> Those close to the defence secretary acknowledged that his remarks could be read as being aimed at the US. An insider argued that the British minister was emphasising the importance of political will as well as sheer military power.
It now doesn't matter as much how much of GDP you spend on military but also political power as well.
Ministers can redefine the word superpower, and you can downvote me, but with it being defined as, "A superpower is a state with a dominant position characterized by its extensive ability to exert influence or project power on a global scale."[1] the US still is in that set of countries with extensive influence.
> Those close to the defence secretary acknowledged that his remarks could be read as being aimed at the US. An insider argued that the British minister was emphasising the importance of political will as well as sheer military power.
It now doesn't matter as much how much of GDP you spend on military but also political power as well.