Thucydides Trap is one of the most debated concept in modern geopolitics. coined by Harvard political scientist Graham Allison, the term describes a deadly structural stress that occurs when a rising power threatens to displace an established ruling power.
The theory suggests that this friction often results in cataclysmic war—not necessarily because either side wants a conflict, but because of deep-seated fear and insecurity inherent in a shifting global hierarchy.
Origin
The concept is named after ancient Greek historian Thucydides, who chronicled Peloponnesian War (431–404 BCE). In his seminal work, History of the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides identified a specific cause for devastating conflict between the city-states of Athens and Sparta:
“It was the rise of Athens and fear that this instilled in Sparta that made war inevitable.”
In this scenario:
-
Sparta was established, (the “Ruling Power”).
-
Athens was the rapid-growth, (the “Rising Power”).
-
Result: A conflict that lasted nearly 30 years and ended Golden Age of Greece.
Thucydides Trap
According to Allison’s research at Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, the trap is driven by two primary psychological and systemic forces:
-
Rising Power Syndrome: As a nation grows stronger, it naturally expects more influence, a greater say in international rules, and more respect from the global community.
-
Ruling Power Syndrome: Established power view newcomer’s rise with suspicion, interpreting every move as a challenge to existing order and its own security.
This creates a vicious cycle where even defensive actions by one side are interpreted as offensive threats by the other.
16 Cases
To test the theory, Allison and his team identified 16 historical instances over the last 500 years where a rising power challenged a ruling power. The results were sobering: 12 of those 16 cases ended in war.
| Rising Power | Ruling Power | Period | Result |
| France | Hapsburgs | 16th Century | War |
| Germany | Britain | Early 20th Century | War (WWI) |
| Japan | Russia/US | Mid 20th Century | War (WWII) |
| USSR | USA | Cold War | No War |
| UK/France | USA | Early 20th Century | No War |
The four cases that avoided war demonstrate that trap is a challenge, not a deterministic law. Successful transitions typically required massive adjustments in mindset and diplomacy from both sides.
US vs. China
Today, Thucydides Trap is almost exclusively discussed in context of relationship between the United States (the ruling power since 1945) and China (the rapidly rising power).
-
Friction Points: Trade dominance, technological supremacy (AI, semiconductors), and territorial disputes in South China Sea.
-
Danger: Minor incidents—such as a collision at sea or a misunderstanding regarding Taiwan—could escalate into a full-scale conflict that neither side actually desires.
Can Trap Is Avoidable?
Graham Allison emphasizes that recognizing trap is first step toward escaping it. Avoiding war requires extreme statecraft, which includes:
-
Define Red Lines: Clear communication of what each side considers an existential threat.
-
Mutual Accommodation: The ruling power must find ways to share space, while the rising power must show restraint in its expansion.
-
Focus on Common Problems: Redirecting energy toward shared challenges like climate change, pandemics, or global economic stability.
While history suggests the odds are stacked toward conflict, the existence of nuclear weapons and global economic interdependence provides a powerful incentive for both US and China to find a new form of great power relations.