COLONIALISM and IMPERIALISM: Historical Evolution and a Criterion for Distinguishing Imperial Domination from Power Politics

Colonialism and imperialism are related but not equivalent concepts. Colonialism entails, in its classical form, territorial domination and direct political administration; imperialism constitutes a broader category for studying asymmetric power relations that may operate through military, economic, financial, technological, diplomatic, or cultural instruments. Thecontemporaryanalyticalproblem, however, consistsinpreventingevery instance of international coercion from being automatically labeled imperialism. This essay therefore proposes an original criterion for distinguishing between traditional power politics, hegemony or structural coercion, and imperialism. The Imperial Domination Criterion(IDC)isstructuredaroundfivedimensions: asymmetryofcapabilities, coercion, penetration of decisional autonomy, structurality of dependence, and reproduction of asymmetric advantages. The proposal draws on the historical tradition of informal empire, particularly the work of Gallagher and Robinson, but seeks to operationalize it for contemporary analysis. The criterion is applied comparatively to five cases: the United States, the European Union, Russia, China, and the United States–Venezuela relationship. The analysis shows that not all coercion is equivalent to imperialism: some behaviors correspond better to power politics or geoeconomics, while others display several features of imperial domination. The central conclusion is that contemporary imperialism should be identified not by the mere existence of superiority or coercion, but by the sustained conversion of that superiority into a relationship that structurally reduces the subordinate actor’s autonomy and reproduces an asymmetry of power