Destined for War

Introduction

Destined for War delves into the realm of ancient military wisdom to analyze a contemporary clash: the power struggle unfolding between the entrenched might of the United States and the ascending influence of China. This exploration unveils the historical patterns of conflict stemming from such power dynamics and articulates the crucial steps that both the US and China must take in the future to avert an all-encompassing war.

In the early 1800s, Napoleon astutely remarked, "Let China sleep; when she wakes, she will shake the world." Fast forward to the 2020s, and China has indeed awakened, emerging as a formidable force at the forefront of industry and technology, solidifying its position as a major player on the global political stage.

The ramifications of China's ascent on the world and, more specifically, on the United States are yet to unfold completely. While analysts, politicians, and think tanks engage in the challenging task of forecasting how China's unstoppable rise will mold the geopolitical landscape, a more enlightening perspective may be found by examining historical precedents.

This is because the current political dynamics between China and the US echo an observation made by the ancient Greek historian Thucydides in the fourth century BCE—a scenario where the ascent of one power challenging an established power often leads to war.

In this summary, we embark on a journey to uncover the lessons that ancient Greece can impart about the impending face-off between China and the US, exploring whether it is inevitably destined for war and, more importantly, how such a fate might be avoided.

Chapter 1: The Meteoric Rise of China as a Potential Challenger to the US

A chapter unfurls, drawing us back to a tumultuous period nearly two and a half millennia ago—the Peloponnesian War, a protracted conflict that echoed across southern Europe and the Mediterranean. The war's protagonists were Sparta, an established power, and Athens, an ascending force. The eventual defeat of Athens marked the twilight of the Ancient Greek empire, and the reasons behind this clash, as succinctly captured by Thucydides, offer timeless insights: the rise of Athens instilled fear in Sparta, setting the stage for inevitable conflict.

Fast-forward to the early twenty-first century, and a similar narrative unfolds between two contemporary giants—the US, a twentieth-century powerhouse in politics and economics, and China, whose rapid growth positions it on the cusp of challenging American supremacy.

China's ascent to global prominence has been nothing short of remarkable. In 1971, Henry Kissinger's visit painted a picture of a closed, provincial China. However, the ensuing decades witnessed a metamorphosis into an industrialized nation with the corresponding infrastructure. The transformation, likened by former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to the confluence of the English Industrial Revolution and the global information revolution at warp speed, saw China become the world's leading producer in various sectors, signaling its dominance in manufacturing and its trajectory toward economic preeminence.

From 1980 to 2017, China's GDP burgeoned from 7 percent of the US's to a formidable 61 percent, a growth rate exemplified by surpassing India's entire economy every two years since 2008. Even amid the slowdown following the Global Financial Crisis, China outpaced the world, as noted by the former Singaporean Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew, who envisioned a global recalibration when China assumes full power.

The awareness of this shifting equilibrium is not lost on the US, prompting a strategic pivot announced by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2011, redirecting foreign policy focus from the Middle East to Asia.

China, in its quest for influence, demonstrates a willingness to employ sanctions and assert aggression to advance its global agenda. This echoes historical patterns, a resonance with the Thucydides Trap—a dynamic observed time and again on the world stage.

The upcoming section will transport us through history, examining instances where nations found themselves ensnared in a Thucydides Trap, shedding light on the complexities of such geopolitical struggles.

Chapter 2: Thucydides's Insights Illuminate Historical Global Conflicts

Thucydides, the ancient historian, introduced the concept that when a rising power poses a threat to an established power, the likely outcome is war—a concept contemporaries have termed the Thucydides Trap.

The inevitability of conflict in such scenarios can be attributed to the significant geopolitical stress caused by the redistribution of power. This upheaval at a structural level creates instability akin to shifting tectonic plates, where not only extraordinary or aggressive political acts but also ordinary points of tension can escalate into epic conflicts.

A Harvard think tank, scrutinizing history through the lens of Thucydides's criteria, identified 16 instances of political tension, of which 12 escalated into war. One illustrative case is Japan at the turn of the twentieth century, experiencing rising power syndrome. Opening its closed society in 1853 due to the display of military might by US naval commodore Matthew Perry, Japan rapidly advanced economically and militarily, seeking dominance in the region. A conflict with China ensued, resulting in Japan's control of Korea, Taiwan, and Manchuria. However, a subsequent clash with Russia, triggered by perceived disrespect, ended with Japan securing its newly acquired territories. This conflict contributed to Russia's downfall, leading to the First Russian Revolution.

Examining nineteenth-century France and Germany provides another example. Prussian ruler Otto von Bismarck strategically engaged in conflict with France to unify German states. France, suspicious of Prussia's rapid growth, fell into the trap, leading to Bismarck's victory in the Franco-Prussian War and successful German unification.

While these examples share parallels, they don't follow an exact blueprint. Sometimes the rising power prevails, as seen in Japan and Germany, while in other cases, the established power maintains its dominance, as with Britain defeating France in 1805 during the Napoleonic era.

In the majority of instances, conflict appears inevitable, raising the question of whether the same holds true for the current power dynamics between China and the US.

Chapter 3: The Spectrum of Potential Triggers for Conflict

Analysts assessing the potential for global conflict adopt a mindset akin to park rangers vigilant during fire season. While arsonists may plan deliberate fires, numerous other sparks, such as improperly extinguished bonfires or carelessly tossed cigarettes, can also ignite a blaze. The analysts understand that, under favorable conditions, most sparks won't lead to catastrophic wildfires. However, in the midst of a dry season, even the smallest spark can escalate into an inferno.

In the current state of affairs between the US and China, we find ourselves in the peak of this metaphorical fire season. China, driven by ambition, seeks to expand its influence, while the US is determined to safeguard its global power and retain interests in the Pacific region.

Several potential "sparks" have been identified by analysts that could potentially trigger large-scale conflict between these two powers.

Firstly, an accidental collision between naval vessels in the contested South China Sea could escalate tensions. China's claim of sovereignty over the entire region is disputed by countries like Vietnam and the Philippines. The presence of US naval vessels adds to the complexity. Incidents involving Chinese coast guard vessels harassing US destroyers in disputed waters could lead to a collision, potentially resulting in fatalities. China might choose diplomatic channels to protest or, alternatively, respond with a show of military force.

Secondly, Taiwan's movement toward independence could be another catalyst. China claims Taiwan as part of its territory, but there is a popular movement in Taiwan seeking independence. If this movement gains momentum, resulting in protests and unrest, China might intervene militarily. However, the US, under the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, is committed to defending Taiwan against Chinese invasion.

Thirdly, a third party, such as Japan, could instigate a conflict between the US and China. Japan, with an increasingly pro-military stance, may focus on the Senkaku Islands, contested by China. Any hint of Japanese activity could lead to a skirmish, potentially escalating into a full-scale confrontation, triggering the US-Japan mutual defense treaty.

Fourthly, the collapse of North Korea poses a significant threat. If the North Korean government were to collapse, South Korea and the US might send troops to secure the region, bringing them close to the Chinese border. Alternatively, a scramble to secure North Korea's alleged massive stockpile of nuclear weapons could lead to a direct confrontation between China and the US.

Lastly, a trade conflict could escalate into a military confrontation. If the US determines that China's trade practices discriminate against it and imposes sanctions, China might retaliate. As tension escalates, cyber warfare could ensue, potentially escalating into physical attacks and transforming a trade conflict into a military one.

While these scenarios are speculative, the underlying friction between China's emerging power and the established power of the US creates conditions where conflict becomes a looming possibility.

Chapter 4: Navigating Towards Peace: Alternatives to Inevitable Conflict

As China rapidly ascends, flexing its growing influence, and the US remains steadfast in preserving its global dominance, the potential for conflict looms on the horizon. However, amidst these choppy waters, there exists the possibility of charting a course toward a peaceful resolution through diplomacy, strategy, and adept statecraft.

The idea that conflict between emerging and established powers is inevitable can be challenged by historical examples of compromise and accommodation. In the fifteenth century, Spain and Portugal, vying for control over territories in Latin America, reached a compromise in the Treaty of Tordesillas after the intervention of the Pope. Similarly, in the early twentieth century, the US, akin to China today, peacefully maneuvered into a pole global position, displacing Britain. Recognizing America's rapid growth and expanded military might, Britain pivoted to diplomacy, safeguarding its national interests through treaties and alliances. During the Cold War, the threat of Mutually Assured Destruction served as a deterrent, preventing a hot war.

To manage the Thucydidean relationship with China, the US can adopt several strategic options. Policymakers should grapple with tough questions, such as whether a more powerful China poses an existential threat that must be thwarted at any cost, or if coexistence in a world where China holds substantial influence is viable.

Strategic options include accommodating China's core interests without compromising US interests. For instance, a negotiated agreement might involve the withdrawal of US troops from South Korea in exchange for China's commitment to denuclearize North Korea.

Alternatively, the US could explore destabilizing tactics, questioning the legitimacy of China's communist rule or leveraging dissent against the country's draconian censorship and internet policies.

A third approach involves redefining the US-China relationship by emphasizing shared interests. Joint efforts against global threats, such as terrorism and climate change, could transform the antagonistic dynamic into a cooperative partnership. This shift would require a collaborative approach to address common challenges, fostering a more constructive relationship between the two powers.

Summary

Thucydides, the ancient Greek historian, asserted that when a rising power challenges an established one, war is a probable outcome. Presently, China's ascent poses a threat to US dominance, creating a precarious situation. However, amidst the looming specter of conflict, strategic measures hold the potential for a peaceful resolution.

About the author

Graham Allison stands as a distinguished scholar and political scientist, holding the esteemed position of the Douglas Dillon Professor of Government at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government. Additionally, he assumes the role of Director at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs within the Harvard Kennedy School. Notably, he spearheads Harvard University's enduring Thucydides Trap Project, showcasing his expertise and leadership in the realms of international relations and political analysis.