What is power?

The big idea: Power is the ability to shape outcomes — to get others to do what you want, or to get what you want done. It is the master concept of global politics: everything else routes back to it.

If you understand power, you understand global politics. But power is not one thing — it comes in different forms, and it is more than just owning a big army.

• Power to — the capacity to act and achieve (e.g. build, invent, defend).
• Power over — getting others to do what they otherwise would not (by force, money or persuasion).
• Power with — the strength that comes from acting together (alliances, movements).

Power is a relationship: Power is not just something you own — it is a relationship. It only counts when it shapes what actually happens between actors. A resource you cannot use to change an outcome is not really power.

A key idea: power is about outcomes, not just resources. Having a lot — a huge army, a big economy — does not always mean getting your way.

Case study — when the strong don't win: The United States has the world's most powerful military, yet it struggled for years in conflicts like Vietnam and Afghanistan against far weaker opponents. Overwhelming resources did not deliver the outcome it wanted.

A weaker actor can still get its way — through resolve, knowing the ground, or simply outlasting a stronger enemy. So we must judge power by who actually shapes the outcome, not just who has the most stuff.

The key point: Measure power by results, not resources. The real question is always: who got the outcome they wanted? That is why a small state or non-state actor can sometimes beat a giant.

So how should we measure power? This is a real debate — and it shapes how we read global politics.

Link it up: Keep resources (what an actor has) apart from outcomes (what an actor achieves). Strong answers note that resources are only potential power — it becomes real only when it changes what happens.

How power comes up in Paper 1: A Paper 1 source is really always about power. So ask the core question: who is getting whom to do what, and how — by force, by money or by persuasion?

Easy marks to lose: 1. Treating power as only 'power over'. There is also power to and power with.



2. Counting only resources. Judge power by outcomes too.



3. No real example. Use a case where the strong did not win.



4. Forgetting power is relational. It exists between actors, not on its own.