ABC Live compares the U.S. with China, EU, India, and BRICS+ to map the real contours of multipolarity. Who leads where — and why no one leads everywhere.
New Delhi (ABC Live): U.S. Hegemony : As the world transitions from unipolarity to multipolarity, the question facing scholars and policymakers alike is clear: Can any single country or bloc replace the United States as the world’s dominant power? Despite China’s rise, the European Union’s regulatory assertiveness, BRICS+ expansion, and India’s emergence, the answer — for now — remains no. But the nature of global leadership itself is evolving.
Comparative studies by the Brookings Institution, Chatham House, Carnegie Endowment, RAND Corporation, and The Economist Intelligence Unit suggest that domain-specific power centres are replacing old hegemonic models. ABC Live examines the contenders and how they compare, with data and global expert insights.
? U.S. Dominance: The Benchmark for Global Leadership
According to the Lowy Institute’s 2024 Asia Power Index, the U.S. remains the most influential power across military capability, cultural influence, alliances, and innovation. It continues to set the tone for:
-
Finance (U.S. dollar dominance)
-
Technology (home to 60% of global tech unicorns)
-
Defence (750+ military bases, NATO leadership)
-
Soft power (Hollywood, Ivy League, democratic values)
Chatham House (2023): “The U.S. is not declining in absolute power; it is being met by others rising in selective dimensions.”
? Comparative Analysis: Who Comes Close?
?? China: Manufacturing Giant, Trust Deficit
Brookings (2023) highlights that while China surpasses the U.S. in manufacturing output and trade with over 120 countries, it still struggles to:
-
Internationalize its currency
-
Build trusted alliances
-
Offer transparent governance models
RAND (2024) notes that Beijing’s global influence is growing but often coercive, citing examples in Southeast Asia, Africa, and the South Pacific.
Conclusion: A near-peer competitor in economic and technological scale, but not in soft power, trust, or defense networks.
?? European Union: The Rule Setter, Not Enforcer
EU institutions drive global regulations on AI, carbon markets, digital privacy, and trade sustainability. According to The Economist’s Democracy Index, the EU remains the largest bloc of liberal democracies. However, the Centre for European Reform highlights its lack of a unified defence force, internal political rifts, and reliance on NATO for security.
Conclusion: Strong in regulatory leadership and values-based diplomacy, but limited in strategic hard power and global enforcement.
? BRICS+: Symbolic Unity, Structural Weakness
With the inclusion of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, UAE, and Ethiopia, BRICS+ commands 46% of the world’s population and nearly a third of global GDP. Yet, as noted by the Carnegie Moscow Center, the bloc is hampered by:
-
Ideological heterogeneity
-
Absence of a coherent institutional framework
-
Internal rivalries (e.g., India–China border tensions)
IMF (2024) and OECD reports show that BRICS+ economies have widely divergent growth rates and economic models.
Conclusion: A rising political voice, especially in de-dollarization and Global South unity, but not a functional global leadership bloc.
?? India: The Swing Power of the 21st Century
The Atlantic Council identifies India as the “decisive power in a multipolar world,” capable of partnering with all major blocs while avoiding dependence on any. India’s strengths include:
-
Trusted digital public infrastructure (UPI, ONDC)
-
Strategic partnerships with U.S., France, Japan, and Russia
-
A reputation for neutrality and democracy
However, as per McKinsey Global Institute (2024), India’s logistics and regulatory environment remain key bottlenecks in scaling global influence.
Conclusion: Rising credibility and capability, especially in tech and diplomacy, but not yet at global leadership scale.
? Comparative Snapshot of ¸Metrics
| Indicator | United States | China | EU | India | BRICS+ (Combined) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GDP (2024) | $25.5T | $17.8T | $18.8T | $3.9T | ~$28T |
| Defense Budget | $885B | $290B | ~$100B | $81B | ~$1.1T (uncoordinated) |
| Global Tech Unicorns | 57 | 14 | 10 | 4 | ~25 |
| Global Universities (Top 100) | 29 | 7 | 10 | 3 | – |
| Foreign Military Bases | 750+ | <10 | <10 | 0 | ~20 |
| SWIFT Usage (2024) | 46.7% (USD) | 3.4% | 23.2% | – | – |
| Soft Power Index (2024, Brand Finance) | 1st | 4th | 3rd | 7th | Mixed |
? Thought Leadership: What the Experts Say on U.S. Hegemony
| Institution | Key Insight |
|---|---|
| Brookings | “China can rival the U.S. economically, but not in values or institutional trust.” |
| RAND Corporation | “The U.S. remains the only power with global military and alliance capabilities.” |
| Atlantic Council | “India is becoming the swing state of geopolitics.” |
| Carnegie Endowment | “BRICS+ is an aspirational bloc, not yet a strategic framework.” |
| Chatham House | “Europe has influenced by rules, not by force — its power is persuasive, not coercive.” |
? Conclusion: No Replacement of U.S. Hegemony, But Many Rivals in a Fragmented Order
The post-U.S. world is not one of replacement, but of rebalancing. The data and expert consensus converge:
No nation or bloc matches the United States across all dimensions — economic, technological, military, institutional, and cultural.
However:
