2. BACKGROUND TO POWER TRANSITION Organski A.F..K. and Jacek Kugler (1980) The War Ledger . Kugler, Jacek and Douglas Lemke, Eds. (1996) Parity and War . Tammen, Ronald, Jacek Kugler et al. (2000) Power Transitions Lemke, Douglas (2002). Regions of War and Peace , Efird, Brian, Gaspare Genna, and Jacek Kugler. (2003) From War to Integration: Generalizing the Dynamic of Power Transitions. International Interactions 29(4). Feng, Yi. (2003). Democracy, Governance, and Economic Performance: Theory Kugler, Jacek, and Ronald L. Tammen. (2004) Regional Challenge: China’s Rise to Power. In Jim Rolfe, ed. The Asia - Pacific: A Region in Transition National Intelligence Council. (2004) Mapping the Global Future . , D.C: GPO. Ronald Tammen and Jacek Kugler (2005) “Strategic Equation”. China, . Organski A.F..K. World Politics (1958,1968) Kim, Woosang. (1996) Power Parity, Dissatisfaction and War in East Asia 1860-1993. Journal of Conflict Resolution 46: 654-671
3. Figure 1.3. Hierarchy and Distribution of Satisfaction
4. Regional Hierarchies in World Politics USA Lebanon China Korea Taiwan Israel Syria Palestine Global Hierarchy Regional Hierarchies
5.
6.
7. FORMALIZING POWER TRANSTION CC = RP- S (RP3) + Hs + Hg where CC = conflict-cooperation RP = relative power H = power concentration in the hierarchy S = satisfaction with the status quo.
8. DISTRIBUTION OF POWER COMPONENTS 2000 AND 2050 ESTIMATED DISTRIBUTION OF GDP 2050 Brazil Russia India China France Germany Italy UK US Japan DISTRIBUTION OF GDP 2000 Brazil Russia China France Germany Italy UK US Japan India POPULATION 2000 Brazil Russia India China France Germany Italy UK US Japan ESTIMATED POPULATION 2050 Brazil Russia India China Italy UK US Japan Germany France
11. Number of American Voters Right Left R1 R2 R3 D1 D2 D3 Democratic Primary Republican Primary General Election Center D R Primaries “Mobilizing the Extremes” General Election “The Race to the Center” Contested at Parity Political Orientation Parity: Median & Confrontation
12. Relative Power and Productivity G6-BRIC 2000-2050 0 20 40 60 80 100 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 Year Relative Power G6 BRIC
13. Relative GDP and Productivity Brazil-Russia-India-China 2000-2050 0 20 40 60 80 100 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 Year Relative Power China Brazil India Russia
14. Relative GDP and Productivity USA-China-India 0 20 40 60 80 100 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 Year Relative Power USA China India
18. RELATIVE POWER AND PRODUCTIVITY G6-BRIC 2000-2050 0 20 40 60 80 100 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 Year Relative Power G6 BRIC
19.
20. RELATIVE GNP AND PRODUCTIVITY USA-China 0 20 40 60 80 100 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 Year Relative Power USA China
21. SATISFIED DYAD Year War Integration Conflict Cooperation Neutrality Satisfaction Dissatisfied Satisfied US - China, 1996 - 2050 1996 2006 2016 2026 2036 2046
22. Year War Integration Conflict Cooperation Neutrality Satisfaction Dissatisfied Satisfied DISSAISFIED TRIAD US-China-Taiwan Triad 1996-2050
23. RELATIVE GNP AND PRODUCTIVITY China-India 0 20 40 60 80 100 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 Year Relative Power China India
24. Similarity of Interests Dissimilar Similar War Integration Increasing Severity of Conflict Increasing Intensity of Cooperation Neutrality Forecasting Conflict-Cooperation: India-China, 2000-2050
27. GDP Share and GDP Per Capita Iran, Russia and Turkey: 2000 - 2050 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 Year Power Share % IRAN TURKEY RUSSIA Source: Birol Yesilada and Brian Efrid (2006)
28. Similarity of Interests Dissimilar Similar War Integration Increasing Severity of Conflict Increasing Intensity of Cooperation Neutrality Forecasting Conflict-Cooperation: Iran-Turkey, 2000-2050
29. GDP Shares and GDP Per Capita EU29 and Iran: 2000 - 2050
30. GDP Shares and GDP per Capita Iran and Israel: 2000-2050