Measuring National Performance

The discussion about inputs for state power clearly underscores the fact that few—if any—such elements exist in raw " natural " form. Rather, these inputs are actually " intermediate goods, " that is to say, resources created by prior societal or state actions with an eye to being incorporated in the production of still other " final goods. " While the nature of the final goods is invariant in the realm of international politics—effective military instruments—the paths to their production may vary depending on the state-society structures of the country that produces them. A country with a strong society–weak state structure might seek to produce these intermediate goods mainly in order to produce commercial goods demanded by its civil society. A country with a strong state–weak society structure, in contrast, might concentrate on these intermediate goods simply in order to maximize the production of military instruments that enhance its national power in the international arena. Since the framework for measuring national power adopted here does not privilege one pattern of state-society relations or another, it does not matter how effective military capability is produced. It could be produced either indirectly, as a by-product of commercial endeavors (as in the case of countries with a strong society–weak state structure), or it could be produced directly (as in the case of countries with a strong state–weak society structure). Because effective military capability can be produced so long as a minimally effective state or a minimally effective state-society complex exists, the analytical task now consists of describing what exactly the predicates of these terms actually are.