Measuring National Power

Abstract

Jump down to documentThis document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. The proceedings described in this report were hosted by the RAND National Security Research Division, which conducts research and analysis for the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, the Unified Commands, the defense agencies, the Department of the Navy, the U.S. intelligence community, allied foreign governments, and foundations. Limited Electronic Distribution Rightsiii PrefaceUnderstanding the nature and force of power long has been central to the study of international relations and to the work of the U.S. intelligence community. This elusive task is now all the more important because the United States enjoys an unprecedented amount of economic, military, and technological might in comparison to other states. Yet it must exercise its power in a world not only of state-related constraints on that power but also of transnational forces and non-state actors (NSAs) that act as competitors, qualifiers, constrainers, and, sometimes, enhancers of that power. This report summarizes and extends the results of a two-day workshop the RAND Corporation hosted with the CIA's Strategic Assessments Group (SAG), in cooperation with Barry Hughes and his International Futures (IFs) model. That workshop brought together a diverse group of modelers, specialists in international relations, and thinkers about power from both the public and the private sectors. The lead presentations on the first day were by Paul Herman of the SAG, Barry Hughes, and Ashley Tellis of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. On the second day, the opening remarks were delivered by Jessica Mathews, president of the Carnegie Endowment, Nathan Gardels, editor, New Perspectives Quarterly, and editor-in-chief, Global Editorial Services, Los Angeles Times Syndicate/Tribune Media; and the Chief of the SAG. We appreciate the time and effort of those experts, many of whom we consulted more than once. Needless to say, though, we hold these good people blameless for any shortcomings that remain.

Research problems of socio-economical systems capabilities

“…Показатели характе-ризуют демографию, экономику, военную силу. Как указано в работе [22], это до сих пор один из наиболее известных и наиболее общеупот-ребительных методов измерения национальной мощи и национальных потенциалов. Обычно понятие национальной мощи (national power) используется в особом специфическом смысле, а именно: как страте-гическая способность суверенного государства использовать все свои ресурсы для того, чтобы влиять на другие страны [21].…”

The Politics of Contestation in Asia: How Japan and Pakistan Deal with Their Rising Neighbors

“…Whereas military power is based on a country's latent power, which is made up of its economic and demographic resources, a broader approach to material power incorporates technology and energy indicators as well (Treverton and Jones 2005). We argue that economic and technological dependence on the primary power is another structural factor that influences the secondary power's strategic response.…”

The projection and measurement of cyberpower

“…Soft power targets human factors and aims to 'get others to want the outcomes that you want' through the power of attraction, which includes non-material means such as culture, political values and foreign policies (Treverton and Jones, 2000). After a decade of military operations in the Middle East, which it may be argued has produced unclear outcomes, the benefits of soft power as the policy of attraction over coercion are seen as offering an alternative means to achieve national objectives.…”