What is the “Thucydides Trap” that Xi spoke about?

Xi Jinping at a meeting with Donald Trump mentioned again “Thucydides’ trap”. This ancient formula today sounds like a warning about the risk of conflict between the United States and China.

Chinese President Xi Jinping during a meeting with the US President Donald Trump V Beijing brought the term back into the spotlight “Thucydides’ trap”. This expression has long been one of the most popular in international politics when it comes to rivalry. USA And China.

As reported The Guardian And The Washington Postthe Chinese leader asked the question: can China and the United States overcome “Thucydides’ trap” and create a new model of relations between great powers. This phrase was heard against the backdrop of a discussion of trade, Taiwantechnological rivalry and general stability in the world.

NOW – Xi: “Currently, transformation not seen in a century is accelerating across the globe and the international situation is fluid and turbulent. The world has come to a new crossroads.” pic.twitter.com/iDz4eHoaV9

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) May 14, 2026

The mention itself was far from accidental. Xi Jinping actually reminded Washington: history knows many cases when the rise of a new power caused fear in the already dominant power, and fear, mistrust and mistakes in crisis management led to war. And yes, when the Chinese leader quotes an ancient Greek historian at a meeting with the US President, this is not just a love of classical education. This is a diplomatic signal with heavy historical baggage.

What does Thucydides’ Trap mean?

“Thucydides’ Trap” is the theory that war becomes more likely when a rapidly rising power begins to challenge an established leading power. The dominant power is afraid of losing its position, the rising one demands recognition of a new status, and the system of international relations is entering a dangerous phase of tension.

The term became widely known thanks to the American political scientist Graham T. Ellisonprofessor Harvard University. In his book Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap?published in 2017, he used an ancient Greek example to analyze the modern rivalry between USA And China.

The basis was the famous idea Thucydides from “History of the Peloponnesian War”: “The growth of Athens’ power and the fear it caused in Sparta made war inevitable”. It was this formula that Ellison transferred to modern international politics: when one power is rapidly rising, and the other is afraid of losing primacy, the danger of conflict increases sharply.

In the study Belfer Center at Harvard Kennedy Schoolwhich Ellison refers to, are considered 16 historical caseswhen a rising power challenged a dominant one. IN 12 of 16 In such cases, the result was war, although in four cases a major armed conflict was avoided. This data is published on the website Belfer Center.

Athens, Sparta and modern China

The historical example on which the theory is based is the confrontation Athens And Sparta in the 5th century BC e. Athens quickly grew stronger after the Greco-Persian Wars, increasing its navy, trade, alliance system, and political influence. Sparta, already the leading military power in the Greek world, began to perceive this growth as a threat.

As a result, the tension between the two centers of force led to Peloponnesian Warwhich continued for decades and radically changed the balance of the ancient Greek world. For modern analysts, this plot has become a convenient model: Athens – a rising power Sparta – dominant power, fear and mistrust are the fuel of a future war.

In today’s logic, the analogy looks obvious: China – a rising power that is strengthening economically, technologically and militarily; USA – a country that, after World War II, got used to being the main architect of the world order. The problem is that analogies, like cheap umbrellas, look good until the real storm hits.

The modern world is much more complex than ancient Greece. The US and China are linked by trade, finance, supply chains, technology and global institutions. They have nuclear weapons, international organizations, direct lines of communication and crisis management experience. But at the same time, there is something that Thucydides understood very well: fear, pride, prestige and an incorrect assessment of the enemy’s intentions can move history no worse than armies.

Why did Xi mention this term now?

Mention “Thucydides’ traps” at a meeting with Trump became part of the broader Chinese position. Xi Jinping stated that China And USA should be partners, not rivals, and that cooperation benefits both sides, while confrontation harms both countries. This formula is also given ABC7.

But at the same time, the Chinese leader strictly outlined red lines. According to Western media reports, Si warned Trumpthat’s the wrong approach to the question Taiwan can lead to clashes and even conflict. For Beijing The Taiwan issue is not a private issue in bilateral relations, but the core of national sovereignty and security.

Right here “Thucydides’ trap” becomes not an academic metaphor, but a political warning. China says: if the United States perceives China’s rise as a threat, and Chinese red lines as a field for pressure, the two countries could enter a spiral of conflict. Washingtonin turn, sees China’s rise as a challenge to its influence, alliance system in Asia and technological superiority.

The Chinese formula is that conflict is not inevitable if the United States recognizes China’s right to development and agrees to a new model of great power coexistence. The American formula sounds different: cooperation is possible, but China should not change the international order by force or at the expense of American interests. Here you have the whole knot, neatly tied in an ancient quote.

The theory is popular, but not indisputable

Despite its popularity, the theory “Thucydides’ traps” is subject to serious criticism. Many historians and international experts believe that the ancient Greek example cannot be mechanically transferred to the 21st century. Historical analogies can be useful, but they are not a formula for the future.

Critics point out that Ellison’s choice of historical cases is controversial and that his conclusion 12 wars out of 16 may create an overly fatalistic impression. In addition, the modern United States and China are in conditions of nuclear deterrence, a global economy and multi-level interdependence, which neither Athens, nor Sparta, nor most powers of the past had.

But the weakness of the theory does not mean that the question itself is meaningless. Even if war is not inevitable, the logic of fear between a rising and a dominant power is very real. Countries can fall into conflict not because “history has decided so,” but because each side misreads the actions of the other, overestimates its own capabilities and underestimates the risks of escalation.

Editorial comment

Mention Xi Jinping “Thucydides’ traps” was designed for several audiences at once. For Trump this is a warning: don’t try to stop China’s rise through pressure, Taiwan and technological containment. This is a signal to the world: Beijing wants to look like a force of stability that offers to avoid a historical mistake. For China’s own audience, it’s a show of confidence: China is already speaking to the US as an equal great power.

The term itself is convenient for Beijing. It allows us to present the conflict not as a consequence of Chinese policy, but as a risk arising from the old power’s fear of the new. In this frame China looks like a country that is simply developing, and USA — a force that must decide whether it is ready to accept the new reality. Diplomatically, this is beautiful. Politically it is very beneficial.

But Washington has its own logic. The US sees not only China’s economic growth, but also military pressure around Taiwantechnological competition, control of supply chains, influence in the South China Sea and an attempt to change the balance of power in Asia. Therefore, the American elite is unlikely to accept the Chinese formula “let’s just coexist” without serious conditions.

That is why our conclusion remains reserved: USA And China can agree on minor issues, reduce rhetoric, open communication channels, and agree on individual trade or technological details. But a global agreement on a new world order is unlikely. The contradictions are too deep Taiwantechnology, military balance and China’s role in the international system.

“Thucydides’ Trap” does not mean war is inevitable. But she reminds us that great powers often clash not because of a single mistake, but because of an accumulation of fear, ambition, mistrust and wrong signals. This is what makes US-China relations dangerous today. Not ancient rock, not an ancient historian and not a beautiful theory, but a completely modern mixture of strength, pride and mutual suspicion.

Source link