THE THUCYDIDEAN TUSSLE

A political exploration of Russo-American relations through the evolution of

warfare and the relevance of the Thucydides Trap.

OCTOBER 2, 2020
MODERN HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIRLS, KOLKATA

1|Page
 The Thucydidean Tussle | SHREYA GANGULY

ABSTRACT

The methodology involves research through several sources like websites, journals, books, blogs

and surveys.

Ever since the birth of mankind, the feeling of superiority over others has gripped us all, being

avaricious in nature is what defines us. In no way does this mean that a savage society is the

order of nature, but it implies that even in a seemingly ‘peaceful’ society, we are dominated by

our feeling of self-interest.

It permeates from the individual, to our systems and finally our States. The present day

governments of the world are characterized by this race of satisfying self-interest and ambition.

An already existing world order which forms the status quo is therefore always threatened by

another power, catching up in this race. Thus, when one great power threatens to displace

another, war is almost always the result. This constant struggle of insecurity, instability and

maintaining status quo causes a security dilemma, further testified by the Thucydides’ trap.

This concept formulated centuries ago still hold true today, forming the very foundation of the

Neorealist and Structural realist schools. Warfare, as we know it, has drastically changed and has

taken a political, social, economic and cyber form. This essay will explain the theory of balance

of power and power transition put forward by Neorealists through the rocky relation between

USA and Russian Federation. From the First World War, Second World War, Cold War to the

current proxy wars, the Syrian conflict, Ukrainian civil war, cyber attacks, the Russian

interference in the U.S elections of 2016 and finally dominance in terms of soft power- the

weapons and ammunition of warfare may have change, but the goal clearly has not.
 The Thucydidean Tussle | SHREYA GANGULY

The research question hence stands- To what extent does the Thucydides’ trap holds relevance in

today’s world, with regard to the evolution of warfare, through the relations between the United

States of America and the Russian Federation?

Abstract word count- 313 words.

 The Thucydidean Tussle | SHREYA GANGULY

Years after progressing from a savage, anarchic and barbarian society where violence was the

way of life, scholars today believe we have reached a point in the development of mankind

where ‘warfare’ seems inconceivable. But a question to ask is- if it is our limited minds for

which it’s impossible to conceive?

The most accepted definition and implication of warfare is indefinitely attached with as a

consequence. Be it the Peloponnesian War, World War 1 or World War 2- violence and the

control of it played a role in changing the course of history. However, it is my firm belief that

warfare isn’t simply limited to physical warfare resulting in violence and physical damage.

The Italian psychoanalyst Franco Fornari, a follower of Melanie Klein, thought war was the

paranoid or projective “elaboration” of mourning”1 Fornari thought war and violence develop out

of our “love need”: our wish to preserve and defend the sacred object to which we are attached,

namely our early mother and our fusion with her. For the adult, nations are the sacred objects

that generate warfare. Thus, warfare, I believe, has evolved over the years in terms of its

methodology in the truest sense. From brutal physical war, we’ve come to a point where war also

entail proxy wars, for economic influence, cyber attacks, for social influence, cultural influence,

propaganda of all types- manipulation and media, logic and rhetoric, psychological aspects and

more.2 This, therefore, leads to dominance in terms of soft power. Moreover, enforcement of

labor and environmental standards, intellectual property rights protection, financial aid and trade

policies greatly influence the power dynamics of the world system.3

Hence, one has to agree to the fact that intimidation techniques which hamper a country’s sphere

of influence, insinuate war.

1
Fornari, 1975
2
https://gspm.online.gwu.edu/blog/public-relations-and-propaganda-techniques/
3
Journal of International Economics 84 (2011) 135–148, Pol Antràs, Gerard Padró i Miquel
 The Thucydidean Tussle | SHREYA GANGULY

War is, therefore- inevitable.

A famous 5th century BCE Greek philosopher and one of the founding fathers of international

relations- Thucydides,4 with the above statement in mind, came up with a fascinating political

metaphor known as the Thucydides’ trap. This concept which holds major relevance even today,

stated, “when one great power threatens to displace another, war is almost always the

result.”5This statement was made after analyzing the famous Peloponnesian War where “The

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

theory of balance of power as an attempt at the change in the power dynamics of the current

status quo, an inexorable, structural stress caused by a rapid shift in the balance of power

between two rivals-leading up to warfare. Before the aforementioned happened, a lot of tactics

and methods were applied by both rivals to counterbalance each other. This concept is best

explained by the school of realism in international relations argue that the motivation of states is

the quest for security, and conflicts can arise from the inability to distinguish defense from

offense, which is called the security dilemma. To get a clearer understanding, we must explore

the neorealist school represented by Kenneth Waltz and John Mearsheimer. These scholars put

out the theory of balance of power and the power transition theory. The first one implies that

states have the goal of preventing a single state from becoming a hegemon, and war is the result

of the would-be hegemon's persistent attempts at power acquisition. In this view, an international

system with more equal distribution of power is more stable, and "movements toward unipolarity

are destabilizing.”6 The second one speaks of how hegemons impose stabilizing conditions on

4
(See Appendix A)
5
The History of the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides, 431 BCE
6
Levy, Jack S. (June 1998). "The Causes of War and the Conditions of Peace"
 The Thucydidean Tussle | SHREYA GANGULY

the world order, but they eventually decline, and war occurs when a declining hegemon is

challenged by another rising power or aims to preemptively suppress them.7

Figure 1- An 1866 cartoon by Daunier, L'Equilibre European, representing balance of power as soldiers of

different nations uphold the earth on bayonets8

In the above figure, the bayonets today symbolize more than weaponry and warfare, but modern-

day soft power techniques and cyber proficiency, economic tools and more.

The issue of balancing power prevails wherever two and only two requirements are met: that the

order is anarchic and that it is populated by units wishing to survive. 9States can do this either

through internal balancing, where a state uses internal efforts such as moving to increase

economic capability, developing clever strategies and increasing military strength or through

“external balancing”, which occurs when states take external measures to increase their security

by forming alliances, explained best through the offensive and defensive schools of neorealism.

7
Annual Review of Political Science. 139–65.

8
Actualités, published in le Charivari, April 3, 1867
9
(Waltz, 1959, p. 118)
 The Thucydidean Tussle | SHREYA GANGULY

Thucydides subscribed to this notion of ‘balance of power’, when he explained that the policy of

Tissaphernes,10 King of the Persians, as one of holding ‘the balance evenly between the two

contending powers’, Athens and Sparta.

The power transition theory on the other hand, envisions global politics composed of a hierarchy

of nations, with varying degrees of cooperation and competition. It provides testimony to how

stability is not always possible as the dynamics of growth alter power relations and generate

potential challengers to the existing status quo. 11 I shall use the theories I analyzed through the

changing relations between the United States of America and the Russian Federation, more

specifically the evolution of warfare between the two, through the lens of the Thucydides’

trap. For close to 20 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the international order

organized under the USSR’s former rival, the United States. Under this system, US interests

around the world were relatively unchallenged.12 The current unipolar system, dominated by US

is thus challenged by its long term nemesis, Russia.

Under the leadership of Michael Gorbachev, the then USSR disintegrated and so did the ongoing

Cold War. The policies of Petroiska and Glasnost were adopted which helped the goals of

Russia change into the spirit of international cooperation. He advocated for radical economic

changes where Glasnost meant a greater willingness on the part of Soviet officials to allow

western ideas and goods into the USSR. On the other hand, Petroiska, was an initiative that

allowed limited market incentives to Soviet citizens.13 From hereon, we see a shift in Russia’s

foreign policy, making them eligible for a greater stronghold in the world political scenario. The

10
(See Appendix B)
11
https://oxfordre.com/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-
296
12
The New Cold War, Ian Turner, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
13
https://www.ushistory.org/us/59e.asp
 The Thucydidean Tussle | SHREYA GANGULY

US hegemony over world politics was thus challenged by Russia even after Cold War through

various proxy wars, for economic influence, cyber-attacks, for social influence, cultural

influence and propaganda of all types.

Proxy warfare is the first area where the rules of engagement and strategic risk between the two

poles were rewritten. A typical strategy adopted by both the countries were backing opposition

groups in certain territories, be it backing corrupt governments or local rebel groups. First signs

of a proxy war post Cold War developed in the region of Chechnya where Chechens who

declared jihad against Russians were deemed as heroes by the Western media and were dubbed

as, “an army of Davids fighting the Russian Goliath.”14 Eventually, Russians retreated due to

international pressure but this was definitely just the beginning of their many interventions in

regions all over the world. Then came the more recent intervention by the US and Russia ,

notedly in the Greater Middle East and its periphery spreading like a cancerous tumor throughout

the region. The ‘axis of evil’ comprised Iran and Iraq and beyond the axis-Libya and Syria, was

promulgated by the Bush administration. This was in response to the 9/11 attacks in the US

which compelled the US to announce a ‘War on Terror’ in the Middle East. This was

materialized by the various operations conducted which further paved the way for regional

tensions in Syria, Libya, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon and more. Although it seems that the strings of this

apparent puppeteering is being pulled by Saudi Arabia and Iran, there are in fact two greater

players involved in this larger picture. Through sectarian divides and a power struggle by the

Muslim countries, militias and corrupt governments namely the Houthis, the Hezbollah, Al-

Qaeda, Hamas are being fueled by the US and Russia to achieve their interests in the field of

14
https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2014/12/11/chechnya-russia-and-20-years-of-conflict/?gb=true
 The Thucydidean Tussle | SHREYA GANGULY

world dominance. Keeping the Thucydides’ trap in mind, we see a struggle for influence through

these proxy wars.

Economic sanctions and trade wars has definitely gained momentum in today’s world, which

has reached a distinctive and extraordinary level of globalization. Every decision taken by a

nation invariably affects other nations. In the case of Russo-US sanctions, the sanctions have

almost always been one-sided. More than 60 rounds of sanctions have been imposed upon

individuals, companies, and the nation over the last 6 years. The most prominent being the

Ukraine conflict related Minsk Accords which were imposed upon Russia by the US. Further

sanctions have been imposed after their 2016 US elections intervention and for not complying

with the North Korea sanctions. Sanctions have become one of the most defining features in the

political landscape today and a way by which can potentially change their position in the balance

of power in the world. The Thucydides’ trap is seen working by the imposition of sanctions upon

Russia as an attempt to limit their power in the world scenario, strengthening the American

position.

However, we must reflect upon the influence of the internet and social media in shaping the

ground for war as we know it, today. The Arab Spring Revolution is the most significant

example of the power of the internet in modern warfare. Armed with smartphones and the power

of Facebook and Twitter, the youth of Tunisia began a revolution in 2011. Videos of police

brutality and widespread protests flooded the internet, but Tunisia was just the stepping stone to

the Arabian domino effect which was to follow. This was majorly felt in Egypt where the use of

communication technologies and internet activism, eventually leading to the resignation of their

ageing autocrat, Hosni Mubarak. Online campaigns like the "We Are All Khaled" campaign

launched on Facebook and called millions of Egyptians out on the streets to protest for their
 The Thucydidean Tussle | SHREYA GANGULY

rights and overthrow the corrupt Mubarak government. The concept of “hacktivism”; promotion

of a particular political agenda or social change through cyber based techniques gained

importance in the world even led to some famous revelations by groups such as the

“Anonymous” reveals made in 2020.15

This leads us to the concept of cyberwarfare which was prophesized to be the ‘Third World

War’. Cyberwar has no single, universal definition as per the United Nations record but it is

often described as acts which potentially harm world infrastructure systems through cyber

methods. Both the Russian and US forces are known to be notorious in the field of cybercrime.

From Russia’s Estonia attack in 2007 which used the denial of service method to USA’s Stuxnet

virus attack in Iran, these countries have established themselves in the field of cyberspace as

strong players. The aforementioned countries have always chosen different battle grounds for

their various attacks and operations, only engaged in direct confrontation in the Russian

interference in the Presidential elections of 2016. On March, 2016 Hilary Clinton’s campaign

manager John Podesta receives a phishing email after which thousand of confidential notes and

emails are leaked. The WikiLeaks website manages to get a hold of these mails and publishes

them days before the Presidential debate, boosting Trump’s position and harming Clinton’s

campaign. Putin however, denies all claims of these hackers being affiliated with the Russian

government, but states that it does more good than harm, with the US citizens being more aware

of internal party politics before casting their vote. The CIA and the FBI confirm Russian links to

the leaks and this event is dubbed as “one of the greatest breaches of the democratic machinery.”

This confirms the fact that with a computer and the right coding skills, the next war is definitely

headed towards the cyberspace.

15
https://www.journalism.org/2012/11/28/role-social-media-arab-uprisings/
 The Thucydidean Tussle | SHREYA GANGULY

We see the working of John Mearsheimer’s power transition theory, be it through the proxy wars

of Ukraine and Middle East or the social media revolution; the Arab Spring Revolution, the

imposition of the Minsk accords or the extremely humiliating cyber-attack of the 2016 US

elections- the struggle for power between the US and Russia has been a constant in the field of

international relations. The concept of warfare has taken various different names and shapes

through economic, cyber, proxy war and soft power techniques but have managed to create

similar if not more impact than pre- Cold War violent wars. The Thucydides’ Trap is thus a

concept which goes beyond the constraints of time proving that although man has evolved from

his barbaric methods of dominance, his greed for power has materialized through the evolution

of warfare instead.

Essay word count- 2173 words.

 The Thucydidean Tussle | SHREYA GANGULY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

SERIAL BIBLIOGRAPHY DATE

NUMB AND
ER TIME
ACCESS
ED
1. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4418087 7th May,

4:41 PM

2. https://study.com/blog/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-history-of-us- 7th May

russia-relations.html 5:00 PM

3. http://www.hri.org/por/thucydides.html 8th May

9:08 PM

4. https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/09/united-states- 8th May

china-war-thucydides-trap/406756/ 10:48 AM

5. https://www.e-ir.info/2010/02/15/the-political-realism-of-thucydides- 8th May

and-thomas-hobbes/ 10:57 AM

6. https://bookdown.org/Jack_Biggs/Thucydides_Dissertation/chapter-1- 9th May

neorealism-and-thucydides.html 9:26 AM

7. https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/antras/files/jie_gpim_published.pdf 10th May

9:52AM

8. https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/are-u-s-and-russia-in-a-new-cold- 10th May

war/ 10:06 PM

9. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43581449 17th May

4:43 PM
 The Thucydidean Tussle | SHREYA GANGULY

10. https://www.journalism.org/2012/11/28/role-social-media-arab- 17th May

uprisings/ 5:02 PM

11. https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2014/12/11/chechnya-russia-and-20- 21st May

years-of-conflict/?gb=true 5:21 PM

12. https://oxfordre.com/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001 22nd May

.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-296
8:36 AM

13. https://www.ushistory.org/us/59e.asp 22nd May

8:54 AM

14. https://gspm.online.gwu.edu/blog/public-relations-and-propaganda- 24th

techniques/ August
7:16 PM
15. Laurie M. Johnson Bagby. “The Use and Abuse of Thucydides in ---------
International Relations.” International Organization, vol. 48, no. 1, 1994,
pp. 131–153. JSTOR
16. Phillips, Walter Alison (1911). "Balance of Power". In Chisholm, Hugh 26th
(ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. 3 (11th ed.). Cambridge University August
Press. 6:12 PM
17. Dinneen, Nathan (1 December 2018). "The Corinthian Thesis: The ----------
Oratorical Origins of the Idea of the Balance of Power in Herodotus,
Thucydides, and Xenophon". International Studies Quarterly. 62 (4):
857–866
18. Mearsheimer, John (2010), "Structural Realism" (PDF), in Dunne, Tim; ---------
Kurki, Milja; Smith, Steve (eds.), International Relations Theories, New
York: Oxford University Press, pp. 79–85
19. Kegley, Charles W.; Wittkopf, Eugene R. (2005), World Politics: Trends ---------
and Transformation (10th ed.), p. 503
20. The New Cold War, Ian Turner, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State 16th May
University
4:28 PM

21. Thucydides and Modern Realism Author(s): Jonathan Monten Source: 9th August
International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 50, No. 1 (Mar., 2006), pp. 3-25
5: 55 PM
 The Thucydidean Tussle | SHREYA GANGULY

22. Graham Allison, 2015.09.24 The Atlantic - Thucydides Trap 14th May

9:21 AM

APPENDIX A

THUCYDIDES AND THUCYDIDES’ TRAP

Thucydides was an Athenian historian and general. His History of the Peloponnesian War

recounts the fifth-century BC war between Sparta and Athens until the year 411 BC. Thucydides

has been dubbed the father of "scientific history" by those who accept his claims to have applied

strict standards of impartiality and evidence-gathering and analysis of cause and effect, without

reference to intervention by the deities, as outlined in his introduction to his work.16

Thucydides's Trap refers to the natural, inevitable discombobulation that occurs when a rising

power threatens to displace a ruling power...[and] when a rising power threatens to displace a

ruling power, the resulting structural stress makes a violent clash the rule, not the exception.17

16
Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thucydides

17
Allison, Graham (2017). Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides's Trap?. New York:
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. pp. xv–xvi.
 The Thucydidean Tussle | SHREYA GANGULY

APPENDIX B

POLICY OF TISSAPHERNES

In his portrayal of Tissaphernes in Book Eight, Thucydides addresses a major problem of

Athenian politics in the late fifth and early fourth centuries, the hope for alliance with

Achaemenid Persia. Tissaphernes’ quarrels with his Spartan allies during the early phase of

Persian intervention in the Peloponnesian War led to a wide-spread Greek belief, encouraged by

Alkibiades, that Persia might transfer its support to the Athenians. Thucydides, while agreeing

with contemporary theories of Tissaphernes’ secret hostility to the Spartan war effort,

reconstructs Tissaphernes’ motives in order to challenge Alkibiadean ideas of Persian friendship

for Athens.18

18

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277624615_Waiting_for_Tissaphernes_Athens_and_Persia_in_Thucydi
des_VIII