The global balance of power is undergoing a gradual transformation, with the long-standing dominance of the United States increasingly being challenged by emerging powers, particularly China, Dr. Rizwan Rafeeqi, Associate Secretary of Jamaat-e-Islami Hind (JIH), said while speaking on “The Changing Balance of Global Power and the Future of American Hegemony.”
Dr. Rafeeqi said history demonstrated that no dominant power remained at the top of the international system permanently. “Universal supremacy is like a flowing river, not a solid rock,” he said, arguing that the rise and decline of great powers was a recurring feature of world history.
Referring to the reported interaction between the US and Chinese leadership, he highlighted the contrast between America’s relatively young political history and China’s ancient civilisation. He said the episode symbolised the changing nature of relations between established and emerging powers.
Tracing the history of global supremacy, Dr. Rafeeqi referred to the Ottoman Empire, Portugal, Spain, the Netherlands, France and Britain, each of which had enjoyed periods of international dominance before gradually losing its position. He said the decline of the Ottoman Empire, for instance, was not an overnight event but a prolonged process marked by military setbacks and territorial losses.
Similarly, Portugal dominated important maritime trade routes, while Spain accumulated enormous wealth from the Americas. However, he argued, Spain failed to sufficiently transform its wealth into industrial and technological strength. The Netherlands subsequently emerged as a commercial power, followed by France and eventually Britain.
Britain’s decline, he said, became particularly evident after the two World Wars. By 1945, the United States had emerged as the dominant Western power. The Suez Crisis of 1956 further demonstrated the shift, when Britain and France were forced to withdraw under American pressure.
According to Dr. Rafeeqi, the historical experience suggested that great-power decline did not necessarily begin with a military defeat. Economic productivity, financial strength, technological innovation, military effectiveness and moral legitimacy were equally important determinants of a country’s ability to maintain global influence.
He pointed to what he described as a decline in America’s productive capacity. Referring to analyses attributed to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, he said the US share in several strategic industries had declined substantially. He cited semiconductors, shipbuilding and pharmaceutical inputs as areas where American dependence on foreign production had increased.
The second major factor, he said, was financial dominance. Although the US dollar continued to occupy a central position in international reserves and global trade, countries were increasingly exploring alternatives. He referred to China’s Cross-Border Interbank Payment System (CIPS) and said growing trade between China and Russia was increasingly being conducted in national currencies rather than the dollar.
Dr. Rafeeqi also argued that economic sanctions were becoming less effective as countries developed alternative financial and trading mechanisms. The growing role of BRICS countries and alternative payment systems, he said, indicated that the international financial order was gradually becoming more diversified.
On military power, he referred to the Vietnam and Afghanistan wars as examples of the limitations of American military strength. He argued that technological superiority alone could not guarantee political victory, particularly when military intervention became prolonged and costly.
Technology and innovation, he said, represented another crucial arena of competition between the United States and China. Referring to the disruption caused by China’s DeepSeek in the global technology sector, he said the episode demonstrated that American technological dominance could no longer be taken for granted.
He also cited developments in robotics and artificial intelligence in China as evidence of an increasingly competitive technological landscape. According to him, countries were moving towards greater “digital autonomy”, reducing dependence on a single technological centre.
Dr. Rafeeqi placed particular emphasis on what he called the moral dimension of superpower status. Referring to the Gaza conflict, he criticised the US for continuing to support Israel despite widespread allegations of violations of international humanitarian law. He said the humanitarian consequences of the conflict had damaged the credibility of Western powers, particularly among younger generations.
He argued that growing scepticism among young Americans and Europeans towards their governments’ policies could eventually have political consequences. “The power that loses confidence in its population or loses confidence in the new generation is no longer a superpower,” he said.
Turning to the changing geopolitical landscape, Dr. Rafeeqi said the conflict involving Iran had also exposed limitations in the projection of American power. He argued that Washington had failed to achieve several objectives that had reportedly been associated with its military strategy, while prolonged conflicts were imposing economic and political costs.
He further pointed to growing uncertainty among traditional American allies in the Gulf. According to him, countries in the region were increasingly seeking diversified partnerships rather than relying exclusively on Washington. This, he said, was an indication of the wider movement towards a multipolar international order.
The speaker also highlighted the increasing importance of relatively inexpensive technologies in modern warfare. He argued that low-cost drones and other technologies could impose disproportionately high costs on sophisticated military systems, thereby narrowing the technological gap between major powers and smaller states.
Dr. Rafeeqi suggested that the future could develop in several directions. One possibility was a renewed Cold War-like confrontation between the United States and China. Another was the emergence of a genuinely multipolar world involving China, India, Russia, Arab states and other regional powers. A third possibility, he said, was the formation of new regional alliances and arrangements.
He cautioned against predictions that American hegemony would collapse within a year or two, just as he rejected the idea that US dominance would continue indefinitely. The dollar, he said, was unlikely to lose its global significance suddenly, but neither would it necessarily retain its present level of dominance forever.
For India, Dr. Rafeeqi said the emerging transformation presented both opportunities and challenges. He stressed the importance of strengthening manufacturing, innovation, technological capacity and economic self-reliance if India wanted to play a greater role in the emerging global order.
Concluding, Dr. Rafeeqi said the world was moving away from a system dominated by a single superpower. The “walls” of the existing power structure, he said, were developing cracks, creating opportunities for other nations to play a greater role.
He expressed hope that the emerging balance of power would ultimately be used to promote peace, justice, human dignity and prosperity rather than further conflict and bloodshed.
