Potential superpower

Brazil

The Federative Republic of Brazil has seen limited discussion among authorities regarding its potential as a superpower.

Writing for The Diplomatic Courier, former British Ambassador to Brazil, Peter Collecott, identifies that Brazil's recognition as a potential superpower largely stems from its own national identity and ambition. Collecott points out that for the past two hundred years Brazil has sought to emerge as a serious global economic and political power, a position "that [Brazil] instinctively feels is her due."^[32] However, Collecott also argues that while Brazil has certainly fulfilled some of its aspirations and finally started to gain the international recognition it deserves, it perhaps won't quite emerge as a superpower; instead, its current position as an emerging power will allow Brazil to shape the future with more realistic aspirations.^[32]

In his 2014 publication, The BRICs Superpower Challenge: Foreign and Security Policy Analysis, professor Kwang Ho Chun carefully assesses the likelihood of the BRICs countries attaining the status of superpowers.^[33] Regarding Brazil, Kwang Ho Chun highlights that the country possesses enormous and almost untouched "strategic" natural resources, including valuable minerals, a tenth of the world's fresh water and Earth's largest remaining rainforest. Because of this, Kwang Ho Chun feels it is likely that Brazil could gain a dominant role in international relations, especially when it comes to environmental issues.^[33] This soft power influence is further enhanced by Brazil's policy makers seeking to engage in as many international organizations as possible and forming alliances, most notably on social, diplomatic and economic issues.^[33] Despite its economic potential and Brazil's "self-image as a country with a great destiny," Kwang Ho Chun believes that the country "falls far short of the levels required for a superpower."^[33] Supporting his belief, he emphasizes Brazil's apparent lack of "traditional hard power" (i.e. military power and global security influence) as a major obstacle. Kwang Ho Chun writes that Brazil has "little incentive to invest in its military" as "the country developed in an environment with hardly any inter-state security threats", therefore Brazil "may never be in a position to accumulate enough influence on global security matters to meet the criteria of being a superpower."^[33] Instead, Ho Chun feels that Brazil will emerge as a great power with an important position in some spheres of influence but limited in others such as international security.^[33]

In 2023, geopolitical analyst Matija Šerić wrote, "Although the current situation is not bright, when considering the long-term perspective, with a lot of work and reforms, the Brazilian people and the country can only string success after success." He added, "In addition to enormous natural, material and human resources, the advantage of Brazilians is that they have a democratic state that provides political, media and other freedoms. Brazil can become a superpower that can strongly contribute to the construction of a fairer multipolar world, and the prerequisite for this is internal stability and a government that will be politically prudent, economically expert, but also transparent and non-corrupt."^[34]

European Union

The European Union (EU) has been called a potential superpower, mainly due to its economic power and global political influence. Factors highlighted include its large population, the size and global reach of its combined economy, and the comparative unpopularity of US foreign policy.^{[35][36][37][38][39]}

Despite lacking a cohesive military of its own, with military capabilities still in the hands of individual member states, it has been argued that this is irrelevant when considering the status of the EU as a potential superpower.^[40][41] Others disagree, saying that its lack of a unified military structure compared to the United States undermines its claim to be a potential superpower.^[42][43][44]

There have also been conflicting views about the EU's lack of political integration. Some have argued that its "lower profile" diplomacy and emphasis on the rule of law represent a new kind of geopolitical influence that fulfills the political requirements for consideration as a superpower, rather than simply failing to meet them.^[36][45] Others however argue that its lack of a centralised foreign or defence policy leaves its effectiveness uncertain when compared to that of a more politically integrated union of states such as the United States,^[46][47] and it has even been argued that the EU is little more than an extension of a Europe reliant on or dominated by the United States.^[48]

The European Union has been called a "regulatory superpower" due to the Brussels effect, which suggests that regulations and standards applicable in the EU will also be adopted by numerous countries outside the EU over time.^[49][50][51]

Japan

In the 1980s, some political and economic analysts predicted that Japan would eventually accede to superpower status due to its large population, growing economic, military, industrial, technological and cultural influence, large gross domestic product, and high economic growth at that time.^[52][53][54] Japan's economy was expected to eventually surpass that of the United States.^[55][56][53] However, this prediction failed to materialise following a stock market crash and the resulting "Lost Decades", where Japan has suffered a flat to negative economic outlook,^[57] while its population has been aging since the late 1980s before suffering real decline in total population starting in 2011.^[58][59]

India

India has seen considerable coverage of its potential of becoming a superpower. Multiple opinions have pointed towards India's rapid economic development as a reason for it to be considered a potential superpower, in particular during the 2010s when it was predicted to outpace China's growth into the future.^[a]

Some commentators made the prediction of India becoming a superpower by 2020, most notably based on A. P. J. Abdul Kalam's book India 2020.^[64][65] In 2019, BJP politician Amit Shah claimed that India would emerge as a superpower in the next 5 years under the rule of Narendra Modi.^[66]

Economists and researchers at Harvard University have projected India's 7% projected annual growth rate through 2024 would continue to put it ahead of China, making India the fastest growing economy in the world.^[67][68] Over and above, India also has the advantage of having a very large and growing young population with a median age of 28, compared to China's median age of 40.^[69] In 2003 Goldman Sachs predicted that India would become an economic superpower by 2050.^[70] In a 2024 interview with The Independent, former UK PM Tony Blair predicted that by 2050 India would be a 'global superpower' along with the United States and China.^[71] In 2025 Former UK PM Rishi Sunak suggested India is an 'economic superpower'.^[72]

While India’s economic growth has continued, some analysts note that inequality remains high and that its trade potential is more limited compared to regional competitors such as China. Although India briefly became the world’s fastest-growing major economy in 2015, its growth rate has fallen below China’s since 2018.^[b] Since 2021, India's economy has grown faster than China's and^[78] remains the fastest growing major economy.^{[79][80][81][82][83]}

It has also been argued that India's government and bureaucracy is geared against emerging as a superpower, with it being argued that it "does very little collective thinking about its long-term foreign policy goals, since most of the strategic planning that takes place within the government happens on an individual level".^[84]

Following the years of Premiership of Narendra Modi, the perception towards India's potential in becoming a superpower has significantly changed downwards.^[85]

In 2017, a study for London School of Economics by nine experts of Indian economy, defence, government, culture, environment and society concluded that India is not likely become a superpower and should not desire to become one.^[86]

In 2023, economist Ashoka Mody wrote, "China has a plausible path through its current muddle. India, by contrast, risks falling into blind alleys of unfounded optimism."^[87]

Russia

Russia, since its imperial times, has been considered both a great power, potentially in decline since the 2020s, and a regional power. Throughout most of the Soviet-era, the Soviet Union was one of the world's two superpowers. However, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Russian Federation as its successor state lost its superpower status.^[88] In his 2005 publication entitled Russia in the 21st Century: The Prodigal Superpower, Steven Rosefielde, a professor of economics at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, previously predicted that Russia would emerge as a superpower before 2010 and augur another arms race. However, Rosefielde noted that such an end would come with tremendous sacrifice to global security and the Russian people's freedom.^[89]

Others however have put forward more pessimistic views towards Russia's ability to regain its superpower status. A mixed opinion has been offered by Matthew Fleischer of the Los Angeles Times, contending that severe climate change would be necessary for much of Russia's inherent natural resources to become viable.^[90]

Several analysts commented on the fact that Russia showed signs of an aging and shrinking population. Fred Weir said that this severely constricts and limits Russia's potential to re-emerge as a central world power.^[91] In 2011, British historian and professor Niall Ferguson also highlighted the negative effects of Russia's declining population, and suggested that Russia is on its way to "global irrelevance".^[92] Russia has, however, shown a slight population growth since the late 2000s, partly due to immigration, quickly rising birth rates, slowly declining death rates.^[93]

In the 2020s, many scholars view Russia's global influence as being in decline.^[94][95]

In 2026, Historian Marc Ewert wrote in his book Cold War II: How the War in Ukraine Changed the World that, "The Second Cold War at first was a bipolar conflict between the West and Russia, akin to the First Cold War. However, as the years have progressed, it has steadily become a semi-multipolar conflict, and tensions and proxy wars have steadily become a free for all arena between the superpowers and emerging superpowers of the US, Russia, China, Turkey, India and Iran. As shall be explored in the final chapter, even the US has become an emerging remote superpower, separate from Europe, at the turn of Donald Trump's second presidency, due to Vladimir Putin's exploitation of the West's internal political infighting. The US' growing detachment from Europe adds to the complexity of the Second Cold War's multipolar conflict."^[96]