Today’s currencies of power are not territory or mineral resources, including oil and gas, but the means of communication, channels of innovation, and the ability to maintain a dynamic equilibrium between tradition on the one hand and change on the other.
“Some rise by vice, and some fall by virtue”
The currencies of power are changing all the time, Panta rhei - the ancient Greeks observed. Once currencies of power are established they tend to be overtaken by events while they continue to coexist, sometimes out of period. Today’s currencies of power are not territory (cf. Singapore, Hong Kong, CH or tiny Liechtenstein) or mineral resources, including oil and gas, but the means of communication, channels of innovation, and the ability to maintain a dynamic equilibrium between tradition on the one hand and change on the other. Reliable, predictable, trustworthy institutions do not in themselves mean power, but they can enable long-term stability.
The size and climate of countries of course count as before, especially in the face of climate change, material resources, access to open seas, navigable rivers – but the population, people’s level of education, social discipline, manners and morals matter even more, notably the chemistry between puritanism and capitalism. Over the last half century, cyberspace, whether for offensive or defensive purposes, has become a major force in the management of political, economic and military affairs, notably in defining both the successes and failures of a political system. The cyber universe is experiencing an ongoing revolution, as it works almost independently of physical strength, distance or the laws of gravity. A cyber war has become a real possibility.
Nation state or empire? What is the future of each? The jury is still out.
The liberal empire of the US has shown that it can cope with crisis and upheaval better than traditional agglomerations of vast power.
Russia, to quote Dean Acheson’s commentary about Britain after WWII, has lost an empire and not yet found its role between the West and Eurasia. The current antagonism does not promise a clear-cut answer but only a sharpening of Russia’s eternal ambiguity, symbolized by the ubiquitous double-headed eagle.
The EU has a fundamental dilemma: it continues to take power from Europe’ s ancient nation states without itself being a nation state or aspiring to become an empire: The new amalgam of states, as Germany’s constitutional court indicated 20 years ago, is clearly out of its depth. While in economics and technology the EU is second to none, in security and defense it has to rely on the US power projection, diplomatic guarantees, promises and a friendly environment – which is not a given at this point.
The Middle Kingdom, older than history itself, unsure of its internal glue, - Confucianism, Communism and state capitalism - is also unsure of its place in the world at large: an aspiring empire of the Pacific or a self-contained civilization? It may well be that, against its status quo instincts, the PRC is driven, through its need for strategic resources, too far away. Except for the US, none of these aspiring great powers offers the world a universal system of both legitimacy and power, which means that the world order is adrift, and conflict is inevitable.
