Military might remains king
Issue 13: Military Power in a Multipolar World
Geopolitical power is drawn from three major pillars - military, diplomatic, and economic. The most important through history, which has helped the formation of states, is military power and is the focus for today. Despite increasing utility in economic and diplomatic power, military power and the capacity to effectively project it remain an essential instrument of policy where disagreements cannot be solved through political or diplomatic means. Military strength and its infrastructure are two different things, yet critical for the demonstration and therefore, the projection of such military power. In addition, the strong military capability of great powers establishes deterrence and maintains the delicate balance of power in both regional and global contexts.
Military power is broadly determined by three factors: the quality and modernity of equipment, weapons systems, and personnel; the quantity of these assets; and the military’s readiness and ability to carry out key functions and achieve strategic objectives. Core components of military strength include trained personnel, advanced technology and equipment, a strong economic and industrial base, coherent strategy and doctrine, robust logistics and infrastructure, and effective intelligence capabilities. Defence infrastructure is related to this and refers to the permanent facilities and installations such as bases, airfields, ports, and command centers that are required to support, deploy, and operate a nation's armed forces.
Throughout history, a state's capacity to wage war has been closely tied to its ability to preserve sovereignty, project power, and shape the international order. Political theorist Charles Tilly famously argued that "war made the state, and the state made war," highlighting how the demands of organized violence, particularly in Europe, drove to increased centralization of authority, the development of bureaucracies to organise this authority, and the expansion of taxation systems necessary to fund standing armies. Military strength was not just a means of defense, but a core mechanism through which states were formed and consolidated.
A historical illustration of this dynamic can be seen in the Roman Empire. For the Romans, the expansion of political and military control was viewed as essential to preserving the security and integrity of the state. In a Mediterranean world marked by anarchy and competition, war was considered a legitimate and routine instrument for resolving disputes and asserting dominance. Rome’s military success, which was enabled by a combination of discipline, technological innovation, and strategic flexibility, allowed it to establish supremacy over rival powers, secure its frontiers, and embed its authority across a vast and diverse territory. In this context, military power was not simply a tool of defense but as a fundamental pillar of their statehood and sovereignty.
Largest military expenditures in 2024 from SIPRI (https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/2025-04/2504_fs_milex_2024.pdf)
US military power
The rise of the United States to great power status in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was inseparable from the expansion of its military capabilities. US military power played a decisive role in the outcomes of both World War I and World War II, and its world power status was further consolidated during the Cold War, as Washington built up a formidable global force to contain Soviet influence and protect its strategic interests. Over time, military strength became not only a tool of national defense but a central pillar of US global leadership and international order-building.
Today, the United States is widely recognized as the leading global military power, possessing the unmatched ability to project force across all regions of the world. It maintains an extensive network of overseas bases and forward-deployed troops, particularly in strategically critical regions such as the Indo-Pacific, the Middle East, and Europe. This posture is backed by strong alliances, including NATO, AUKUS, and trilateral security frameworks with Japan and South Korea, which amplify its strategic reach and deterrent capability. It maintains this military force with the largest annual military budget - over 3 times the next highest.
Map showing all US bases abroad (from: https://www.basenation.us/maps.html)
The US also possesses some of the most advanced conventional and strategic military capabilities globally. It continues to modernize across all domains, land, sea, air, cyber, and now space, in order to maintain its technological edge and deterrence credibility. A key part of this modernization is the overhaul of the nuclear triad, including the development of next-generation delivery systems such as the B-21 Raider, the world’s most advanced stealth strategic bomber.
Naval fleet in action
Underlying this military power is a highly developed defense industrial base, which not only supplies US armed forces but also dominates global defense exports and is integral to their economy. This industrial strength ensures long-term sustainment of military capabilities, provides financing for research and development, and can be used as a lever of influence within the global defense economy.
China
The Chinese military, the People's Liberation Army (PLA), has been undergoing a rapid and comprehensive modernization. Its aim is to create a world-class military force by the middle of the 21st century that can compete with the United States across all domains. This restructuring saw the disbandment of the Strategic Support Forces and its key functions, reorganized into three new independent Arms under the control of the Central Military Commission.
This updated PLA organisational structure now consists of four theater-grade services and four deputy theater-grade services. These theater grade services are - PLA Army (PLAA), PLA Navy (PLAN), PLA Air Force (PLAAF), and PLA Rocket Force (PLARF). The deputy theater grade services are - the Information Support Force (ISF), Aerospace Force (ASF), Cyberspace Force (CSF) and the Joint Logistic Support Force (JLSF). This restructuring of the Chinese military is borne out of a recognition within the PLA of the importance of the information domain alongside more traditional warfighting domains such as land, sea, and air. The PLA plans to move away from “Informationized” warfare to “intelligentized” warfare with a focus on integrating emerging technologies such as AI, quantum information, big data, cloud computing, and the internet of things (IoT) into new doctrine. Apart from the focus on maximizing operational efficiency, the restructuring also enhances government oversight and strengthens the Chinese communist Party's political control over the military.
Comparison of Chinese military platforms and the US Indo-Pacific Command deployed forces and allies Australia, Japan & South Korea (from Federation of American Scientists (https://fas.org/publication/pacom-china-military-projection/)
China possesses a well-funded, extensive, and increasingly sophisticated defense industrial base that is capable of producing advanced equipment across all warfighting domains. This comes from Chinese strategic recognition of the need to achieve technological self-sufficiency and the leveraging of civilian innovation for military applications. The PLA is increasingly willing to assert regional dominance through progressively more aggressive action to achieve its strategic objectives.
A prominent example of this assertive behaviour is the continued large-scale training exercises around Taiwan involving its Army, Navy, Air Force, Rocket Force, and Coast Guard which is afforded to them because of improvements in conventional military capabilities. It is also important to note that China is expanding its Surface naval fleet even as it retires older vessels. In the next 10 years, the Chinese Navy will increase its total number of frigates from 57 to 60 and its total number of destroyers from 51 to 67. These ships will be key to China’s increasing domination of the region.
China's growing military presence around the world as of September 2023 - Map from Craig Singleton NYT (https://www.almendron.com/tribuna/chinas-military-is-going-global/)
Russia
Russia maintains one of the world’s largest conventional military forces and possesses the largest nuclear arsenal globally. Since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Moscow’s defense policy and strategic orientation have been significantly recalibrated. The war has triggered a dramatic shift in state priorities, with the military-industrial complex now at the core of Russia’s political economy. This transformation is evident in both the massive ramp-up of public expenditure on defense and the Kremlin’s increasingly coercive approach to manpower recruitment and mobilization including the rapid increase in salaries for recruits.
In 2024, Russia committed approximately 7.1% of its GDP to military spending marking the highest share since the Soviet era. This surge in expenditure reflects a broader reorientation of the Russian economy towards a wartime production, with entire sectors subordinated to the needs of the defense industry. Arms manufacturing has been prioritized, and the state has expanded subsidies and state orders to sustain output across key firms in its defense-industrial base.
Expansion in Russian military expenditure since their invasion of Ukraine (data from SIPRI and World Bank)
Alongside industrial mobilization, the Kremlin has intensified efforts to replenish and expand its military ranks through a combination of conscription, recruitment campaigns offering high pay, and the use of private military companies and prison populations. This is in line with Russia’s tradition of prioritising manpower on the battlefield as a determinant of victory amid heavy battlefield attrition. Reports suggest that Russia recruited over 400,000 contract soldiers in 2023 alone, and these efforts are likely to continue as the conflict endures.
Strategically, Russia has also adjusted its nuclear doctrine, signaling a lowered threshold for nuclear weapons use in response to growing Western support for Ukraine. Its strategic nuclear forces remain central to its deterrent posture with its huge stockpiles backed by advanced delivery systems such as intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), hypersonic glide vehicles, and dual-capable missile systems.
Despite the sheer size of its armed forces, Russia has suffered major setbacks in Ukraine, including substantial personnel and equipment losses and tactical underperformance across land, air, and maritime domains. The Black Sea Fleet, in particular, has been seriously degraded by Ukrainian drone and missile strikes, forcing it into a defensive posture and redeployment to safer ports in the eastern Black Sea. Nevertheless, Russia continues to pose a serious military threat, particularly in Eurasia, by leveraging its strengths and prioritising strategic depth. Its ability to sustain a high level of defense investment, alongside an assertive foreign policy and highly developed information and hybrid warfare capabilities continue to push the Kremlin’s agenda..
Russian current and planned military bases from The World in Maps (https://brilliantmaps.com/russia-military-bases-abroad/)
European Union
Driven largely by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the evolving global security environment, the European Union has taken decisive steps to enhance its military potential. This effort is marked by a renewed focus on strengthening collective defence capabilities, deepening its defence industrial base, and improving crisis response mechanisms. New frameworks such as the European Defence Industrial Strategy (EDIS) and the proposed European Defence Industrial Programme (EDIP) reflect a more ambitious and structured approach to achieving these objectives.
One of the cornerstones of this emerging defence posture is the ReArm Europe Plan, also known as Readiness 2030, which facilitates member states' access to defence financing—unlocking up to €800 billion in potential investments. Complementing this is the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) initiative, which adds another €150 billion in EU-backed loans to support member state efforts to expand their armed forces and scale up domestic defence production. These measures are designed to address the urgent need for increased military readiness and industrial capacity in the face of intensifying threats.
Want to find out more about the European Defence Industry coming to life? Listen to our episode here:
While NATO remains the backbone of European collective defence, the EU’s pursuit of more autonomous military capabilities signals a broader strategic shift. These initiatives suggest that the European Union is moving toward a more assertive security role, potentially redefining its traditional remit to include responsibilities historically reserved for nation-states, such as defence and deterrence.
Active and reserve military forces - data from IISS Military Balance
From the Pickle Jar of Ronan - Conclusions to be drawn in today's environment
Global military spending is surging amid intensifying geopolitical rivalries, strategic realignments, and widespread uncertainty. From Europe’s response to the war in Ukraine, to the U.S. and China’s growing competition across the Indo-Pacific, nations are racing to modernize their armed forces, expand their defence budgets, and enhance military readiness. This acceleration reflects not only a response to immediate threats, but also a longer-term recognition that military strength remains a core pillar of geopolitical influence.
Emerging technologies including artificial intelligence, hypersonic weapons, drones, cyber capabilities, and autonomous systems are set to dramatically reshape the character of warfare and redefine what constitutes military advantage. States are investing heavily to gain an edge in these domains, understanding that future conflicts may be decided as much by advantages in information and communications spheres as much as physically on land, in the sea, or in the air.
Importantly, military power cannot be measured by defence spending alone. Meaningful comparisons between states require a multidimensional analysis of several key factors: the size and quality of military personnel; the proportion of spending dedicated to capital expenditure versus operating costs (such as salaries); the resilience and scalability of the defence industrial base; and the ability to sustain a protracted conflict through logistical depth and strategic reserves.
One crucial dimension not yet explored in depth is the role of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. These capabilities fundamentally shape strategic deterrence, crisis stability, and power projection and warrant a dedicated analysis to understand how they influence the broader military balance.
Estimated number readily deployable nuclear warheads in 2025 (from Federation of American Scientists (https://fas.org/initiative/status-world-nuclear-forces/)
In short, the global security landscape is becoming more complex, technologically advanced, and volatile. Military power, while evolving, remains a central instrument of statecraft and understanding its nuances is essential for grasping the trajectory of contemporary global geopolitics.
If you like what we do here at The Pickle Gazette, please share and subscribe so that you get every new issue delivered straight to your inbox.