Military power is important.

Top board military power among states.

Is it population, military strength, or economic development?

Is Military Power Becoming Obsolete?

The aspect it stresses is military power.

China s economic and military power is rising.

CAMBRIDGE Will military power become less important in the coming decades?

Military power remains important because it structures world politics.

American military might can still make right against any challenger.

Military power is also used to provide protection for allies and assistance to friends.

Economic or military power, in this case, is less important than glory in sports.

Rising economic and military power is emboldening China s government to pursue a more muscular foreign policy.

America s military and economic strength reinforces confidence in the dollar as a safe haven.

America s global military power is undisputed, although it is used with decreasing frequency.

China s military power has increased, but its behavior has been more moderate than it was a decade ago.

Other states tend to resist bids by any Asian power be it Japan, China or India to rise to the top of the pyramid.

As a foreign based power, the US needs the cooperation of Asian partners.

Economic, political and military power no longer necessarily cohere in one single locus.

Yes, he admits, China is growing in strength, but US dominance is still overwhelming American military might can still make right against any challenger.

Military power, which some call the ultimate form of power in world politics, requires a thriving economy. But whether economic or military resources produce more power in today s world depends on the context.

But for Chinese military power, the US would treat China like another Japan.

This history helps to explain why China s rapidly growing military power raises important concerns in Asia today.

Europeans like to talk about the values of peace and compromise, while US military might takes care of their safety.

Military power, which some call the ultimate form of power in world politics, requires a thriving economy.

While military power remains important, it is a mistake for any country to discount the role of economic power and soft power.

China s military power was built by Mao Zedong, enabling Deng to focus single mindedly on rapidly building the country s economic power.

Eisenhower was right about something else, too America s military strength depends on preservation of its economic strength.

Political observers have long debated whether economic or military power is more fundamental. The Marxist tradition casts economics as the underlying structure of power, and political institutions as a mere superstructure, an assumption shared by nineteenth century liberals who believed that growing interdependence in trade and finance would make war obsolete.

Political observers have long debated whether economic or military power is more fundamental. 160

But America s real strength, more than its military and economic power, is its soft power, its moral authority.

Furthermore, Russia s economic and military power has been in decline, whereas China s has exploded.

Some critics are fearing amendments to basic human rights and larger power in military.

The Hand of Allah is over their hands.

The hand of God is over their hands.

The Hand of Allah is above their hands.

Some analysts argue that military power is of such restricted utility that it is no longer the ultimate measuring rod.

The Bush Administration believes that US military power buys security, even though terrorism has increased since the Iraq War.

On the top chessboard, military power is largely unipolar and likely to remain so for a while.

The key idea was that military power could be made obsolete if the food chain of military technologies was controlled by other nations.

The notion promoted by Romney and his boosters that only US military power can preserve world order is deeply reactionary.

September 1939 taught every Pole that military power must be real to be effective.

Countries cooperate out of self interest, but a country's soft or attractive power, not only its military might, affects the degree of cooperation.

While America s military power was sufficient to defeat Saddam Hussein s forces quickly, it did so at the expense of its attractiveness in many countries.

Its impressive military strength is of limited use as an instrument of power, and its political clout has been overestimated, particularly in Syria.

Military discipline?