The main aim of diploma thesis "China - real threat for American hegemony?" is to answer the question whether China is trying to threaten American position of world hegemon. After the dissolution of USSR and the fall of Iron Curtain USA became the only world superpower. Balance of power theory assumes that the occurrence of leading actor in the system will invoke attempts of others to balance the power of the leader, or to weaken him. In current world political system there are powers whose power potential is growing. One of them is China, mainly because its fast growing and prospering economy. Author of the thesis works with the concept of hegemony based on hard and soft power and three types of exercising of power - three faces of power - as means of achieving its goals. Author analyses Chinese use of hard and soft power resources, that can be classified under three types of use of power. All policies are then examined from "balance of power" theory view. Author tries to find out which one of behavior "balancing" attempts to balance, weaken USA or "bandwagoning" - support of USA is prevailing in Chinese policies. According to the prevailing tendency of Chinese behavior towards USA the author is capable to state whether China can be considered as a threat for US hegemony.

The European Union have since the signing of the Rome treaty in 1957, come to be a new superpower in the world, spreading the word of soft power through the economic and democratic cooperation in the pan-European continent. The theory of soft and hard power and the theory of diffusion of innovations illuminate how the European Union has been able to increase their influence and gain power in the world, as it has become the largest economy in the world. Through this soft power focus, the European Union has been able to grow and to act as a model for success as it attracts other parts of the world by the positive messages of cooperation and economic integration. This should be seen in a time when the US has increasingly acted unilateral in their foreign policy and experienced increasing legitimacy problems on the global scale. The understanding of the development of the European Union to its contemporary magnitude through the theory of soft and hard power and the diffusion of innovations, what I call cooptive enlargement, brings new light of how to understand its development and influence in the world. This theory could further be used to analyze and understand why and how other parts of the world create trade areas and Unions in their quest for future peace, democracy and economic development. The European Union has through this cooptive enlargement come to lay the foundation to a new world order, enabling all parts of the world to collide into a prosperous future of cooperation.

While few would deny America is the most powerful nation on earth, there is considerable debate, and controversy, over how America uses its foreign policy power. This is even truer since the “unipolar moment,” when America gained sole superpower status with the end of the Soviet Union and the Cold War. In the Cold War Reinhold Niebuhr was the main theological voice speaking to American power. In the Unipolar world, the Religious right emerged as the main theological voice, but instead of seeking to curb American power the Religious right embraced Neoconservatism in what I will call “Totemic Conservatism” to support use of America's power in the world and to triumph Manifest destiny in American foreign policy, which is the notion that America is a chosen nation, and this legitimizes its use of power and underpins its moral claims. I critique the Niebuhrian and Religious right legacies, and offer a classical realist strategy for theology to speak to America power and foreign policy, which avoids the neoconservative and religious conservative error of totemism, while avoiding the jettisoning of Niebuhr's theology by political liberals, and, the political ghettoizing of theology by his chief critics. This strategy is based on embracing the understanding of classical realism, but not taking the next step, which both Niebuhr and neoconservativism ultimately do, of moving from a prescriptive to a predictive strategy for American foreign policy. In this thesis, I argue that in the wake of the unipolar moment the embrace of the Religious right of Neoconservatism to triumph Manifest destiny in American foreign policy is a problematic commingling of faith and politics, and what is needed instead is a strategy of speaking to power rooted in classical realism but one which refines Niebuhrian realism to avoid the risk of progressing a Constantinian theology.