Strategika

Subscribe to receive Strategika. Subscribe »

Thursday, March 28, 2019

Issue 57

The Growth of Chinese Power and Influence
Background Essay
Background Essay

China Never Was A Superpower—And It Won’t Be One Anytime Soon

by Gordon G. Changvia Strategika
Thursday, March 28, 2019

“The world by 2049 will be defined by the realization of Chinese power,” write Bradley Thayer and John Friend, referring to the centenary of the founding of the People’s Republic. “China,” these American academics tell us, “will be the world’s greatest economic and political force.” Must Americans accept the inevitability of Chinese dominance of the international system?

Featured Commentary
Featured Commentary

China’s Tide Is High, But Is It At High Tide?

by Michael R. Auslinvia Strategika
Thursday, March 28, 2019

If China’s explosive economic growth since the beginning of reform in 1979 is a unique success story, no less impressive has been the concomitant growth of its military and political power, as well as its global influence. Few could have predicted that within one generation of Richard Nixon’s visit to Beijing in 1972, China would vie with the United States for the banner of global leadership. By any measure, China’s efforts to surpass American predominance in the world must be taken seriously, and in some cases, may even seem to have succeeded. 

Featured Commentary

From Trade War To Tech War To Cold War

by Niall Fergusonvia Strategika
Thursday, March 28, 2019

If you had told me 30 years ago America would be in another Cold War with another communist superpower by 2019, I would not have believed you. If you had told me that, simultaneously, socialism would be the height of fashion with young Americans, I would have directed you to a psychiatrist. But here we are. Three decades ago Francis Fukuyama published his seminal essay “The End of History?”, hailing the victory of liberal capitalism over all its ideological competitors, but especially over communism. The essay he needs to write today is “The Upend of History?”

E.g., 6 / 22 / 2019
E.g., 6 / 22 / 2019
Wednesday, September 5, 2018

Issue 53

U.S. Engagement with Russia

Background Essay

by Ralph Peters Wednesday, September 5, 2018
article

Featured Commentary

by Chris Gibson Wednesday, September 5, 2018
article
by Thomas Donnelly Wednesday, September 5, 2018
article

Related Commentary

by Robert G. Kaufman Friday, February 15, 2019
article
by Peter R. Mansoor Wednesday, September 5, 2018
article
by Hy Rothstein Friday, February 15, 2019
article
Tuesday, July 31, 2018

Issue 52

Turkey and the West
Monday, June 25, 2018

Issue 51

Nuclear Proliferation

Background Essay

by Gordon G. Chang Monday, June 25, 2018
article

Featured Commentary

by Thomas Donnelly Monday, June 25, 2018
article
by Thomas Karako Monday, June 25, 2018
article
Thursday, April 26, 2018

Issue 50

Pakistan's Partnership with the United States

Background Essay

by Peter R. Mansoor Thursday, April 26, 2018
article

Featured Commentary

by Ralph Peters Thursday, April 26, 2018
article
by Bing West Thursday, April 26, 2018
article

Pages

Explore Research

Filter By:

Topic

Type

Author

Section

Enter comma-separated IDs of authors
Enter comma-separated IDs of contributors

Support the Hoover Institution

Join the Hoover Institution's community of supporters in advancing ideas defining a free society.

Support Hoover

Related Commentary

Europe Is Alert to the Dangers It Faces

by Kori Schakevia Strategika
Thursday, January 17, 2019

I think the question (Will Europe ever fully partner with the U.S.—or will the European Union and NATO continue to downplay the necessity of military readiness?) is lagging the reality of European acknowledgement of their military shortfalls. Europeans are no longer downplaying the necessity of military readiness.

Related Commentary

Even Amidst Change, Europe Still Relies on the U.S. for Defense

by Barry Strauss via Strategika
Thursday, January 17, 2019

Are there circumstances in which the European Union and NATO will partner fully with the U.S.? At the moment, they don’t. In 2017, for example, only a very few European countries contributed more than 2 per cent to defense, in spite of a 2014 promise to do so. Meanwhile, the U.S. contributed more than 4 per cent.

Related Commentary

Europe Lacks the Will to Defend Itself

by Bing West via Strategika
Thursday, January 17, 2019

The Hoover Institution at Stanford University posed this question—Will NATO Europe fully partner with the U.S., or continue to downplay military readiness? The brief answer is that the leading economic powers in Europe have moved beyond national defense into a never-never land of post-military globalism. The liminal leap into self-induced delusion assumes that major conflict will never again embroil the European continent. So there isn’t enough money for a credible military force in Europe because there is not the political will. The moral is to the physical as four to one in battle, and Europe lost the spirit to fight long ago.

Related Commentary

The European Alliance That Never Was

by Angelo M. Codevillavia Strategika
Thursday, January 17, 2019

The notion of an Atlantic alliance consisting of Europeans and Americans as full partners was once a useful fiction. Today it is a dysfunctional one, an obstacle to all sides’ understanding of what useful cooperation may yet be possible.

Strategika Issue 55: The Structure of World Power

via Strategika
Friday, November 16, 2018

Strategika Issue 55 is now available online. Strategika is an online journal that analyzes ongoing issues of national security in light of conflicts of the past—the efforts of the Military History Working Group of historians, analysts, and military personnel focusing on military history and contemporary conflict.

Related Commentary

America on Top

by Miles Maochun Yuvia Strategika
Thursday, November 15, 2018

Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has been the lone superpower that, if it’s so willing, can exert preponderant influence over the global, geostrategic, and geopolitical order. In a true sense, a bipolar or multi-polar world order whereby the U.S. is of equal status and influence with another “pole” or “poles” does not really exist.

Related Commentary

Regional Bipolarity, The New Global Model

by Ralph Petersvia Strategika
Thursday, November 15, 2018

The United States’ superpower monopoly endures, but only in the western hemisphere. There is no regional military or economic competitor, and ideological challengers have failed or remain strategically marginal. Elsewhere, the emerging model is regional bipolarity coincident with global economic tri-polarity (United States, China, European Union).

Related Commentary

A Different Path to Global Stability

by Chris Gibson via Strategika
Thursday, November 15, 2018

The global strategic landscape is clearly evolving beyond U.S. hegemony, presenting both challenges and opportunities for our national leaders.

Related Commentary

A Wobbling Goliath

by Giselle Donnellyvia Strategika
Thursday, November 15, 2018

Describing the balance of power by way of “poles,” the analytical framework so favored in recent decades by professional political scientists, is no longer that useful. 

Related Commentary

There Is Only One Superpower

by Gordon G. Changvia Strategika
Thursday, November 15, 2018

“China has overtaken the U.S. in all respects,” said Tsinghua University professor Hu Angang last year.

Pages


The Working Group on the Role of Military History in Contemporary Conflict strives to reaffirm the Hoover Institution's dedication to historical research in light of contemporary challenges, and in particular, reinvigorating the national study of military history as an asset to foster and enhance our national security. Read more.

Is there a military solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

Stay Up To Date!

Be notified when an new issue is available.

Subscriptions »

RSS Feed Subscription

subscribe and listen on iTunes

Strategika is an online journal that analyzes ongoing issues of national security in light of conflicts of the past—the efforts of the Military History Working Group of historians, analysts, and military personnel focusing on military history and contemporary conflict.

Our board of scholars shares no ideological consensus other than a general acknowledgment that human nature is largely unchanging. Consequently, the study of past wars can offer us tragic guidance about present conflicts—a preferable approach to the more popular therapeutic assumption that contemporary efforts to ensure the perfectibility of mankind eventually will lead to eternal peace. New technologies, methodologies, and protocols come and go; the larger tactical and strategic assumptions that guide them remain mostly the same—a fact discernable only through the study of history.

To stay up to date when new issues are released, sign up here to be notified when a new Strategika is available.

Subscriptions »

 

The opinions expressed in Strategika are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Hoover Institution or Stanford University.