I assume most people would say the President of the United States is number one. Who is 2 through 10?
If you disagree with my suggestion for number one, feel free to designate your own!
#2 (possibly #1): the Pope
How many divisions does he command?
I’d think that the Big 5 nuclear powers’ heads of government would automatically qualify, so the US President, British PM, Russian PM, French President and Chinese Premier.
Second, due to a more limited ability to deliver their nukes, the Indian and Pakistani PMs.
After that, I’d say the Saudi King wields an undue amount of power, considering his ability to directly affect world oil prices.
That only gets me to 8… maybe the Pope and the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia?
Why the Pope? Sure there’s a billion or so Catholics, but those who live in developed countries pretty much ignore the Catholic church’s teachings when they’re inconvenient. Italy and Spain have some of the world’s lowest birth rates, despite the Church consistently opposing any effective means of birth control. What’s the argument for the Pope being in the top ten most powerful people on earth?
Angela Merkel is in the top ten.
Israel also has nuclear weapons, so that’s an eighth country to add to the nuclear power list.
After you lose the ability to use nuclear weapons it’s a very long dropoff to #9.
I don’t know that having nukes automatically puts you in the top n countries since using them is verboten by the social order. Influencing the global economy via oil prices is something you can do all the time. You’d have to scale the raw power of using a nuke by the consequences/likelihood of use.
I think the magnitude of the power is what prevents it from being used. Its a bit like the battle between drivers and pedestrians in every major city; the pedestrians run in front of cars because they know the driver will slow down, but its only social norms that cause him to do so. He has all the real power; he just chooses not to exercise it.
My list would go:
NPT Nuclear Weapons States (head of US, Russia, China, Britain, France)
non-NPT States (head of India, Pakistan, Israel)
Janet Yellen (Chair of Federal Reserve)/Pope/Head of Saudi Arabia (due to influence over oil prices+psuedo nuclear weapons state)
I know that’s 11, but I can’t really think of who to kick off.
Power you can’t use isn’t power.
Who’s Russia more afraid of: Pakistan that could nuke them, but never would because the result would be suicide, or Saudi Arabia, who can’t nuke them but can and will crater their economy by manipulating oil markets?
Other people worthy of consideration besides heads of state:
[ul]
[li]Janet Yellen - Chairman of the Federal Reserve[/li][li]Ban Ki-moon - Secretary General of the UN[/li][li]Mario Draghi - European Central Bank President[/li][li]Jim Yong Kim - President of the World Bank[/li][li]Jamie Dimon - CEO of JP Morgan Chase[/li][li]Sergey Brin and David Page - Google[/li][li]Mark Zuckerberg - Facebook[/li][li]Rupert Murdoch - Horseman of the Apocalypse (Pestilence)[/li][/ul]
Well Saudi Arabia very well did help bring down the Soviet Union by dropping oil prices, so they’d be an existential threat to the Russians. And Pakistan’s SRBM have a range of 2500 km, so most of Russia’s population centers would be safe. But the thing is, the person with the massive destructive ability still has power. They just choose not to exercise it, but they full well can, and when push comes to shove, its more important to have than other soft power.
Wouldn’t Lance Armstrong be #1? He can put out, what, 2000 watts or so, and I doubt that Obama, fit though he may be, can come anywhere close to that.
Gilget (in N Pakistan) is about 2200 KM from Novosibirsk, Russia’s third largest city,
Well, hard power has the advantage that it increases your ability to act. Do think that Pakistan would have been able to get away with half of what it has in the last 35 years wrt to superpower relations if it was not a nuclear power? I doubt it.
I don’t know about India, but the Pakistani PM cannot order a nuclear strike. S/he can stop one, but for it to proceed he needs the concurrance of other senior ministers.
Actually, outside of the UK and Israeli PM, is there any leader who can order a unilateral strike? I don’t think so.
I don’t see any problems with that list. If I was going to kick anyone off, it’d be the Pope, since he has the least strong-handed power.
The Israeli PM can’t either, not without a cabinet vote.
I’m assuming you mean Larry Page
Gahh!!! Yes, I meant Larry Page. But you liked my 4 horseman reference, right?
On edit: I actually originally typed David Brin and Larry Page and caught it just before submitting (I like his work), I have no idea how I transferred the David to Larry Page when I made the correction.
Very good! 
I forgot, was that about Stalin?
The French President?
I’m not sure the UK PM can either. Well, not until it’s been tried once and then we can call it a constitutional convention, I suppose. In fact, I’m sure since Iraq and the failed attempt to embroil ourselves in Syria it’s now a de facto constitutional requirement to have a full Commons vote on any military action, including presumably nuclear strikes.
Anyway, my top ten in no particular order: US President, UK PM, French President, Chinese President, Russian President, Indian PM, Pakistani PM, Israeli PM, German Chancellor and Saudi King.