Thucydides Trap: Is War Between the U.S. and China Inevitable?

April 12, 2019 | Blog 6

“It was the rise of Athens and the fear that this instilled in Sparta that made war inevitable.”

So described Athenian historian Thucydides on the Peloponnesian War two and a half millennia ago.

What was the Peloponnesian War? Let me begin by explaining Athens’ gradual rise in power.

After the Greek city-states banded together to fight off the Persians, the group split into two main alliances: the Delian and Peloponnesian Leagues. The Delian League, under the control of Athens, was a broad pact of city-states based on the Mediterranean Sea with a powerful navy.

With the League’s treasury shifted to Athens by 454 BC, Athens was no longer a republic but an empire. The following years were characterized by the degradation and brutal treatment of allies.

With Athens as a rising power threatened to displace Sparta as the ruling power, the two city-states were on the path to a long and bloody war. This is known as the Thucydides Trap, and we can apply this concept to a familiar situation in modern times: the United States vs. China.

Over the past 60 years, China has transformed from an agrarian backwater to “the biggest player in the history of the world.” China and American risk plunging into the dangerous trap recognized by Thucydides.

In truth, this aged insight illustrates a destructive pattern in history. There have been multiple occurrences in which the rise of a significant nation has disrupted the position of a dominant state in the past few centuries.

A most recognizable example is a rapidly expansionist Germany threatening Britain’s state of hegemony in the last century. Their economic and military competition upgraded to world war.

Since World War II, the rules-based order designed by D.C. has allowed time without fighting among great powers. With China increasing in strength, the harmony countless generations have come to value is now endangered.

Despite his credibility, Thucydides’ claim about “inevitability” is bogus. A war between the U.S. and China is not predestined. In fact, Presidents Barack Obama and Xi Jinping thoroughly discussed their situation at the 2015 U.S.-China summit. They agreed that the two nations are “capable of managing their disagreements” while it is possible for significant powers to slip up, resulting in war.

Will something shortly prompt these two great nations to war? Will the leaders of the U.S. and China follow in the tragic footsteps of Athens and Sparta or Britain and Germany? Or will they keep the peace for years to come?

There is no definite answer, but tensions between the two nations will rise.

We must not allow the Thucydides’ Trap blind us from reality. Together we must band to brave history’s trends and defy the odds for the sake of our posterity.

— Cameron Guan

Word Count: 422

Sources:

The Atlantic article The Thucydides Trap: Are the U.S. and China Headed for War? by Graham Allison, published on Sep. 24, 2015, accessed on Apr. 12, 2019

History of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides (c. 431 BCE)

History’s Darkest Times

April 1, 2019 | Blog 5

In a few years, one man orchestrated the deaths of millions of men, women, and children across Europe, Asia, and Africa.

This man was Adolf Hitler.

If you were thinking of Genghis Khan, you’re not wrong. But, I’ll save him for later comparison.

From the rise to fall of Nazi Germany (1933-1945) under the Führer, the Nazis murdered millions across Europe for reasons concerning race, religion, handicap, sexual preference, and politics. Annually, the Nazis killed six to seven people out of every hundred in occupied Europe. The odds of a European dying under Nazi occupation were about one in fifteen.

How did this all start?

Adolf Hitler blamed the loss of World War I and German economic depression on Jewish capitalism. As World War II broke out, Jews fell victim to Germany’s policies of oppression and extermination.

Jews were not the only ones who were victim to Nazi Germany’s ruthlessness. Those of other races and religions were targeted as well. Political opponents were eliminated, and “undesirables” were euthanized.

However, German occupation was also distinguished by tolerance for those who were compliant. A brilliant example of such tolerance was in the occupation of Denmark (1940 to 1945). The Danish government immediately cooperated with the Germans, as it wanted to preserve Denmark while accommodating the wishes of the Germans.

Most Danes, as a result, were able to continue their daily lives much as before occupation. Although there were shortages of certain goods in Denmark, the Danes had one of the highest standards of living in Europe during the war years.

How is Nazi Germany so similar to the Mongol Empire? Similar to how Nazi Germany spread rapidly through blitzkrieg, the Mongol Empire expanded through the success of skillful military leaders. The Mongols relied on their archery cavalry, and this led to the empire, at the peak of its power, to be almost six times larger than Nazi Germany.

If the Mongols’ goal was to be the most brutal people ever to walk on this planet, they succeeded. Almost wiping out 10% of the world’s population, the Mongol armies decimated cities and used captives as sacrificial lambs. Historians estimate the death toll to be nearly 40 million people, double the number Nazi Germany so proudly boasted.

“They came, they sapped, they burnt, they slew, they plundered, and they departed,” Persian historian Ata-Malik Juvayni recollected bluntly during the Mongol invasion of Central Asia.

While crueler, the Mongols were still more tolerant than the Nazis. Those who submitted to the Mongols enjoyed a fearless life while only paying taxes. The Mongols held a high tolerance for other religions and cultures. In fact, the Mongols were so successful due to their ability to assimilate and adapt to different cultures.

During the Pax Mongolica, the Mongols promoted interstate relations and provided travel and protection for artisans and merchants. The Mongols even recognized the importance of trade, resulting in tax breaks for traders.

Examining the Mongols and Germans side-by-side, we recognize striking similarities in regards to extreme brutality and surprising tolerance. Hitler’s Nazi Germany is well known for its slaughter of millions in an attempt to provide living space for their superior race, while the Mongols left a path of destruction as Genghis Khan led his armies far across Asia into Europe and the Middle East. Both leaders’ iron fists on conquered territories relaxed, allowing religion, culture, and trade to develop and flourish.

Nonetheless, the reigns of Genghis Khan and Adolf Hitler left dark stains on the tapestry of human history, and we as people of the modern times can hopefully learn some lessons about the past to not repeat the same mistakes in the future.

— Cameron Guan

Word Count: 595

Sources:

Quote by Ata-Malik Juvayni on Mongol invasion of Transoxania (c. 1219)

George Lucas’ Inspiration

March 22, 2019 | Blog 4

Your head pulses amidst a thunder of a thousand voices, and your feet burn as you stagger in scorched sand. But you don’t mind the noise or pain because an immense armored creature with horns is galloping at you. Surely, you can endure some discomfort while you run for your life, right?

At this point, I bet you are wondering, “What in the world is going on?”

I can guarantee you one thought: you are trapped in a movie far, far away, and now you’re being hunted by a reek in the Petranaki arena on the planet of Geonosis.

Bummer, I see that the creature has been impaled by a trap. At least now you can listen to me run a parallel between Star Wars and the Roman Empire while you catch your breath!

The aforementioned arena undoubtedly resembles the Roman Colosseum, where thousands of gladiators fought to the death for the pleasure of Roman audiences. As dark as this may seem, viewers are spellbound by the epic scene George Lucas incorporated with a battle between Jedi and droids.

Hold your horses; I’m not done yet. This is not the only similarity between Star Wars and the Roman Empire. In fact, I discovered many similarities in history, culture, and government, too.

Let’s start with the most obvious: culture through architecture. Many of the buildings and architecture on many planets in Star Wars are taken from Roman designs, especially the domed buildings of Naboo and obelisks on Coruscant.

Furthermore, before becoming an empire, ancient Rome was a republic, and the same case was for the Galactic Empire, which originally was the Old Republic. Both betray their closest allies who helped them reach a status of exceptional power: Chancellor Palpatine deceives the Jedi Temple while the Romans betray the Etruscans.

Both universes are under the control of imperial, totalitarian regimes marked by ruthless leaders. “The body of a dead enemy always smells sweet,” said Roman emperor Vespasian. Driven by the belief that the republic would last forever, both fought lengthy and brutal wars. The Romans produced the Punic Wars while the Star Wars universe experienced the Sith and Clone Wars.

Both had a very disciplined military. Both had an elaborate chain of command. Both had an auxiliary program.

The Galactic Empire spread as they conquered one system after another. Similarly, the Roman Empire often allowed the nations that they defeated to maintain their own system of government and self-rule, culture and religious beliefs, so long as they paid homage to the emperor, paid taxes and didn’t cause trouble.

Finally, both empires are taken down by smaller, more determined foes. The Galactic Empire is ultimately defeated by the Rebel Alliance while the Roman Empire’s destruction is attributed to the invasion of various Germanic tribes.

From such similarities between these universes, I can confidently say that George Lucas was inspired by the Roman Empire to create the Galactic Empire we see in Star Wars today.

— Cameron Guan

Word Count: 482

Sources:

Quote by Vespasian (c. 69-79 AD)

Alexander… the Great?

March 3, 2019 | Blog 3

By 326 BCE, a thirty-year-old man had conquered the largest empire that the world had ever seen. Spanning almost 3,000 miles, this empire stretched from Greece to northwestern India.

Who was he?

His name was Alexander III of Macedon. His father, Philip II, had already taken Greece and begun the invasion of Asia. Alexander, a brilliant military commander, did benefit from Phillip II’s initiative, but Alexander himself was more responsible for his success.

By 336 BCE, the Philip II, the king of Macedon, fulfilled his first goal by securing the majority of Greece under Macedonian sovereignty.

According to the Greek historian Xenophon, “Philip found the Macedonians wandering about without resources […] and made them a match in war for the neighboring barbarians” (Xenophon Anabasis, 7.9).

As the founder of the League of Corinth (337 BCE), Philip II organized an army of 10,000 to free Greeks living under Persian rule. Philip’s dreams of conquering Persia were cut short by his assassination, and Alexander ascended to take his father’s place.

Alexander fulfilled his father’s second goal and accomplished much more: in 13 short years he amassed an enormous empire on foot and spread Greek culture around the world.

There is no accident Alexander is known as the “Great”: it was due to his incomparable success as a military commander. Despite typically being outnumbered, he never lost a single battle.

While Philip created the phalanx tactic, Alexander perfected it. Through rigorous training, the Macedonian phalanx developed in conjunction with cavalry to be deployed at such speed and maneuverability to have a significant effect on larger forces.

Furthermore, Philip had no reason to worry about disloyalty in his army that was made of Macedonians. His military skill and desire for expansion fueled a similar-minded army for success. Philip did not have many enemies. Conversely, Alexander commanded a diverse army of various languages and weapons. To overcome potential disunity, he personally fought in every battle.

Finally, Alexander successfully adapted his forces to his opponents’ style. For example, he faced opponents in Central Asia and India with unfamiliar fighting techniques. Some notable adaptations were shown in Bactria and Sogdiana where Alexander used projectile fire to counter flanking movements.

All of these attributes allowed Alexander to be quite successful. As we study Alexander, a man who lived more than 2,500 years ago, we notice similar patterns of succession in terms of effective regimes due to solid foundations laid by predecessors.

Immediately, we can point to something close in place and time: Truman’s Marshall Plan and America’s resulting ascendence as a global superpower.

The United States in the earlier 1940s witnessed the destruction of Europe, and with knowledge that the Soviet Union had no intention to help, Truman signed the Marshall Plan in 1948, granting $5 billion in aid to 16 European nations.

The U.S. was able to help Europe at such significant measures because of President Franklin Roosevelt’s successful presidency in terms of economic growth. Similar to Alexander’s military success, Truman’s Marshall Plan was built at least partially on the exceptional economic circumstances that FDR cultivated.

However, like Alexander, Truman’s success in bringing America from an isolationist nation to the leader of the free world was his own. Truman, much like Alexander, inherited favorable circumstances, but it was not the mere existence of these favorable circumstances that created Truman’s, or Alexander’s, world-changing success.

— Cameron Guan

Word Count: 549

Sources:

Anabasis by Xenophon (c. 370 BCE)

Gridlock: Now and Then

February 22, 2019 | Blog #2

Have you ever witnessed a heated congressional hearing on TV and wondered how it’ll turn out?

You’re not alone.

The United States legislative branch holds a similar problem with thousands of smaller gridlocks which together are seen as clashing polarities between different political parties.

We’ve seen similar strife in the RTTP debate in class, and a seemingly simple solution is compromise. To be frank, it’s not that easy.

Such dissent often leads to gridlock within Congress, and we saw this occur between the radical democrats, the moderate democrats, the oligarchs, and the indeterminates. Over three days of intense debate, three vague and poorly formed laws were passed by the Athenian Assembly. A lack of productive outcomes results from gridlock, otherwise known as deadlock or political stalemate.

Many might question how 5th-century Athenian politics could possibly share similarities with 21st-century American politics; well, gridlock is an example of significant similarity.

To provide some background information to illustrate my point, allow me to talk about ancient Athens first.

After the Peloponnesian War between the ancient city-states of Sparta and Athens resulted in an Athenian loss, tyrants known as the Thirty were installed to control the city of Athens. Bloodthirsty and greedy, these tyrants ruled with an iron fist and crushed any opposition; soon they were overthrown by democratic insurgents led by Thrasybulus.

The Athenian Assembly gathered once again and debated about concerns that included the electorate and social welfare. A significant topic revolved around the Reconciliation Agreement, a law that provides a general amnesty to those who may have helped the Thirty Tyrants. The radical democrats under Thrasybulus wanted to defeat this law, while the moderate democrats fought to pass the proposition. Ultimately the Reconciliation Agreement was adopted with strong disagreement still ever present.

Athens back then was a direct democracy, which encompassed numerous advantages. In theory, idealists believe that it makes sure that the people’s voices are heard, encourages people to participate in the government, and reduces the chances of corruption.

However, in reality, not every person gets an equal vote and equal representation. Those on the Assembly were wealthier, land-owning citizens of Athens while metics and slaves were not permitted to join the Assembly. Furthermore, factions had varying representation as each had differing numbers of members.

Now comparing the Athenian Assembly to Congress, we see massive problems with gerrymandering and voting eligibility. Often there would be purges of voting rolls and controversies over voter ID laws.

Gridlock in Congress, according to the Stanford professor David Brady and University of Virginia professor Craig Volden, is due to two interrelated factors: first, “the preferences of members of Congress regarding particular policies” and second, “supermajority institutions – the Senate filibuster and the presidential veto.”

The two professors argue that gridlock is not due to solely party differences in Congress, but to individual preferences of politicians and policies.

The Founding Fathers designed the federal government in such a way to make the lawmaking process as difficult and winded as possible to enforce a system of checks and balances. Such policy is also a flaw as we witness stalemates and inaction regarding policies and laws on significant public issues such as gun control, abortion, and funding.

“The whole country is crying out in an agony of distress for measures of relief,” Henry Clay of Kentucky said in debate over a bank bill in 1841. But, he said, long-winded senators were delaying the public business with amendments that served only to “kill time, without any hope of practical results.”

In both Congress and the Athenian Assembly, we now understand how dissent leads to gridlock and a lack of outcome.

As Thucydides once said, “I shall be content if those shall pronounce my History useful who desire to give a view of events as they really happen, and as they are likely, in accordance with human nature, to repeat themselves at some future time—if not exactly the same yet very similar” (Thucydides 1.22). Perhaps we can propose change to our political system to create more productivity for the betterment of our lives and the lives of later generations.

— Cameron Guan

Word Count: 590

Sources:

Brady, David; Volden, Craig (2006). Revolving Gridlock: Politics and Policy from Jimmy Carter to George W. Bush. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. p. 4.

History of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides (c. 431 BCE)

New York Times article The Nation; Gridlock, the Way It Used to Be by Robert Pear, published on Oct. 9, 1994, retrieved from 1994 Archives

The Real Spartans

January 28, 2019 | Blog #1

In the 21st century, producers and authors have interpreted and created media based on the city-states of ancient Greece. An example of such a work was a film released a little more than a decade ago, 300. It portrayed the Spartan stand at the pass of Thermopylae. Ultimately, some Greeks fled while the rest were killed by the armies of vengeful Persian King Xerxes. This film provoked a considerable amount of controversy, yet drew awareness to the actual history of the Persian Wars.

300 was a film made first to awe and impress, second to inform. There are several historical inaccuracies, though the producers allege them to be deliberate. On the other hand, there are some historical accuracies, such as women being regarded as equals in Spartan society.

This blog post will examine discrepancies between what was represented in the movie and what indeed transpired based on historical records from Persian and Greek historians. Herodotus will be one of the principal primary sources on the Greek faction. His book, Histories, narrates the Persian Wars and is considered to be a biased source representing the Greeks.

In the actual Battle of Thermopylae, Spartan estimates according to Herodotus were closer to 7,000 rather than 300. What was correctly depicted by the movie was that it was a clear Greek defeat that led to succeeding battles on land and sea.

A striking attribute of the movie was the slow-motion, CGI fight scenes that occupied much of the screen time. Spartan soldiers in the movie fight with a spear and sword almost stark naked, but genuine Spartan warriors had chest plates and leather skirts. Moreover, there were little to no records on the actual combative arts used by Spartans aside from reports of formations and tactics. The action directed by combat choreographer Damon Caro was a combination of several weapon techniques with Filipino martial arts as the foundation, seen through the usage of weapons in the fights that ensued during the span of the film.

A. G. Leventis Professor of Greek Culture Paul Cartledge at Cambridge University taught filmmakers on the articulation of Greek names and said that his published trade on Sparta was “made good use.” Furthermore, Cartledge asserted that 300 accurately depicts the Spartan heroic code and influence of women in Spartan culture. He, however, was reluctant to praise the entire “‘West’ (goodies) vs ‘East’ (baddies)” complex.

In addition to the idea of the Spartans being great and Persians being wicked, we notice an encounter between King Xerxes and Leonidas. In the movie, Xerxes towers over the Spartan hero, but in real life, he (Xerxes) had a beard and was much smaller. This interpretation brings forth the review of the discrepancies between Greek and Persian values. For instance, the Persians valued items of substance and worth as well as domination over others, while the Greeks valued loyalty and freedom. These are demonstrated when Leonidas rejects King Xerxes’ offer of wealth and power over rivals by stating “the idea of kneeling […] would be hard for [him].”

All-in-all, 300 was filmed to retell the Battle of Thermopylae. Replicating imagery from the original comic book, 300 gives itself the name of historical fantasy. With the inclusion of fictitious characters and exotic creatures, the historical inaccuracy of the film draws away the legitimacy of some details included, but the fact that this movie was created to entertain allows viewers to distinguish between the truth and imagination. Despite the controversy enveloping the release of the film, we can appreciate the fact that common myths were debunked and the real history behind ancient Greece was recognized and enjoyed even more by the ordinary viewer.

— Cameron Guan

Word Count: 591

Sources:

Histories by Herodotus (c. 440 BC)

USA TODAY interview of Paul Cartledge, author of Thermopylae: The Battle that Changed the World; Link: https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/science/columnist/vergano/2007-03-05-300-history_N.htm