Why are superpowers so massive? Is this a size requirement? And is Pakistan too small to aspire to this goal? or any muslim nation for that matter.

[Baburfromsarmarkand]

USA, USSR, China and if india becomes one, all are huge nations.
I was wondering if other nations are just too small to ever attain this status.

 

[313ghazi]

Britain was a pretty puny superpower.

Although the empire was HUGE.

 

[VCheng]

USA, USSR, China and if india becomes one, all are huge nations.
I was wondering if other nations are just too small to ever attain this status.

Britain was a pretty puny superpower.

Although the empire was HUGE.

Clearly, it is not the size, but what you do with it.

 

[AlKardai]

Interesting documentary to watch

 

[Trisolaran]

These countries had/have huge resources and an educated population that could handle it. If size was the only importand thing than Mongol empire would have more influence than Roman empire in the history

 

[wali87]

I don't think Pakistan will ever become developed country let alone a super power. Not because our country is small but because we are a nation comprised mostly of corrupt and selfish thieves who always put their personal interest above the interests of our nation. I would go so far to say we never became a nation, we just got a country. Whatever the reasons might have been. We are a fragmented group of mob, divided on the basis of caste, ethnicity, colour, race even business interests. The driving force behind a common Pakistani today is Jealousy and hatred, towards everyone who he thinks is progressing or is better than him. You don't have to look far to realise this, just take a look around you, neighbours, family, friends, colleagues. I speak about the majority. The few good people left stay quite and in the shadows.

 

[TheSolution]

Obviously. There are certain inherent qualities required of a nation for it to attain such status - GDP potential and population size being two.

Small nations with low population and not much resources can never contend.

 

[Thevilone]

I do not think size is an issue, size helps but there are other factors at play as well.

I believe Pakistanis in general are obsessed about population growth. This is a result of contant indoctrination here a higher population is seen as an advantage and increasing it is a religious duty. The reality is Bangladesh has stronger influence than Pakistan on a global stage even though it's smaller in population and this difference will only grow larger every year. This is simply because Bangladesh's GDP per capita is 60% higher than Pak and increasing every passing year.

 

[FuturePAF]

I do not think size is an issue, size helps but there are other factors at play as well.

I believe Pakistanis in general are obsessed about population growth. This is a result of contant indoctrination here a higher population is seen as an advantage and increasing it is a religious duty. The reality is Bangladesh has stronger influence than Pakistan on a global stage even though it's smaller in population and this difference will only grow larger every year. This is simply because Bangladesh's GDP per capita is 60% higher than Pak and increasing every passing year.

A growing population means the nation still retains the means for a demographic dividend when the economy is properly structured and the country goes through industrialization. Once industrialization begins the birth rate drops and the population stabilizes. Future growth 2-3 decades later tends to taper off.

Until economic reforms are made, a large population can be sustained through an increase in arable land and labor exports. The Philippines did something similar, Ireland potato famine forced something similar, The Chinese diaspora over centuries forced something similar, the Indian diaspora has forced something similar.

A good example is Germany;
From the Holy Roman Empire and Prussia to the unified German state saw a large population increase coinciding with the German industrialization in the late 1800s.

Another factor is the western pressure on China is set to increase and Chinese investor may need to move their factories to friendly countries with good infrastructure and low labor costs. Pakistan is the closest and best placed to be that country.

A large population with a low average age and few elderly dependents allows the country to grow out of its current messes and become attract the means to become competitive in the world.

On the tops of being a superpower; Pakistan would indeed need global influence to fit that category. In the mean time the state needs to become unified and strong domestically, and able to push back challengers to its writ from the region. A regional power that can punch above its weight should be a realistic goal.

Align with partners that share our interests is the best way for not have to live under Indian hegemony.

 

[Thevilone]

A growing population means the nation still retains the means for a demographic dividend when the economy is properly structured and the country goes through industrialization. Once industrialization begins the birth rate drops and the population stabilizes. Future growth 2-3 decades later tends to taper off.

Until economic reforms are made, a large population can be sustained through an increase in arable land and labor exports. The Philippines did something similar, Ireland potato famine forced something similar, The Chinese diaspora over centuries forced something similar, the Indian diaspora has forced something similar.

A good example is Germany;
From the Holy Roman Empire and Prussia to the unified German state saw a large population increase coinciding with the German industrialization in the late 1800s.

Another factor is the western pressure on China is set to increase and Chinese investor may need to move their factories to friendly countries with good infrastructure and low labor costs. Pakistan is the closest and best placed to be that country.

A large population with a low average age and few elderly dependents allows the country to grow out of its current messes and become attract the means to become competitive in the world.

Pakistan is already importing WHEAT and PULSES. It grows chicken and cattle, but the feed needs to be imported. Water scarcity is reaching dangerous levels; Pakistan may face droughts in coming years. Arable land is not increasing but decreasing as more and more land is being shifted to commercial and residential use.

If 10 people farm the same land that one person can easily farm, then 9 people are practically unemployed and dependant on the one person working.

 

[GWXP]

John Mearsheimer is one of the most influential political scientist who belongs to realist school of thought.


Some points from the book by John Mearsheimer "Tragedy of Great Power Politics"

1) Great power is a country that has a military that can at least exhaust the strongest state in the system (USA)

2) Morgentau: Great powers are inherently aggressive because of their will to power.

3) Waltz: Great powers are inherently aggressive because they want to survive. Great powers fear each other. Great powers can never be sure about intentions of other Great powers who have offensive military capabilities

4) Power of a country depends on the size of its population and the level of its wealth. Great powers fear populous states with rapidly expanding economies

5) Big population is needed for raising big armies and big population can produce large GDP

6) Foundation of military power is ground force, with navy and air force supporting it

7) Great powers think about conquest and of how to prevent other Great powers from gaining power- the best defense is a good offense

8) USA doesn't conquer other countries because of separating power of water

9) While all Great powers are wealthy states, not all wealthy states are Great powers.

10) Mobilizable wealth is different from ordinary wealth. Mobilizable wealth means ability to produce weapons. Soviets produced more weapons and had more divisions and their divisions were better equiped than Nazi Germany's army, despite Germany having 3 to 1 advantage in wealth in 1941- Soviet economy was better organized for producing weapons than Germany's economy

^^So, a Great power is a country that has a formidable military and for building such a military you need 1) large population 2) wealth 3) defense industry.

Large population can produce large GDP and you can raise a big army, and you need wealth to buy weapons for that army, and you need defense industry that can produce those weapons....

And if you build a military that can exhaust the strongest state in the system (USA) than you can be classified as a Great power.


Regarding Pakistani population - no problem here, as Pakistan's population will hit 350mln people by 2050.

Regarding wealth of Pakistan - if Pakistan's GDP PPP will continue growing 5% a year for the next 30-50 years than it can become a large economy in the future

Regarding defense industry and technology - I think competition with India will force Pakistan to develop its defense industry and it can import military technology from China, Turkey or any other country in the future.

Assuming Pakistan becomes a populous and wealthy state by 2075 with developed defense industry, it will be able to build a powerful military and can be classified as a Great Power with population of 300-400 mln people somewhere in 2075.

 

[villageidiot]

Clearly, it is not the size, but what you do with it.

Yeah but it does help.

 

[VCheng]

Yeah but it does help.

Undoubtedly!




(And a pair of healthy "sidekicks". )

 

[migflug]

USA, USSR, China and if india becomes one, all are huge nations.
I was wondering if other nations are just too small to ever attain this status.

There is no country in the world that has as good geographic advantage as USA. Brazil, Argentina comes close, but even they are not that good. One of the biggest reason USA is a sole superpower and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future.
Then it also has a huge population(3rd largest) and will continue to grow with the help of immigration.

Top three countries that has resource and population to become a superpower would be China, Russia and Brazil. All these 3 have large population & resources but some geographic constraints.

Then next 3 would be India, Argentina, Australia who have ample resources and decent population which could be increased through immigration in case of Australia and Argentina.

Then countries with most potential to become superpower would be Canada, Indonesia and Congo/Nigeria, Mexico. These countries too have the ample resource and population to become the potential superpower.
The list is solely based on the resource of these countries and the demographics. There are many factors like good human capital, technology, society etc. But the above are the countries with most potential in the descending order.

While currently it seems funny that no European countries are included or that there are the likes of Congo/Argentina/Nigeria in the list. But these are extremely resource rich countries with large populations. All they need to do is get their acts together, and within the end of this century they are the viable potential superpowers.

Reason for no European country is because they don't have the demographics nor the resources to become a superpower again. Its not the age of colonization anymore and even if they import tones of resources & become a tech powerhouse they still don't have the population or large size to sustain larger populations(through immigrations btw).

FYI: By resources I means not just the mineral resources but also the agricultural land which is an overlooked factor. USA, India, China, Russia have the largest agricultural lands and hence the large population. While the likes of Canada and Australia both have very large agri land as well as total area, they are not as fertile as China, India, USA or Argentina.

USA: Best geography, large population, large fertile lands, very good human resource, huge mineral resource + oil
China: Not good geography vis v USA, large fertile lands, good human resource, large population but ageing, huge mineral resource ,no oil
Russia: Bad geography v-> no warm ports, mostly tundra, large fertile lands, good human resource, ageing population, huge mineral resource ,huge oil
Brazil: Good geography, large population, large fertile lands, good human resource, huge mineral resource , some oil
India: Good geography, large population, large fertile lands, below average human resource, decent mineral resource , no oil

 

[FuturePAF]

Pakistan is already importing WHEAT and PULSES. It grows chicken and cattle, but the feed needs to be imported. Water scarcity is reaching dangerous levels; Pakistan may face droughts in coming years. Arable land is not increasing but decreasing as more and more land is being shifted to commercial and residential use.

If 10 people farm the same land that one person can easily farm, then 9 people are practically unemployed and dependant on the one person working.

Pakistan is very inefficient. The potential to implement modern technology, new seed varieties, and better water management can turn this around. It’s about farmers investing, in these (and government facilitating the borrowing to achieve it), rather then owners of farms consuming all of the profit from the revenue.

A hinderance is the cost to implement these technologies, and that is what needs to be focused upon, as well as a means for farmers to borrow to implement the high yield generating methods.