Suchergebnisse

THIS ARTICLE REJECTS THE IDEA THAT A GREAT POWER REQUIRES FORMAL RECOGNITION OR 'GENERAL INTERESTS' OR AN INCLINATION TO 'RESPONSIBLE' BEHAVIOUR. CONTRARY TO MARTIN WIGHT, IT ALSO REJECTS THE VIEW THAT THE DEMONSTRATION OF GREAT MILITARY POWER IN WAR IS EITHER A NECESSARY OR A SUFFICIENT CONDITION OF BEING A GREAT POWER. IT ALSO DENIES, CONTRARY TO WILLIAM T.R. FOX, THAT AN ABILITY TO 'PROJECT' POWER WORLDWIDE IS A NECESSARY CONDITION OF BEING A GREAT POWER (ALTHOUGH IT WOULD, OF COURSE, BE SUFFICIENT). ON THE BASIS OF AN INVESTIGATION OF THE HISTORICAL GREAT POWERS, THIS ARTICLE CONCLUDES THAT A GREAT POWER IS ONE WHOSE REPUTATION FOR EXISTING OR LATENT MILITARY STRENGTH MAY BE EQUALLED BUT NOT SIGNIFICANTLY SURPASSED BY THAT OF ANY OTHER POWER.