The Nature of State Power 147an institute and a journal, thrusting himself into a position as the leading supporter
and proponent of Nazi expansion.
But geographic power potential is magnified or constrained by natu ral resources, a
second source of natu ral power. Controlling a large geographic expanse is not a posi-
tive ingredient of power unless that expanse contains natu ral resources. Petroleum-
exporting states such as Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, which are
geo graph i cally small but have a crucial natu ral resource, have greater power potential
than their sizes would suggest. States need oil and are ready to pay dearly for it, and
will even go to war when access to it is denied. States that have such valuable natu ral
resources, regardless of their geographic size, wield power over states that do not. The
United States, Rus sia, and South Africa exert vast power potential because of their
diverse natu ral resources— oil, copper, bauxite, vanadium, gold, and silver. Rus sia has
leveraged its power from its control of natu ral resources to influence po liti cal outcomes
in other states. For instance, Rus sia cut off natu ral gas supplies to Ukraine, thereby
slowing supplies to Eu rope, which gets one- quarter of its gas through Ukraine. Main-
land China, which supplies over 95 percent of the demand for so- called rare earth
minerals essential in high- tech manufacturing, has been able to use its mono poly to
deny access for po liti cal purposes and drive up prices. Yet China’s mono poly is not
assured as new mines in Australia, the United States, India, and Vietnam open. Even
natu ral resource– based power may have its limits.
Of course, having a sought- after resource may prove a liability, making states tar-
gets for aggressive actions, as Kuwait soberly learned in 1990. Nor does the absence of
natu ral resources mean that a state has no power potential; Japan is not rich in natu ral
resources, but it has parlayed other ele ments of power to make itself an economic
power house.
Population is a third natu ral source of power. Sizable populations, such as those of
China (1.4 billion people), India (1.3 billion), the United States (321 million), Indonesia
(256 million), Brazil (204 million), and Rus sia (142 million), automatically give power
potential, and often great power status, to a state. Although a large population produces a
variety of goods and ser vices, characteristics of that population (health status, age distri-
bution, level of social ser vices) may magnify or constrain state power. States with small,
highly educated, skilled populations, such as Switzerland, Norway, Austria, and Singa-
pore, can fill disproportionately large economic and po liti cal niches. States with large
but relatively poor populations, such as Ethiopia, with 99 million people but a gross
national product of only $550 per capita, can exercise less power. States with a declin-
ing population, like Rus sia, or a rapidly aging one, as in South Korea and Japan, may in
the future suffer from a decline in this natu ral source of power, as Chapter 11 explains.
Both tangible and intangible sources can affect the degree to which these natu ral
sources of power potential are translated into actual power. These sources are used to
enhance, modify, or constrain power potential, as Figure 5.1 shows.