Power, structural power, and American decline

Abstract

Over the past twenty years, debates surrounding American power have oscillated between celebrations of empire and laments of decline. What explains such wild fluctuations? This article argues that the power shifts debate rests on an underpinning concept of power based around relative capabilities that is theoretically not fit for purpose. We propose instead an approach to power shifts that locates power primarily in structural power. In doing so we show that developments in the character of the international system render structural advantage more significant to questions of international leadership than the balance of national capabilities. These developments also mitigate against systemic changes that might bring relative strength and structural position into greater alignment.

Notes

¹ It is notable, and perhaps surprising, that scholars concerned with theoretical and empirical challenges of power analysis have scarcely engaged with the decline debate, and International Relations has remained largely resistant to engaging research from that field (see Baldwin 2016).

² On the sources and evolution of the decline debate see Cox (2001b; 2007).

³ A useful discussion of the content and implications of this debate can be found in Hayward & Lukes (2008).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Nicholas Kitchen

Nicholas Kitchen is Co-Director of the Centre for International Intervention at the University of Surrey, where he is also Lecturer in International Relations. Email: [email protected]

Michael Cox

Michael Cox is Professor Emeritus of International Relations at the London School of Economics, and Director of LSE IDEAS. Email: [email protected]