U.S. - China: “Power Transition” and the Outlines of “Conflict Bipolarity”

This article focuses on the phenomenon of global rivalry between China and the United States in terms of power transition theory, which is scientifically new and relevant due to the increased attention to the so-called Thucydides trap, in which, as some experts claim, both states have fallen. This paper presents a different vision of the global rivalry for leadership in the shaping of a new world order, which has already taken the form of overt non-violent confrontation and manifests itself in technological and trade wars as well as scientific and cultural rivalries. Nevertheless, despite the non-violent nature of the rivalry, this process is followed by an increase in the military capabilities of states, mainly projected in the basins of the Pacific and Indian Oceans (Indo-Pacific region). The methodological basis of the paper is power transition theory, which has been developed over the past 60 years by A.F. Organsky, J. Kugler, D. Lemke, R. Tammen and other researchers, united in the TransResearch Consortium. The authors argue that the analytical prism of this theory is more relevant to the analysis of current global rivalry than the classical neorealist balance of power approach. Through the prism of the theory the issues of rebalancing the global system of economic governance are analyzed. Also, a comparative analysis of the US-Japanese and US-Chinese trade and technological wars is carried out. Both the military and aggregate capabilities of two countries on a global scale and in the Indo-Pacific region are examined. The conclusion contains findings and comments on the impact of U.S. - China rivalry on the system of international relations.

Low carbon transition of global power sector enhances sustainable development goals

Low-carbon power transition, key to combatting climate change, brings far-reaching effects on achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in terms of resources use, environmental emissions, employment, and many more. Here we assessed the potential impacts of power transition on 49 regional multiple SDGs progress under three different climate scenarios. We found that power transition could increase global SDG index score from 72.36 in 2015 to 74.38 in 2040 under the 1.5℃ scenario, compared with 70.55 and 71.44 under ‘Coal-dependent’ and ‘Middle of the road’ scenario, respectively. The power transition related global SDG progress would mainly come from switching to renewables in developing economies. Power transition also improves the overall SDG in most developed economies under all scenarios, while undermining their employment-related SDG progress. The global SDG progress would be jeopardized by power transition related international trade changes under ‘Coal-dependent’ and ‘Middle of the road’ scenario, while improved under the 1.5℃ scenario.

Testing the Power Transition Theory with Relative Military Power

This article tests the power transition theory using relative military power within a dyad pair. The author hypothesizes that when a dyad pair achieves relative military power parity, the two states are likely to initiate war. Furthermore, when a dyad pair no longer maintains relative military power parity, the probability of war between the two states decreases. Although the sample population used to test this hypothesis is small (n=3), the mixed-method analysis indicates support to the power transition theory. Furthermore, results are more substantial when using military expenditure and surplus domestic when compared to results using military personnel and surplus domestic product. No statistically significant difference exists (p=.99) when comparing military expenditure and surplus domestic product with a combination of military expenditure, military personnel, and surplus domestic product. These results indicate that relative military power possesses the potential to provide researchers an additional quantitative measure to test the power transition theory. Although these initial results are promising, further research is required to test a larger sample population of dyads.

U.S. & China Approaches to Global Internet Governance: "New Bipolarity" in Terms of "the Network Society"

From the perspective of power transition theory, international relations system is gradually entering the phase of "power transition" where the United States, as a global hegemon, seeks to maintain the existing world order, and China establishes alternative international formats to reorganize the system of international relations and strengthen its structural power. Cyberspace and technological sphere are becoming the field of non-violent competition between states, which makes the study of global governance of cyberspace critical for the understanding of the outlines of the "new bipolarity". The analysis in the paper is focused on U.S. & China approaches to global governance of cyberspace through the prism of Manuel Castells' theory of "network society". The authors aimed to determine the directions of the U.S. and China policy in the course of four types of "power" in cyberspace: networking power, network power, networked power and network-making power. Present analysis concludes that the United States play crucial role in the course of all four types of "power" at the expense of decentralized model of Internet governance which is based on the idea of "multistakeholderism". NGO and other entities play a decisive role in such a model. Nonetheless, China has already developed necessary tools for reforming the present system of global governance of cyberspace based on centralized model with the leading role of United Nations as an international governance organization and state as a basic actor. The main beneficiaries of the centralized model are developing countries, which are unable to influence the global governance of cyberspace under the dominance of private companies from developed countries.

Planned Power Transition and Unexpected Crisis: Russian Responses to Belarusian Post-Election Protests

This Policy Insight article aimed to review Russia’s policies toward Belarus since the outbreak of the post-election protests. Russia tries to minimise the impacts of the crisis in Belarus to prevent the possibilities of the redistribution of power when it faces the “2024 problem”.