In The World in Depression: 1929–1939 (1973), Charles Kindleberger introduced the concept of “stability through hegemony,” arguing that the absence of a dominant economic power contributed to the global instability of the interwar period.
This idea, later developed into Robert Gilpin's Hegemonic Stability Theory, holds that international order depends on a hegemon that provides public goods, such as security, open markets, and monetary stability, while bearing disproportionate costs.
However, hegemonic power is inherently limited. According to the theory of hegemonic decline, the burden of leadership fosters relative decline over time. Rising powers benefit from the system without sharing costs, while the hegemon becomes overextended.
Gilpin argues that hegemonic decline is driven by three factors: high domestic costs (e.g., fiscal deficits and military overreach), the emergence of capable rivals (e.g., China), and global dissatisfaction with the prevailing order (e.g., the rise of the Global South).
Faced with the exorbitant costs of hegemony, and to avoid losing its global primacy, the U.S. has three potential paths:
A- Renew hegemony through innovation, as Ronald Reagan did in the 1980s. By prioritizing technological and economic breakthroughs instead of over-reliance on military might or traditional industries, the U.S. could revitalize its comparative advantage, dominate critical sectors, and shape global standards.
B- Retreat into protectionism, which risks gradually ceding global influence as trust erodes in the post-WWII and post-Cold War order America built.
C- Adapt to a multipolar world—a difficult pill for Americans to swallow today, even if U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio acknowledged in late January that a return to multipolarity is inevitable, noting that a unipolar world is unnatural and was merely a product of the Cold War’s end.
This idea, later developed into Robert Gilpin's Hegemonic Stability Theory, holds that international order depends on a hegemon that provides public goods, such as security, open markets, and monetary stability, while bearing disproportionate costs.
However, hegemonic power is inherently limited. According to the theory of hegemonic decline, the burden of leadership fosters relative decline over time. Rising powers benefit from the system without sharing costs, while the hegemon becomes overextended.
Gilpin argues that hegemonic decline is driven by three factors: high domestic costs (e.g., fiscal deficits and military overreach), the emergence of capable rivals (e.g., China), and global dissatisfaction with the prevailing order (e.g., the rise of the Global South).
Faced with the exorbitant costs of hegemony, and to avoid losing its global primacy, the U.S. has three potential paths:
A- Renew hegemony through innovation, as Ronald Reagan did in the 1980s. By prioritizing technological and economic breakthroughs instead of over-reliance on military might or traditional industries, the U.S. could revitalize its comparative advantage, dominate critical sectors, and shape global standards.
B- Retreat into protectionism, which risks gradually ceding global influence as trust erodes in the post-WWII and post-Cold War order America built.
C- Adapt to a multipolar world—a difficult pill for Americans to swallow today, even if U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio acknowledged in late January that a return to multipolarity is inevitable, noting that a unipolar world is unnatural and was merely a product of the Cold War’s end.
No comments:
Post a Comment