My assessment

1.USA

2.China

3.Germany
4.Russia
5.Japan
6.UK
7.France

8.EU
9.India
10.Brazil

At least Mr. Frost has identified 9 out of 10.
The basic mistake seems to be an overemphasize on current events while neglecting the fundamentals (UK an FR still have more GDP, more ideological and more military capabilities than Brazil and India !).
Plus, these two Europeans have a global political/diplomatical outreach, unlike Brazil and India which are merely large regional factors.

More comments later….

!!!! Breaking news: Now its official, the E.U. is the home of Santa Claus !!!!!

Quote:
The EU has conferred the northern Finnish city of Rovaniemi (Finland) the title of “the official home of Santa Claus”.

http://baltic-review.com/2009/12/21/finland-santa-claus-finally-has-a-home/

With Santa and the Pope living in the European Union who else could be the most divine spiritual leader

Would just like to say that as a European from a country nowhere near any top 10 World Powers (or top 50 for that matter..) and therefore with no vested interest in the promotion of any of the countries mentioned here I would like to say, that contrary to some of the other posters here, I think that Mr Frost has his rankings of the European countries bang on.

The driving force behind the EU is the partnership between Germany and France. They are the core to the organisation and by extension Merkel and Sarkozy are defacto leaders of Europe.

To quote the great British statesman Winston Churchill, speaking of his own country “We are with Europe but not of it”. The UK has always kept itself apart from Europe and has never really been committed to the European Project. Its failed attempts to compete with the EEC with EFTA, the usage of Europe by UK politicians as a scapegoat to raise nationalist sentiments behind them and the shift of the likely successors to Brown’s government from a pro-European EU parliamentary grouping to a far right, euroskeptic grouping all serve to keep the UK on the periphery of Europe. The UK simply does not lead in Europe and therefore exerts less weight internationally than Germany and France.

Italy of course is an absolute shambles and I really cannot understand why it should be anywhere near the rankings. Italy always seems to be overestimated for some reason but considering the state of Southern Italy (3rd World infrastructure and controlled by the Mafia and Gomorrah) it really is nowhere near Great Power status.

and finally, to end this ridiculously long winded post, the EU cannot claim to be a Global Power or even want to be when we appoint an unelected and uninspiring lady from a country highly opposed to the expansion of the EU as Foreign High Commissioner and a similarly non-awe inspiring haiku writing man who I frankly had never heard of before as president.

Must apoligise for the above post, I pressed enter instead of delete!

Eoinod…

When the candidates were drawn up for the new European president, Tony Blair was part of the shortlist. But many critics including the German chancellor Angela Merkel and French president Nicolas Sarkozy stated that as he was an instigator of the war in Iraq/Afghanistan aswell as being ” Too big ” for the job as European president (Personally I think they were both scared someone with a personality and abit of charisma was going to overshadow both there dull persona’s) Now you just stated that You had never heard of the newly elected president Van Rompuy. So who is the ideal candidate for this job? Someone with a big reputation or someone relatively unknown? What makes Van Rompuy or Tony Blair so unsuitable for this job? At the end of the day the European Union needed a change instead of France and Germany thinking they can lead proceedings as they have done for many decades, Now a British voice as entered an high job in Europe (Baroness Ashton) this as been a change to the system and rightly so!

Secondly, The fact you think that because France and Germany have such a close relationship (Maybe this is because they are bordering neighbours) and the fact they lead the European Union (Do they??) This gives Germany a bigger voice in world politics, For one they aren’t a member or a permanent member of the UN Security Council, They have a by far weaker armed forces than both the UK and France (Yes this does matter as a military adds massively to a countrys infleunce in world affairs, Just look at American for example) aswell as this they are not a nuclear armed state. Aswell politically, Culturally they are none existant, Comparing the culture and historical culture of both the UK and Germany is like comparing a Lion to a kitten! This is why the UK still leads along with the US in many cultural issues and as alot of Influence as once said ” The Beatles would put the UK 5th on this table alone… ” But this regardless of your theory that Germany exerts a far bigger voice internationally than the UK… I just cant accept that for the above reasons, Not only that the UK is a founder and current head of the Commonwealth of Nations the legacy of the British Empire, Aswell as the ‘Special Relationship’ with the greatest and only remaining Superpower in existance gives the UK a bigger voice alone!

So please Eoinod explain Your theory??

@supermeowl:
Well my “theory” was mainly expressed in my above post. To expand and address what you have said however..

1) EU wise I wanted Blair as president and returning EU ambassador to the US John Bruton as High Commissioner for Security and Foreign and Policy. Javier Solana would have been good in either role also.

2) Germany and France’s close relationship is not what makes them so powerful but how they have used their relationship to become the lynchpin of Europe. They most definately do lead the way EU-wise in pretty much every regard.

3) Militarily UK may have a better military now but look at history. Germany was could not be militarily defeated in WWI, only browbeaten into an armstice from a stalemate she could not win. In WWII a Germany extremely oppressed militarily by the Versailles Treaty brought the world to its knees. Only US intervention prevented Nazi domination of Europe. If Germany needed to or even wanted to, her military power would far exceed anything else in Europe.

4) Culturally I disagree. British culture has merged into Anglo-American culture and with the UK as the lesser partner, this translated more for US soft power rather than British.

German culture has been pivotal in the foundation of Western civilisation. Western political though owes much to the writings of Emmanuel Kant. Bismark brought in the idea of a welfare state and Western Military Theory is indebted to Karl Von Clausewitz and his perennial work “On War”.

I think that the impact of French culture is a bit more obvious.

5) The legacy of the British Empire if anything reduces the ability of the US to project its power internationally outside the “colonies” (ie US, Australia, Canada).

As UK politicians find it easy to rage against the EU to get nationalistic zeal behind them to win domestic elections (at the expense of the ability to project power internationally) so do politicians in country’s once occupied by your empire find it easy to give the UK “the two fingers” to get nationalist support behind them. Again, look at history.

Also the “legacy of the British Empire” has been to create huge bitterness in nations oppressed for centuries by British Rule. For example, no Torie government could ever expect cooperation or a cordial reception from an Irish government. Bitterness over “700 years” or so does not disappear overnight and fosters large anti-UK sentiments amongst indigenous populations, again limiting the UK’s ability to project its power.

6)With regards to the “special relationship”, as the UK is much weaker that the US, she must play the junior partner, a subordinate role. Whether this is true or not, this is how it is perceived. The UK cannot ever oppose the US without losing credibility as they are perceived as being one and the same.

7) UN Security Council seat is a plus for the UK but the UN is so ineffective that it is easily outweighed.

Also with regards the Commonwealth, did the Balfour Declaration not end UK’s leadership and put all nations on equal footing (1926 I think)? Also the UK probably isn’t even the most powerful of the commonwealth’s members (I am referring to India of course).

Overall supermeowl, and if you read nothing else read this.

History has shown that even when the UK is economically far far superior to anyone else in Europe, France and Germany have always been more powerful than her. She has needed at least one to defeat the other. Now that Germany’s economy is decidedly stronger than the British and the French on a par with yours, how can Britain claim to be more powerful than either? If anything the disparity between Germany (and to a lesser extent France) and Britain (power wise) has bever been greater.

The super-power status of the EU has been debunked quite thoroughly in this blog if for no other reason than its lack of a cohesive military and its inability to respond to the Russian invasion of Georgia. Russia certainly projects world power in a number of ways and it would be unwise to ignore them especially when they are at the back door of most European nations and seem to have no hesitancy to intervene militarily.

In August 2008 Russia effectively annexed 1/2 of a sovereign state attempting to seek NATO and EU membership. Despite Saakeshvili’s strong backing by the EU, US and NATO, no one had the power to intervene in Russia’s “near abroad”.

A few months later Russia flexed its muscles by stopping its gas flow to the Ukraine as the Ukrainian government voiced the possibility of requesting EU and possibly NATO membership. Again all that could be done was for the Ukraine to give in.

Combined with the continued propping up by Russia of Lukashenko, Europe’s only and one of the world’s more brutal dictator, and his oppressive regime in Belarus and two largely unrecognised puppet states in Georgian territory (South Ossetia and Abkhazia), Russia’s sheer dominance of its near abroad, while the neighbouring EU and the US can simply do nothing, is plain to see and why Russia still is a premier world power (and also why the EU quite simply is not).

Eoinod…

Are you sure not German/French?? Maybe even Austrian??

You seem to forget, Europe isnt just about France and Germany, Weather they lead it whatever regard is totally irrelevent! Europe will never furfill its true potential without the all nations uniting, There seems to be alot of bitterness aimed towards the UK from France and Germany and at times it does strain relations. Germany and France cannot make Europe great alone… Remember this!

As for the German military, You talk of the days when the country was run by one of the most evil men in history. Im sure Germany as all in the potential in the world to recreate a large army again but time as evolved and its not that simple of just recruiting anyone You like and making a superarmy, Espcially in Europe! With ongoing conflicts and more opportunitys nowadays recruiting to the armed forces is hard in some countrys. At the moment I speak of the militaries of Europe and its a known fact the two major ones are the British and French… End of story! As for power projection, Britain as maintained several oversea bases around the world, Including Germany itself since WW2. The fact the Navy as decided to spend on new supercarriers further enhances our power projection capabilities (At the moment the UK and US are the only countries purchasing such carriers) but thats enough of that… You talk about the British Empire limiting Britain today’s power to project, But since the empire ceased Britain as kept healthy ties with most countries across the world. Wherever I’ve travelled around the world people have always been friendly and seem excited to meet a British citizen, That is something that makes me feel proud to be British.

British culture as and always will infleunce many around the world, Even the americans. You ask anyone from the 70′s/80′s/90′s/even nowdays with some kids who there favourite musicians are and who inspired them to pick up a guitar and want to play music and they will say some of the greatest musicians to ever walk the planet and the majority are British (The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, The Who, Pink Floyd, The Rolling Stones etc etc) They have and will inspire many more in the years to come, I do agree in some aspects that culture as become a shared anglo/american interest but I dont think where neccessarily the ”weaker” Its just theres many more rewards in the states since its a far richer country! But its not just about music/acting etc. William Shakespeare even though he lived nearly 400+ years ago continues to inspire and infleunce people today. These British icons ferment the legacy and importance of British culture.

As for your short paragraph about the UK ” When far superior economically.. Blah de blah de blah ”

I think you should have a look through history at some key events that have happened in the past centuries. WW2 for example the french were going to all but give up and give in to Hitler, Churchill knew that if the French gave up its navy to German hands they would be far superior than the The Royal Navy which at time was still the king of the seas. Churchill gave the french the decision of sailing with the Royal Navy and continuing the fight or sailing its ships into American ports away from German control, In the end they continued into wanting to surrender so Churchill order the Royal Navy to destroy the French fleets main battle cruisers in order to prevent the Nazi’s from gaining superiority of the seas. In WW2 the British armed forces were the only country from day one to fight the German Army from start till end, Then the American’s joined after Pearl Harbour. The French had all but give up. Please look this up in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Mers-el-K%C3%A9bir

Aswell as this the Napoleonic Wars against the French Empire were won by the British Empire and the Coalition forces which didnt include the Germans. The french also had countrys by there side in combat. So I dont accept your point about the UK needing either France or Germany to need the other.

Luckily in recent times such thoughts havent and wont be needed. Were close allies and rightly so, I just feel that the UK on all scales projects a far bigger infleunce (Politically, Culturally, Socially) I say socially due to the fact that our language is spoke by nearly 1.8 Billion people as either a first or second language. Wereas German or French comes nowhere near!

Supreme has Lear identified as German/French. Considering Lear’s lack of compassion for, or understanding of, the plight of the people in Georgia, I doubt if either country would claim him. Hitler considered the invasion of Poland a “non-event.”

Sorry to disappoint. I´m here to assess and to measure power in International Relations.

Was the Russian invasion a power move? Yes.
Was it a relevant one in order to proof power capabilities. Rather No.

Call me back, when Russia successfully occupies Alaska, Inner Mongolia or Estonia then I might change my assessment (and even compassion) ….

BTW, if anybody thinks Russian occupation in Georgia was an indicator of power how do you think about the EU pulling in 12 countries peacefully in 2004/07 while at the same time making them conform to EU legislation ???

The European Union – The Modest Superpower – Newsweek – Nov 2009

http://www.newsweek.com/id/221614

It sums up all the relevant information.

Quotes:
“Europe has even begun to translate its vast economic power into a broader global role.Europe has even begun to translate its vast economic power into a broader global role.”

“In only 20 years, the EU has evolved from a loose free market completely dependent on U.S. protection to an ambitious, new-style, uniquely collective power. For the foreseeable future, it will be the only force that can come close to matching the clout of the United States.”

If this blog and its list wants to be taken seriously it has to include all major powers.
It is not an avantgarde opinion to include the EU in a Top10 list anymore. The EU is obviously an accepted global factor
among credible academics and popular media.

@Frost: Please adjust the list to realities.

Crisis and resurgence: redefining the United States and European Union relationship in the face of global challenges – London South Bank University – 2009

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a916116140&db=all

Quote:
China and India herald a potential move away from Western hegemony to a multipolar universe where decisions taken in Beijing or Delhi will increasingly impact on Western capitals. This paper argues that Brazil, Russia, India and China (the BRICs), with China foremost, do not as yet command the resources, nor, due to internal division, can they as yet challenge Western dominance. However, this is as much dependent on the European Union and United States working cooperatively together in defining a new economic and geopolitical agenda for the coming era—valuing fairness, greater social equality and mutual respect.
______________________
Mr. Frost tear down this list,
Mr. Frost open this list for the EU !!!

@Frost:

My experience with people who are using the term “great power” in IR always strike me as being a little antiquated. This can basically be seen here as well. It is also quite irritating that you repeatingly cite the non-actions of the European Union.

Is this your working style as a scholar ? Is this successful ? As I have consequently cited credible sources and world power actions that HAPPENED, I wonder how you avoid responding to it.

As I could cite multiple dimensions Turkey India, Brazil could not be considered great powers, you on the other side have not layed out where the global impact of these countries are found.

Obviously the world opinion (9 major countries) is more advanced than you when asked “Who rules the world ?”

Result of the perceived World powers today: 1.USA 2.China 3.Russia 4.Japan 5.EU

http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/cps/rde/xbcr/SID-8FA77565-60B28B77/bst/WorldPower%202007_engl_final_25Nov08.pdf

Even I was astonished when learning that the EU in the eyes of average people around the globe is already seen in 5th position. The poll was taken in 2007, before the Lisbon Treaty came in force !

@ Lear “Even I was astonished when learning that the EU in the eyes of average people around the globe is already seen in 5th position. The poll was taken in 2007, before the Lisbon Treaty came in force!”

First of all, the poll wasn’t taken from average people around the globe; it was taken respondents from nine powerful countries. (I’d venture to say that most people around the globe haven’t even heard of the EU.) Secondly, the polls were done by making random phone surveys, except of course where they weren’t, because the phone surveys wouldn’t work so the surveyors just talked to people on the street in urban areas. From a research point of view that alone probably invalidates the results. Thirdly, the number of people surveyed amounted to approximately 1000 per country, except of course where they weren’t, with some countries (Russia – 1640 respondents) having more than 1000 respondents more than another country (China- 600 respondents.) That flaw in design also invalidates the survey. Surveys inherently reflect the desires of the outcomes by the group that pays for it to be done because they have a say in the wording of the questions. Not that Bertelsmann Stiftung isn’t a fine German foundation concerned with furthering German success, but it’s very difficult to not let one’s own philosophy influence the composition of a survey.

And then of course there is your interpretation of the results. The questions concerning the EU were framed in the format (and I’m paraphrasing) “who should have more influence on the world stage?” Notice not actually who has a position of power but who should have it. Isn’t this also what Bertelsmann Stiftung’s desires? You also failed to mention that the United Nations also scored well up in that area of who should have a voice. Even I’d agree that I’d like to see the EU become a more equal partner in helping solve the world’s problems. Do I see that happening imminently? No, but I’d like to.

So, the “survey” actually proves very little.

Quote reference:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/07/AR2010010703243.html

Well Ireland is number 4! That still makes me happy!

In terms of accuracy, the order of the European Nations looks to be in the right order anyway. Getting a dollar ppp equivalency however strikes me as being less than error proof especially if used for comparing global power.

For instance, the cost of living in the US is a lot lower in the US accounting for the higher PPP (you can buy more stuff with your money) however European Wages are generally higher. Meaning that while domestically Europeans are less well off, on the international market this works in our favour as buying American Goods works out very very cheap. This “quality” of the Euro vs. the dollar is also apparent vs. the Pound Sterling, crossing the border into Northern Ireland brings one into contact with much lower prices but also much lower wages.

My posts here are never exactly succinct…

Well I feel like this is beating a dead horse, but Lear, you continue to treat the EU as an independent country. It is not. The largest GDP of any EU member is 3.6 billion (Germany) followed by the U.K. (2.1 billion), France (2.7 billion) and Italy 2.1 billion). 2009 figures. All other members are below 2 billion. Those figres pale in comparison to the U.S. GDP at 14.4. I notice you don’t talk about NAFTA and its nominal GDP, and with good reason, it makes no sense. NAFTA is just a group of 3 countries with trade agreements, as is the EU, for all of its and your aspirations. Why don’t you respond to the questions regarding the autonomy of the individual EU members and whether they put aside their sovereignty to be a part of the EU? I suspect it is because they don’t do that and view themselves as individual nations and therefore, you have no answer. I think it’s great that they get together for economic benefit, and I hope that someday they can take a place on the world stage, but that doesn’t qualify them as being a nation with super-power status. (Except maybe in the mind of one single person in Germany)

And I, for one, do not boil about your comments because I just don’t take your opinions all that seriously. That is mostly because you really don’t logically answer of the questions other than with threads to follow that for the most part don’t address the questions. Fortunately for me, I have learned quite a lot from the considered opinions of many of the other contributors, and for that I am thankful.

The EU has a single market, a currency, a foreign political staff, a president, courts, a
parliament, EU citizenship, no borders, coherent legislation, a constitution (Lisbon Treaty), global military and humanitarian aid missions, and represents its members in G8, G20, WTO.

@m: My argumentation style cites high quality media and mostly highly ranked officials supporting my rationale. I see no potential in micraig to be able to adopt or learn from these arguments. In fact, ignorance and denial prevail.

I also see no talent in Mr. Frosts abilities to assess the IR in a globalized world, as this blogger seems to concentrate on a singular
dimension in politics; warfare/security/military issues. A universal approach can´t be detected.

Now that we have entered a new decade, I say good bye, may be I join again, when Europe, or better the European Union is on the list….

Was just reading a discussion on this from an Irish Website:
http://www.politics.ie/europe/123189-obama-skip-annual-eu-summit.html

This incident, sadly, proves the failures of the EU to form a cohesive foreign policy front and also how Lisbon has not yet achieved its promises to change this, if anything cause yet more complication.

Video interview about EU, US standards and global politics with author Steven Hill on “Europe’s Promise: Why the European Way Is the Best Hope for an Insecure Age”

http://i5.democracynow.org/2010/2/12/europes_promise

I tried to go to the link Lear posted and got a “not found,” notice.

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/2/12/europes_promise

The purpose of this link is not promoting the European model vs the American.

The purpose is to deliver the proof that the EU is already seen as a coherent influential global player.

OK I am going to wave the flag a little but the ranking of the UK in this list is nothing short of ridiculous. We all accept that Germany, for example, is the largest and strongest economy in Europe, however it is forever reluctant to put its armed forces in harms way. Who is actually doing the fighting in Afghanistan besides the Americans? The good old UK, as we did in Iraq. The UK has a blue seas fleet and a nuclear capability. It is second only to the USA in the ability to exert that power globally. The UK forces have had unbroken battle experience for many decades. It was British ground forces that spearheaded NATO’s advance into Kosovo. If it came to exerting military power in a devasting manner, (heaven hlep us), the UK could destroy almost all of the so called powers that appear to be rated more highly. With the new most advanced destroyers already being deployed and the advent of two modern carriers UK forces will be back at the top table in terms of hard diplomacy. So please, no more c..p!

Introduction

Page 1:

A quiet revolution has been occurring in post-World War II Europe. A world power has emerged across the Atlantic that is recrafting the rules for how a modern society should provide economic security, environmental sustainability, and global stability.

Page 4:

Is Europe a single nation or a union of individual nations ? Increasingly the answer is: both.

http://books.google.de/books?id=36NM38haLCEC&pg=PA48&dq=%22berlin+is%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=12&as_miny_is=2009&as_maxm_is=12&as_maxy_is=2010&as_brr=0&hl=en&cd=30#v=onepage&q=%22berlin%20is%22&f=false

Europe’s Promise: Why the European Way Is the Best Hope in an Insecure Age, Steven Hill, University of California Press

Europe—the Hidden Superpower:

Quote: “The plain truth is that the European Union is the second-greatest power on the world scene today”

And: One of the most incisive and accurate views of Europe (albeit unfashionable in foreign-policy circles) is that of Andrew Moravcsik, professor of politics and international affairs at Princeton University. In an interview published by Global Europe, Sept. 14, 2009, Moravcsik stated, “Europe, singly and collectively, is the most underrated actor in world politics today. … In fact, the world is bipolar. Europe and the U.S. are the only two global superpowers. This will remain true for the foreseeable future……

…..European nations, singly and collectively, are the only other states in the world today, besides the U.S., to exert global influence across the full spectrum from ‘hard’ to ‘soft’ power.”

http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?q=7102.5628.0.0

Leave out the pro-evangelist and anti-German, anti-Rome propaganda and you will find a pretty accurate description of the balance of world powers today …

The upside of the Greek debt crisis

Quote: “Contrary to doomsayers’ predictions, the euro hasn’t collapsed – the response to the crisis looks like leaving the union stronger”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/02/upside-greek-crisis-euro

EU launches new military training mission for Somali security forces

The European Union has launched a new military mission to train some 2,000 Somali soldiers in Uganda in mine awareness and urban combat. The mission is aimed at stabilizing Somalia’s transitional government.
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,5445587,00.html

And as Germany hasn’t been able to solve the EU’s problem with the economies of Greece and Ireland, does that mean that Germany’s status on the power ranking should fall accordingly?

There are a whole host of other mnetrics one could use to assess GP rankings, such as these:

http://jedibeeftrix.wordpress.com/2010/04/11/britain-in-the-world-just-another-medium-sized-country/

My pleasure.

Wow, I’ve never seen anyone try to actually quantify power rankings with statistics. A couple of questions: How are the figures for Creative $ derived? It seems that you are saying that China’s cultural prowess is greater than any other 3 countries combined.

Also it appears that you classify fertility rate as a positive influence (if I understand this correctly which I probably don’t) but wouldn’t it only be a positive if the country could actually feed its population?

And Lear strikes again with his continued rant about how the EU rules the world. And everybody agrees……. except the rest of the world.

Correction:

1. USA
2. EU/Europe
– Germany
– UK
– France
– Italy
3. China
4. Russia
5. Japan
6. India
7. Canada
8. Brazil

Basically this is a conservative view of the world powers and acknowledges the long standing power forum of the G7/8 as prime gathering of global leaders.

Emerging powers coming to the scene like China (10 years ago), India (5 years ago) and Brazil (today) are therefore cautiously ranked.

Europe since 1980 – I. T. Berend – 2010

“The integrating and enlarging European Union has already emerged as an economic superpower.”

http://books.google.de/books?id=AWHkiu4ZhvgC&pg=PA288&dq=%22European+union%22+%22superpower%22&hl=de&ei=vYBRTK_gCc-A4Qa7tciPAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CFQQ6AEwCTgK#v=onepage&q=%22European%20union%22%20%22superpower%22&f=false

The difference between Lear and micraig is simple.

Lear provides uptodate high profile academic sources and leading expert opinions (Zbigniew Brzeziński) concerning the global power constellation.

micraig instead is basically croaking on his sofa because of discomfort.

Don´t worry mic, the postings I provide are certainly not directed to you. That would be Einstein talking to a chimpanzee….

The content of my postings is pretty clear. I´m presenting stable longterm indicators and proven incidents that reveal the current position of the European Union (and its member states) in the global power system.

I´m not interested in day to day media critic, its just journalism, centered on ideology, zeitgeist and short term hype for the masses.

Calling the EU an experiment after 50 years of integration is nonsense. The EU is today a defacto state with 500 million citizens. 300 million use the same currency, its already a single economy. The political elites of 27 members (minus UK) is backing this entity including several thousands of elite entrepreneurs who found the EU indispensable.

Actually I´m the one who wants to know from Mr. Frost if he has proven reasons to believe the high rankings of Brazil and India (and China).

Where Mr. Frost are the incidents these 2 states have influenced the globe or other great powers directly ? I can´t see any. Its fashionable to cite these 2 as future actors.
But in reality India and Brazil are followers and backwaters of the global power constellation.

In reality there are 2 spheres of influence in the world: Europa and America…..

I guess I have provided enough credible sources and expert assessments to underline the European influence and military capabilities.

@Dio: You better tackle the sources and the statements directly otherwise you are in danger to fall in the micraig category as well.

I have also frequently provided evidence that the EU has to be seen as hybrid entity. While a traditional central government is yet not entirely developed, its member states with likeminded interests ensure its status on a global scale.

Its a new form of power conglomerate, which has, in the Frost list, yet not been considered, which is insufficient and wrong.

Wow, I’ve been promoted to being a whole category. I’m honored. lol

Princeton University Press:
All Politics Is Global: Explaining International Regulatory Regimes, Daniel W. Drezner 2008

Quote: As Drezner shows, state size still matters. The great powers–the United States and the European Union–remain the key players in writing global regulations, and their power is due to the size of their internal economic markets. If they agree, there will be effective global governance. If they don’t agree, governance will be fragmented or ineffective.

http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8762.html

Frost, your list needs heavy revision. China is not ruling the globe, neither does Russia, India or Brazil. EU-Europe and its members and the US are still in power to control the major developments in the world.

A reading list just for Lear, noone else need read because they are just as invalid as the ones Lear posts.:

http://centers.law.nyu.edu/jeanmonnet/papers/00/000501-02.html

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=111930&sectionid=351020605

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-jokes-on-eu-a-cartoon-history-of-the-european-union-394698.html

http://philsbackupsite.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/will-the-eu%E2%80%99s-collapse-push-the-world-deeper-into-the-great-depression-ii/

http://www.cnbc.com/id/36961257/European_Union_Currency_Are_Headed_for_Collapse_Gartman

http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/05/20/how-the-euro-might-collapse/

Maybe Mr. Frost should change the name of the blog to: “Lear’s EU Rant.”

My assessment of the worlds leading powers.

Considering the influence on global developments in politics, security, science, economy, culture and ideology during the last 10 years, and the most current tendencies in the world order in 2010:

1. USA

(-). EU as a collective player of combined interests

3. China

4. Germany as single player

5. UK as single player

6. France as single player

7. Russia

8. Japan

9. India

10. Canada

11. Brazil

Sorry,

But I find this list to seriously flawed by underestimating both the UK and France and overestimating Russia and in particular Germany and India.

Yes, the UK and France have smaller populations than other countries on the list but despite this both have bigger economies than India and Russia.

Yes, Germany has the bigger economy and population. However, unlike Germany, both the UK and France are major military and politcal powers.

Both the UK and France are nuclear armed countries with major military capability. Indeed, both are the only countries in the world apart from the USA to have ‘blue water navy’ capability’ (though, granted, the UK is showing some current weakness whilst it awaits its new aricraft carriers but these will be super carriers which only the Americans can match).

Further, both the UK and France are two of only 5 U.N Permanement Security Council Members. How can you underestimate the value of this??? Neither Germany or India are.

Both France, and in particular the U.K, also still have extensive overseas terroteries too.

Further, the U.K is also clearly a cultural superpower and UK current affairs events are still globally covered (e.g the recent Royal wedding).

My list:

1. US

2. China

3. Germany

4. Japan, Britain, France.

7. Russia

8. Brazil, India

10. Turkey

EU? I don’t think it qualifies as a Great power equal to states like U.S., China, Russia, etc..

Britain and France are overrated, but most certainly rank higher than Russia, which is the most overrated piece of defunct crap ever.

If the mighty Soviet Empire collapsed, then you know something is wrong not with the system, but with the people itself.

Heya are using WordPress for your site platform? I’m new to the blog world but I’m trying to get started and set up my own. Do you require any html coding expertise to make your own blog? Any help would be greatly appreciated!

My rankings are based on each countries geopolitical influence & projection of power, as well as my analysis of these countries stability level in terms of economics and politics forecasting into the near future. Although a few of the countrys on my list are “questionable” because of corruption and level of internal complications (Namely Iran, Brazil, India), I still include them due to their influence on regional and international events.

1)USA
2)China
3)Russia
4)Germany
5)Japan
6)UK
7)France
8)Brazil
9)Iran
10)India

My belief is that India and Brazil have the resources to grow in an economic sense, but it is the rapidity of their growth that constrains their projection of power. The faster they rise, the more quickly they have to adapt to constraints.
I have Iran placed high on my rankings even though they are obviously in an unpredictable position. The more I read about Iran, the more I understand their overwhelming influence in the region and in its peripheral.