before they can combine forces. Prepare the nuclear strike.

I mean...

>.>
<.<
*Runs*

Well you might quibble about one or two. I'm surprised that China rates itself so far down. In amny ways China would be at number 2, challenging for top spot. It has enormous clout.
It also reflects the G8 (with Italy excluded)

I'm not sure about "soft" power (i.e. economic, cultural and prestige power). In times of peace, the so-called "soft" power is more tangible.

What do you think? Would your list of the 10 most powerful countries look different?

It's an interesting system and the list is pretty much what mine would be.

I wonder which is the very least powerful nation on earth.

WOOOOOOO!! 57! Take THAT South Korea!

Well you might quibble about one or two. I'm surprised that China rates itself so far down. In amny ways China would be at number 2, challenging for top spot. It has enormous clout.
Sometimes it's better to be in the middle of the top.

I wonder which is the very least powerful nation on earth.

The Vatican?

AaaaH Canada beat Australia. Why you hockey-playing beavers!
Doesn't matter, we got more Olympic gold! C'mon Aussie c'mon!

I wonder which is the very least powerful nation on earth.
Sealand. Their entire country set fire, lol.

The Vatican?

Nah, the Catholic Church still holds significant influence around the world. It's probably Liechtenstein or something.

Nah, the Catholic Church still holds significant influence around the world. It's probably Liechtenstein or something.

I'd bet Zimbabwe.


I'm curious how they get their numbers, but I generally agree with the listing.

WOOOOOOO!! 57! Take THAT South Korea!

All fear the powerful CANADIAN NAVY!
http://www.code7r.org/Bintoons/canadian_navy.jpg
Donations are accepted.;)

Sealand. Their entire country set fire, lol.

owned. lol

They're surrounded by water, couldn't they just put it out?

So you wouldn't rate Saudi Arabia, Iran and Israel? Nor Italy or Brazil?

My (top of my head) list would be:

1. US
2. France
3. UK
4. China
5. Germany
6. Russia
7. Iran
8. India
9. Saudi Arabia
10. Japan

Well you might quibble about one or two. I'm surprised that China rates itself so far down. In amny ways China would be at number 2, challenging for top spot. It has enormous clout.
It also reflects the G8 (with Italy excluded)

I was surprised, too. Then again, the "Asia Rising" idea is probably a bit of a bogeyman for the West. I wouldn't be surprised if China's actual power is less than it is often made out to be.

All fear the powerful CANADIAN NAVY!
http://www.code7r.org/Bintoons/canadian_navy.jpg
Donations are accepted.;)

If that's us, just imagine how bad SK and others below us are.

I'm shocked that Britain made it to number 2. Seriously? Take that Frenchies :p

Although I was similarly surprised to find out that Britain had the second most expensive military, I guess the country must be more important than you would think if you live inside it.

So you wouldn't rate Saudi Arabia, Iran and Israel? Nor Italy or Brazil?

My (top of my head) list would be:

1. US
2. France
3. UK
4. China
5. Germany
6. Russia
7. Iran
8. India
9. Saudi Arabia
10. Japan
Only ones on this list I would disagree with are Iran and Saudi Arabia. No question they are regional powers, but I don't know that they'd make top 10 globally.

I was surprised, too. Then again, the "Asia Rising" idea is probably a bit of a bogeyman for the West. I wouldn't be surprised if China's actual power is less than it is often made out to be.

I think it is. China has the worlds largest standing army, yes. But its technology isn't the most modern.
Culturally, it doesn't wield huge influence (on a global scale, atleast...regionally, maybe). Economically, they have some decent power, but not enormous.

Asia's rise has been rapid primarily because they are playing catch-up. It is very easy to import technologies already in use in other parts of the world, which explodes productivity. Once they (or anyone) reaches the point where new technology must be created, economic growth becomes much slower.


My top 10 would probably be this:
USA
UK
France
Germany
Russia
China
Japan
Canada
Italy
India

I wonder which is the very least powerful nation on earth.

Andorra?

I wonder if your lists will be the same in 5-10 years?

China could be on top then. The Olympic results are just the beginning. The sleeping dragon has awoken and is taking wing.Over one sixth of the world speaks Chinese.

I wonder if your lists will be the same in 5-10 years?

China could be on top then. The Olympic results are just the beginning. The sleeping dragon has awoken and is taking wing.Over one sixth of the world speaks Chinese.

Let's put it back to sleep.

I'd personally rate Russia lower than France, Germany and China, as Russian power projection capabilities are far weaker than those of France, as the Russian economy is less diverse, and far too reliant on a primary (highly volatile) commodity export. Further, their alliance structures are far weaker than those of Germany and France, and their population is downright puny when compared to the US, let alone India or China.

I'd personally rate Russia lower than France, Germany and China, as Russian power projection capabilities are far weaker than those of France, as the Russian economy is less diverse, and far too reliant on a primary (highly volatile) commodity export. Further, their alliance structures are far weaker than those of Germany and France, and their population is downright puny when compared to the US, let alone India or China.
The British population is far smaller than even Russia's and we still kick arse.

I think India is under rated but that's the only rating i disagree with. India also has fast growth. And they have something China lacks a aircraft carrier which means greater force projection powers. Though thus far its only been used to hem in the Pakistanis during war.

The British population is far smaller than even Russia's and we still kick arse.

Because Britain, unlike Russia, has a diverse economy, close political, economic and military ties with an awful lot of countries, and the ability to project power to places besides the North Atlantic with the Royal Navy.

Russia's claim to fame is they have a lot of land, a lot of oil, and a lot of antiquated Soviet-era tanks.

I found this just now, and it's kinda interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_national_power

Apparently the Chinese use a variety of factors to come up with a number measuring the power a nation has. Here's a ranking from 2006:

United States --- 90.62
Britain --- 65.04
Russia --- 63.03
France --- 62.00
Germany --- 61.93
China --- 59.10
Japan --- 57.84
Canada --- 57.09
South Korea --- 53.20
India --- 50.43

What do you think? Would your list of the 10 most powerful countries look different?

The first 7 are probably about what I'd say, and probably about where I'd say it. South Korea, I think, is deceptive in terms of world power, but probably important in the region. It probably wouldn't make my top ten. I'm surprised to see no Middle East powers, which suggests the weighting must be heavily towards military might, even if not completely. Either that - or the list allows for a sort of 'entropy' effect. The dominance of Middle East powers is largely from one ephemeral product - which means a lack of stability, especially in the long term.

The first 7 are probably about what I'd say, and probably about where I'd say it. South Korea, I think, is deceptive in terms of world power, but probably important in the region. It probably wouldn't make my top ten. I'm surprised to see no Middle East powers, which suggests the weighting must be heavily towards military might, even if not completely. Either that - or the list allows for a sort of 'entropy' effect. The dominance of Middle East powers is largely from one ephemeral product - which means a lack of stability, especially in the long term.

A lack of broader political and economic stability would, most likely, hurt the countries of the Middle East in a most severe fashion. Beyond that, the volatility of reliance on a single-commodity export economy is exceptionally dangerous.

Oh, and I really can't think of a Middle East country that can project its power outside of the regional borders.

The British population is far smaller than even Russia's and we still kick arse.

Rule britannia! Marmalade and Jam!
Five Chinese crackers up your arse
Go bang! bang! bang! bang! bang!

Got to watch thiose Chinese crackers!:eek:

I wonder which is the very least powerful nation on earth.
Kiribati or Vanuatu would be my two guesses.

As for most powerful, I mostly agree with the OP, although I'd put Saudi Arabia in at 10 ahead of South Korea. Probably ahead of India as well. India might be huge, but SA can have more influence on the World economy.

I would put Japan higher. I suppose they are so low because the chinese are doing the rating.

I would put Japan higher. I suppose they are so low because the chinese are doing the rating.

I think they're probably hurt by the military weighting, actually.

Oh, and I really can't think of a Middle East country that can project its power outside of the regional borders.
Neither can Germany, and people seem to rank it consistently in the top 5.

I think they're probably hurt by the military weighting, actually.
Militarily they aren't bad. I think it's their weak foreign policy, which basically amounts to "don't say anything on anything global, and agree with the Americans on anything regional". There've been the occasional attempts to develop more independence, but the last few years no Japanese government has been strong enough to really do much.

I think they're probably hurt by the military weighting, actually.

The Japanese self defense forces are surprisingly much bigger and better equipped than most people imagine.

I suppose the people are looking at it from the point of view that Japan has 'renounced' military force. Since they could unrenounce pretty easily though, I don't find that convincing.

They should at least be around the germany/france/uk level.

The Japanese military is capable enough, but it's not built for power projection. They have no sealift capability, little in the way of a blue water navy, and little in the way of long ranged strike craft. While Japan could certainly defend itself and even conduct limited operations regionally it couldn't fight a war far from it's shores the way the US, UK, France, Russia and possibly even Canada could.

I think they're probably hurt by the military weighting, actually.

likely more tied to political will. They just have a lot of difficulty deploying troops over seas, via internal politics. Their military (called self defense force) is rather high tech and large.

The Japanese military is capable enough, but it's not built for power projection. They have no sealift capability, little in the way of a blue water navy, and little in the way of long ranged strike craft. While Japan could certainly defend itself and even conduct limited operations regionally it couldn't fight a war far from it's shores the way the US, UK, France, Russia and possibly even Canada could.

So I would agree that they are not the UK or France from a military aspect, but they have a much bigger economy and lashings of foreign currency reserves. This more than makes up for that.

At the very least they should be sitting where Germany is. Maybe Germany gets extra points because people think it rules the EU or something.

It's no wonder the United States is ranked so high. (Economically)
We almost double China in purchasing power, and we're only circa a trillion short of the entire European Union.
Link. (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html)

Neither can Germany, and people seem to rank it consistently in the top 5.

I'd say that other factors stand more strongly in Germany's favor, though. Things like the diversity and robust nature of the German economy, the robust alliance structure that Germany exists within, the economic ties it has to its political and military allies, it's relative isolation from hostile foreign powers and the quality of its military all put Germany in good stead.

So I would agree that they are not the UK or France from a military aspect, but they have a much bigger economy and lashings of foreign currency reserves. This more than makes up for that.

At the very least they should be sitting where Germany is. Maybe Germany gets extra points because people think it rules the EU or something.

Without seeing the numbers the Chinese crunch for this I'd say that Germany probably does get extra points for it's influence in the EU and the benefits of NATO membership, such as access to power projection assets (RO/RO ships, especially) of the US.

I'd put Russia at Number 2.

you can clearly see EU politics in this with France and Germany looking to climb the list whilst the UK is happy only being beaten by the US due to size issues

who here smells a good penis waving contest?

Well you might quibble about one or two. I'm surprised that China rates itself so far down. In amny ways China would be at number 2, challenging for top spot. It has enormous clout.
It also reflects the G8 (with Italy excluded)

I'm not sure about "soft" power (i.e. economic, cultural and prestige power). In times of peace, the so-called "soft" power is more tangible.

China is deliberately undermarking itself on that list, I think.

So I would agree that they are not the UK or France from a military aspect, but they have a much bigger economy and lashings of foreign currency reserves. This more than makes up for that.

At the very least they should be sitting where Germany is. Maybe Germany gets extra points because people think it rules the EU or something.

Also the soft power of japan seems under rated. Japanese cars have equal marketability to German ones(not arguing quality). Also Japanese media is far more common outside Japan then German media is In particular Japanese Manga and Animation. Also Japan is no world over for high quality electronics.

It's no wonder the United States is ranked so high. (Economically)
We almost double China in purchasing power, and we're only circa a trillion short of the entire European Union.
Link. (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html)

GDP isn't the most important...but instead, GDP per capita (amount of production per person
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2004rank.html

US is 10, EU is 35

ETA: I should mention that it is best to use both GDP and GDP per capita when considering the size and power of an economy

I wonder if your lists will be the same in 5-10 years?

China could be on top then. The Olympic results are just the beginning. The sleeping dragon has awoken and is taking wing.Over one sixth of the world speaks Chinese.

How much of the world speaks English, French, or Spanish. Must be alot of Indian speakers too.

Neither can Germany, and people seem to rank it consistently in the top 5.

Why not? Its just as advanced as the other top European nations, and bigger. (Unless you count Russia, then its second largest :p)

China is definitely under-ranked compared to Russia; in fact, they should trade places to more accurately affect the real lack of economic power Russia possesses. An economy based on the export of natural resources is doomed to failure because there isn't a whole lot shoring it up besides that; that's one reason why they're concerned about this drop in oil prices because it threatens their balance of payments and in particular their government budget.

The Vatican?They can influence Italian, Spanish, and Polish elections and referendae (referendums? referendi?).

China could be on top then. The Olympic results are just the beginning. The sleeping dragon has awoken and is taking wing.Over one sixth of the world speaks Chinese.

Number of speakers =/= amount of influence. Chinese suffers from some serious shortfalls that make it unlikely to ever have the kind of global currency like English; they'd have to definitely move away from the logographic system because it's simply impractical and inefficient. Plus, it needs to be far better at coining new words and adapting other languages' loan words; English succeeds and thrives because it is so good at localizing itself without compromising intelligibility between regional speakers.

Now, if Chinese were significantly reformed, things might be different.

How much of the world speaks English, French, or Spanish. Must be alot of Indian speakers too.Indian is not a language. Hindu, maybe, but India has a lot more languages than Hindu.

Indian is not a language. Hindu, maybe, but India has a lot more languages than Hindu.

Hindu is a religion, Hindi is a language

Hindu is a religion, Hindi is a languageI stand corrected.

I think you are all significantly underating Russia.

After all , in the recent Georgian crisis, it wasn't Russia which had to back down, was it?

No, it was the much vaunted EU which told Russia to back down, then was forced to look embarrassed when it completly ignored them.

I think you are all significantly underating Russia.

After all , in the recent Georgian crisis, it wasn't Russia which had to back down, was it?

No, it was the much vaunted EU which told Russia to back down, then was forced to look embarrassed when it completly ignored them.The world isn't limited to Georgia. Russia's power is mainly limited to Eastern Europe and former Soviet republics. It's seeking to expand that, but quite honestly, France could stage military operations in South America much faster and more efficiently than Russia could, granted they manage to get their fleet there in the first place.

I think you are all significantly underating Russia.

After all , in the recent Georgian crisis, it wasn't Russia which had to back down, was it?

No, it was the much vaunted EU which told Russia to back down, then was forced to look embarrassed when it completly ignored them.

Single issues are largely unimportant. Besides which, it's not quite resolved yet.

Also, note what China did. It's quite smart really. Rather than be arrogant and assume that they're perfect, they realize they can be better. The mistakes that some people make, such as assuming "hah, we should be on top" rather than being able to admit that you're not on top lead to a situation where you start falling behind.

It's a very interesting way to measure power. I bet the moment China starts seeing itself as nr 1-3 it will find other faults and put itself back into a lower position, so that it has some goals to reach.

Fact is, China is very dependant, economically, on a number of countries. This can end up hurting them, if ever labour costs should rise too high. However, unlike Russia, they do not base their economy on natural resources and this means they get more profit.

In terms of military power, they could probably use better technology.

In terms of cultural power, I think a lot of people associate other asian countries first, and this weakens China's cultural influence.

woo UK #2! but where would the EU be if it were one federal country, eh?

Why not? Its just as advanced as the other top European nations, and bigger. (Unless you count Russia, then its second largest :p)
The technology and the money is there, but the actual military capability isn't. After the Cold War ended, Germany was left with a 500,000 men active force and thousands of tanks no one wanted. In the years that followed there should have been some investment into developing the logistics capabilities that would allow German troops to be deployed quickly around the world in combat situations. But that was politically unpopular, and so after an initial massive cut, there wasn't much done.

They've been doing stuff more recently, given the experiences in Kosovo and Afghanistan - better armoured patrol vehicles and so on, and a much larger air transport from Airbus is due fairly soon as well. But it's still not at the level where Germany could by itself launch an operation outside its immediate region. You could rightly argue that such a scenario isn't exactly likely to arise, but if we're going to do something as hypothetical as ranking countries by power, it matters.

The technology and the money is there, but the actual military capability isn't. After the Cold War ended, Germany was left with a 500,000 men active force and thousands of tanks no one wanted. In the years that followed there should have been some investment into developing the logistics capabilities that would allow German troops to be deployed quickly around the world in combat situations. But that was politically unpopular, and so after an initial massive cut, there wasn't much done.

They've been doing stuff more recently, given the experiences in Kosovo and Afghanistan - better armoured patrol vehicles and so on, and a much larger air transport from Airbus is due fairly soon as well. But it's still not at the level where Germany could by itself launch an operation outside its immediate region. You could rightly argue that such a scenario isn't exactly likely to arise, but if we're going to do something as hypothetical as ranking countries by power, it matters.Germany does, however, have more political clout in the Arab world than most other countries.

Wonder where Finland ranks?

The first 7 are probably about what I'd say, and probably about where I'd say it. South Korea, I think, is deceptive in terms of world power, but probably important in the region. It probably wouldn't make my top ten. I'm surprised to see no Middle East powers, which suggests the weighting must be heavily towards military might, even if not completely. Either that - or the list allows for a sort of 'entropy' effect. The dominance of Middle East powers is largely from one ephemeral product - which means a lack of stability, especially in the long term.
The wikipedia article mentions civilian economic factors being included as a way to avoid Soviet-style over-militarization, so things like a quality of life, average lifespan, and income might be factored in. That would prejudice things in favor of Western nations.
Soft power would also include cultural exports, like movies, music and novels, which would give Britain, South Korea and the U.S. an edge over Middle Eastern countries which import most of their pop culture.

Germany does, however, have more political clout in the Arab world than most other countries.
That's true, but not saying much. It's not like Germany has actually used this clout to solve any of the variety of conflicts that need solving, so any influence it has is largely hypothetical at this point.

That's true, but not saying much. It's not like Germany has actually used this clout to solve any of the variety of conflicts that need solving, so any influence it has is largely hypothetical at this point.Actually, they did. Germany did a lot of mediation after the recent Lebanon war that ended up with Israel receiving some of the remains of the kidnapped soldiers back.

I would have England (perhaps just London) at the top. We have no doubt masterminded the global economic downfall as an extreme measure to topple the U.S.A reducing them to a nation in despair begging to be once again ruled by our glorious monarch. Mythical being bless Her Majesty. The New British Empire will be ours (London's).
Hope not too many Americans read this as I don't want to give the game away.

I may support Great Britain but i Am an American the statement: "Britain and Russia must be stopped, separately, before they can combine forces. Prepare the nuclear strike." Is very wrong Great Britain is our age old ally and Russia is not very much an ally to them. Watch this: Russia is enemy to Great Britain in: Medieval times,world war I, The start of World War II, The cold war (in which Great Britain Did Intervene and help research and development of nuclear devices for the U.S.A), and even more recently the War between Egypt and Lebanon Against Israel ( When we stepped up to protect Israel SO Did Great Britain And Russia Backed Lebanon and Egypt) So how about that

I may support Great Britain but i Am an American the statement: "Britain and Russia must be stopped, separately, before they can combine forces. Prepare the nuclear strike." Is very wrong Great Britain is our age old ally and Russia is not very much an ally to them. Watch this: Russia is enemy to Great Britain in: Medieval times,world war I, The start of World War II, The cold war (in which Great Britain Did Intervene and help research and development of nuclear devices for the U.S.A), and even more recently the War between Egypt and Lebanon Against Israel ( When we stepped up to protect Israel SO Did Great Britain And Russia Backed Lebanon and Egypt) So how about that

This link will explain the post you're ranting about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke

Welcome to NSG. I recommend assuming crazy, off the wall posts, like the one you're so unhappy about, are jokes until you have reason to believe otherwise.

United States --- 90.62
Britain --- 65.04
Russia --- 63.03
France --- 62.00
Germany --- 61.93
China --- 59.10
Japan --- 57.84
Canada --- 57.09
South Korea --- 53.20
India --- 50.43

I dunno...I wouldn't put South Korea in the top ten, they're capital/largest city/economic engine can be obliterated by NK artillery before you can sneeze, regardless of the final outcome of such a scenario, and that kinda thing doesn't strike me as a "top ten" trait.

I'd bump India to #9 and put Israel at #10

I'm just shocked New Zealand isn't in the top 5. Samoa should be 7th.

But seriously, I too wouldn't have South Korea up so high. Would put France below Germany and China.. India above Canada.. Probably chuck Saudi into 10.

So, something like this:

1. USA.
2. Britian.
3. Russia.
4. Germany.
5. China.
6. France.
7. Japan.
8. India.
9. Canada.
10. Saudi Arabia.

My list, based solely on my opinion:

1. USA
2. China
3. U.K.
4. France
5. Germany
6. Russia
7. Japan
8. Iran
9. India
10. Italy

I am slightly stumped by the UK being ranked quite so highly. I was hoping we were seen as rather friendly people who sat around drinking tea.

I am slightly stumped by the UK being ranked quite so highly. I was hoping we were seen as rather friendly people who sat around drinking tea.That gets factored in and probably is why. The other thing would be the Commonwealth.

That gets factored in and probably is why. The other thing would be the Commonwealth.

But we have no real control of the Commonwealth. Still it is nice to know that tea drinking can lead to political power.

The US is definatley #1, followed by UK and Russia being even. Then China, then France, then Germany, then Japan, then Vatican City.........and so on

I dunno...I wouldn't put South Korea in the top ten, they're capital/largest city/economic engine can be obliterated by NK artillery before you can sneeze, regardless of the final outcome of such a scenario, and that kinda thing doesn't strike me as a "top ten" trait.

I'd bump India to #9 and put Israel at #10

Actually the ROK moved most of its government complexes out of Seoul a few years back IIRC.

Britain

Not a country.

1. US
2. France
3. UK
4. China
5. Germany
6. Russia
7. Iran
8. India
9. Saudi Arabia
10. Japan
Lol, France is no way more powerful than the U.K., China or Russia

SPAIN!

I live there.:D

China is just trying to put you off your guard. It is in fact the real #1 country, but it's further plans of global domination depends on western nations underestimating it.

Indian is not a language. Hindu, maybe, but India has a lot more languages than Hindu.

Fair enough. Corrected I am.

Still, alot of Indians speak it.

I am slightly stumped by the UK being ranked quite so highly. I was hoping we were seen as rather friendly people who sat around drinking tea.
We invent everything cool, and have very charismatic accents. Of course we're going to be high.

AaaaH Canada beat Australia. Why you hockey-playing beavers!
Doesn't matter, we got more Olympic gold! C'mon Aussie c'mon!

We got oil.

Lol, France is no way more powerful than the U.K., China or Russia
Actually, the past year or so has demonstrated that it has the diplomatic influence and the power projection ability. It's a toss-up with the UK, but Russia or China don't have the ability to mediate conflicts (because no one would believe them) and much less power projection. France can knock out an African airforce without warning or capture a bunch of Somali pirates as soon as they act up. The speed at which they can do it makes them better than Russia or China in that category. Add a trillion-dollar economy and globally influential culture and the picture is complete.

Hm, Japan's economy is second in the world, yet they're ranked so low...I wonder if they're basing it on military power?

France can knock out an African airforce without warning or capture a bunch of Somali pirates as soon as they act up. The speed at which they can do it makes them better than Russia or China in that category. Add a trillion-dollar economy and globally influential culture and the picture is complete.

of course France is limited to being a bigshot within the Francophone world beyond which France becomes a typical western European state

Britain on the other hand has the Anglophone world which includes dialing Captain America when we find out that the MOD budget doesn't include things like body armour

Hm, Japan's economy is second in the world, yet they're ranked so low...I wonder if they're basing it on military power?

It's based on a combination of factors.