The US-China Thucydides Trap is by no means a foregone conclusion

The Thucydides Trap – the idea that a rising power and an established hegemon are destined for war – often frames China-US tensions and conflict as inevitable. Yet I believe the outcome is determined not by fate, but by choice.

Harvard professor Graham Allison, who popularised the term with his 2012 Financial Times article, agrees with me on the role of human agency. As he put it during an author reading event for my book, Escaping Thucydides’s Trap: Dialogue with Graham Allison on China-US Relations, held last month on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference: “Structural forces account for 75-80 per cent of the outcome, but human agency shapes the rest.”

Peace is not an illusion – it’s a viable option if we act decisively.

The Trap can be traced back to Athens and Sparta, a rivalry that ended in war. History offers plenty of similar warnings – rising powers frequently collide with dominant ones. Yet exceptions exist. In the 1890s, Britain and Germany avoided military conflict through economic competition. Allison’s book, Destined for War – Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap?, does not predict doom; it challenges us to rewrite the pattern.

That China’s economy achieved 5 per cent growth last year and is projected to grow by another 5 per cent this year despite US containment efforts underscores the stakes. Over 70,000 American companies generate US$600 billion in sales annually there, with Tesla’s Shanghai operations driving its global success. These connections are not incidental – they’re a foundation for mutual benefit, favouring cooperation over confrontation, much as trade once steadied European power relations.

US President Donald Trump’s return to power introduces a new dynamic. While 80 per cent of Americans view China unfavourably, Trump praised Chinese President Xi Jinping’s leadership during his campaign. His focus on economic outcomes over ideological divides sets him apart from Washington’s norm.