The big idea: Technology has become one of the great sources of power in global politics. Whoever controls the most advanced technology gains huge advantages in wealth, influence and security.
Three things to hold on to
- What counts: chips, networks, data, satellites, weapons.
- Who controls it: states, or the giant Big Tech companies? This crucial question runs through the whole challenge.
- Uneven spread: the digital divide means this power is spread deeply unevenly, between countries and within them.
- Economic power — the countries and firms that lead in advanced technology capture the most wealth and set the standards others must follow.
- Military power — drones, cyber, satellites and precision weapons reshape who can project force.
- Structural power — controlling the platforms, networks and standards others depend on gives lasting leverage over them.
- Soft power — dominant platforms and content shape how people around the world think and communicate.
States vs Big Tech — a new kind of power: For most of history, states were the main holders of power. Technology complicates this: a handful of global technology companies now control the networks, data and platforms that billions of people — and governments themselves — depend on.
The defining HL question: Their decisions on what information spreads, who is connected and which rules apply can rival those of states. So is power over the digital world held by governments we can vote out, or by private companies we cannot?
Free preview
This is the free notes preview
You're reading the free notes. Aimnova Pro unlocks the full study experience — and you can try it with your first topic free to keep:
- FlashcardsLock in vocabulary and key terms with spaced repetition.
- Practice questionsAnswer exam-style questions and get instant AI marking.
- Mock exams & past-paper vaultSit full mocks and see exactly how examiners award marks.
- Personalised study planA daily plan built around your exam date and weak areas.
Technology deepens interdependence, which creates both cooperation and vulnerability. Control over its chokepoints has become a tool of statecraft: cutting off technology can be as powerful as a military threat.
Where the interdependence lies
- Supply chains for chips
- Undersea cables
- Shared platforms
Technology as interdependence
Advanced technology is built through deeply connected global systems — chips designed in one country, made in another, using materials from a third, and running on shared cables and platforms. No single state makes everything alone, so technology binds countries together in mutual dependence, which can encourage cooperation and shared standards.
Interdependence as vulnerability
But dependence cuts both ways: if a country controls a chokepoint — the most advanced chips, key software, a dominant platform — it can restrict others' access as leverage. So the same interdependence that enables cooperation also creates weapons of pressure, turning technology supply chains into instruments of geopolitical competition.
Case study — control of advanced chips as leverage: Consider the most advanced computer chips, which power everything from phones to artificial intelligence and weapons.
How chips become leverage
Few can make them
Only a few countries and companies can design and manufacture the very best of them.
A long chain
They rely on a long, global chain of specialised suppliers.
Power at the top
Whoever sits at the top of that chain gains real power.
Leverage
They can restrict rivals' access to cutting-edge chips as a tool of pressure, slowing a competitor's technology and military progress without firing a shot.
Whoever holds the chokepoint holds the leverage.
The HL lesson: Technology is not just a tool — it is a source and instrument of power. The deep interdependence of technology supply chains is both a bond that ties countries together and a chokepoint that can be squeezed.
The key point: Technology is a major source of power — economic, military, structural and soft. Control is contested between states and Big Tech companies, whose reach can rival governments. Technology deepens interdependence, which brings cooperation but also vulnerability, as control of chokepoints (chips, platforms, cables) becomes a tool of statecraft. And the digital divide means this power is spread deeply unevenly.
Feeling unprepared for exams?
Get a clear study plan, practice with real questions, and know exactly where you stand before exam day. No more guessing.
Who should hold power over technology — states or companies? Does the digital divide make technology a force for greater equality or greater inequality? Weigh it — and recommend.
The case that technology narrows inequality
Technology can be a great leveller: mobile phones and the internet give poorer people access to information, banking, education and markets once reserved for the rich, letting developing countries 'leapfrog' older stages of development. On this view, spreading access is a powerful tool for reducing global inequality.
The case that technology widens inequality
But the digital divide means those without reliable access — poorer countries, poorer citizens, rural areas — fall further behind as the connected pull ahead, while the wealth and power of dominant tech firms concentrate at the top. On this view, technology can entrench and deepen inequality unless access and control are deliberately shared.
One view: it empowers
- Spreading access lifts the poor.
- It levels the field.
Another view: it concentrates
- Power and wealth end up in the hands of a few states and companies.
- The digital divide leaves the unconnected behind.
Two perspectives — weigh them: Strong HL answers judge that technology is neither inherently equalising nor concentrating. Its effect depends on who controls it and how access is shared — so the political task is to spread access AND hold the controllers of technology to account.
How technology and power comes up in Paper 3: Paper 3 stimulus might show a tech company's global reach, a chip or platform dispute, or data on the digital divide. Work through it in two steps.
Two steps for a technology stimulus
Analyse
Show HOW technology is a source of power and WHO controls it (states vs Big Tech).
Recommend
Usually spreading access AND making the controllers of technology accountable.
How it is power, who holds it, then recommend.
How Paper 3 rewards you (HL)
Understand
Show you understand the challenge and the stimulus material accurately.
base
Analyse
Break the challenge down — causes, actors, perspectives — using the material.
analyse
Recommend
Propose and justify a course of action — the Paper-3-specific skill.
recommend
Synthesise
Pull the material together into a judged, evaluated response.
top
Recommend how governments could respond to the growing power of Big Tech companies over the digital world.
Model answer plan
See the mark-by-mark plan — for / against / judgement, with marking guidance — in study mode.
Common mistakes (Paper 3): 1. Treating technology as just a neutral tool. It is a source of power.
2. Assuming only states hold power. Big Tech's reach can rival them.
3. Ignoring the digital divide. Access is deeply unequal.
4. Only describing. Analyse + recommend.
5. Forcing a binary. Technology can both empower and concentrate — it depends on control.