Is War Inevitable?: China & The USA

In researching for upcoming projects related to politics, economics, and societal relations, I find myself diving into The History of the Peloponnesian War by ancient historian Thucydides. The book, while a difficult read, is wildly unique in the sub-topics it covers and the concepts it proposes. As the book acts as almost a journal, Thucydides, a historian and Athenian general, records his time living in Athens during its ancient war with Sparta in late 400 BC. 

One of the main discussions of Thucydides regards the truth of why the war between the two cities originally occurred. According to the historian, “it was the rise of Athens and the fear that this inspired in Sparta that made war inevitable”. This concept would become known as the Thucydides Trap, which insisted that when an established nation was threatened by the rise of a rival nation. It is the fear of this rising nation that would inevitably cause war to brew. 

Modern historians have claimed that this trap is translatable to modern nations and their conflicts. Examples have been made regarding Britain and Germany in 1917, or the US and the USSR during the Cold War. These conflicts, according to the Thucydides Trap, were a result of a fearful established nation in the midst of a rising power. 

As a novice on this topic, I will make an argument that is in need of further research. The nuances to such a topic should be discussed. 

The assumption that the Thucydides Trap is the sole purpose of modern-day international conflict seems absurd to an extent. In the classic form of this trap as illustrated by Thucydides, it is certainly relevant to an extent in terms of contemporary wars or even pre-contemporary conflicts, yet there are a plentiful number of alternative reasons for such wars. To say the Cold War or World War I was entirely a result of a fear of a rising nation seems to avoid other aspects of these conflicts. 

But in the way that Graham Allison, author and former US Assistant Secretary of Defense, puts it, the Thucydides Trap is relevant in a modernized perspective, where integrating economics into reasons for conflict is essential. 

He quotes Lee Kuan Yew, who claimed that:

“in the old concept, balance of power meant largely military power. In today’s terms, it is a combination of economic and military, and I think the economic outweighs the military” (Allison, 20). 

This quote is quite illustrative of my argument, where in today’s political sphere, it is not rational nor practical to incite any sort of physical war due to the threat of mutually assured destruction (MAD), thus wars over ego are not likely. In this way, Thucydides was wrong, but his trap is not entirely irrelevant.  

Thomas Hobbes, social contract theorist, would claim that humans are inherently selfish and greed driven. In terms of nations and political leaders, the egotistical idea that envy of a growing nation which later breeds anger and action is not ridiculous. The US is a prideful country that sees itself on a pedestal of power. But when a nation like China grows as rapidly as it has since the 1980s, a type of jealousy, anger, or fear is sure to be conceived. 

But does this mean war is inevitable? No absolutely not. If anything, I feel that the US will use China in their empowered state as a means of trying to regain the upper hand. The US has been surpassed by China in GDP growth, purchasing power parity, and technological advancements; and the US could see this as a threat or an opportunity. 

Governor of California, Gavin Newsom, recently had Chinese President, Xi Jinping, to San Francisco for a Summit meeting and the 30th APEC Economics Leaders’ Meeting. This economics meeting had some of the most powerful faces on Earth, the corporate leaders of America. Billionaires crammed into a room together with President Xi discussed opportunities for China to be integrated into the global corporate market. 

The US, the land of opportunity, should and likely will capitalize on opportunities that are proposed to them through Chinese growth. 

There are several examples of nations falling victim to the “Thucydides Trap”, and in many cases these wars surrounded concerns of military power, and typically occurred in bordering nations in Europe. In later contemporary history, Allison’s most recent examples according to the “Harvard Thucydides Trap Project” were between the US and the USSR, and Great Britain and Germany. He concluded that neither of these conflicts resulted in any physical war between one another. 

Based on this, it may be possible that the modernization of economics, politics, and social relations in the 21st century and late 20th century have resulted in a lack of necessity for war in solving international conflicts. Global power, as Allison refers to it, is one of the major contentions between rising and established nations, yet global power is no longer based on physical size of land or armies. Nowadays, power is based on how many warheads you have buried underground, or how economically prosperous your nation is. 

The Cold War was a war of influence, which is why there were a number of proxy wars, and no actual US or Soviet troops on the ground. The growth of technological power, and the shrinking importance of manpower is a sole reason for the absence of the Thucydides Trap in the late contemporary era. 

AI in today’s world is more dangerous than soldiers, and MAD has kept the powers of the world at bay. This trap that Thucydides proposed in ancient Athens was relevant at the time due to the importance of military manpower, which was used to uphold global influence and dominance. Even throughout the 18th, 19th, and some of the 20th century this was true. But society has reached a point where no soldier needs to die in any war, at least in the most civilized of countries. 

Power is now determined by those who control social media, the mainstream networks, the ideas and propaganda that are fed to our minds. In essence, the Thucydides trap still exists, just not in its physical, brutish form it existed in before.  

If anything, this war between the US and China is not inevitable, it is already happening. It's just that the war is not about troops and tanks, it's about influence, economies, and bargaining power. This war is subtle if anything, but the competition between the US and China is and always has been a war. It would be insanity to declare war with China over their growth and our ego, but not insane to ban TikTok as it was Chinese developed, or to label China as communist even though they are more capitalist than the US in many ways. 

It is the way in which politicians can spin the narrative and make the public think in a certain way. It is about how we can sell or buy products at certain prices from China or control the flow of the global economy. 

It is not the Thucydides Trap that has become irrelevant, it is the way in which nations fight their wars that has changed. This trap has not changed in the developing world, it is the world that has changed around the Thucydides Trap. 

Further reading:

Allison, Graham. 2018. Destined for War. London, England: Scribe Publications.