Thucydides Trap
When a rising power threatens to displace an incumbent, structural stress raises the risk of conflict unless actively managed.
author
Graham T. Allison, drawing on Thucydides
Model type
About
Named by Graham Allison after Thucydides’ account of Sparta and Athens, the trap is a power-transition risk: shifts in relative power trigger fear, miscalculation and escalation dynamics.
HOW IT WORKS
Rising vs ruling power: capability gains vs status-quo defender.
Security dilemma: defensive moves look offensive, inviting counters.
Commitment traps: reputational and alliance promises reduce flexibility.
Escalation channels: crises, accidents, proxies, sanctions, tech choke points.
Rising vs ruling power: capability gains vs status-quo defender.
Security dilemma: defensive moves look offensive, inviting counters.
Commitment traps: reputational and alliance promises reduce flexibility.
Escalation channels: crises, accidents, proxies, sanctions, tech choke points.
Use cases
Incumbent vs disruptor strategy: set guardrails when a challenger’s growth threatens your core.
Regulatory and geo-economics scanning: anticipate choke points, export controls and market bifurcation.
M&A and JV design: mitigate rivalry triggers via governance, veto scopes and dispute playbooks.
Operating model shifts: manage internal power transitions (legacy BU vs growth BU) to avoid destructive infighting.
Regulatory and geo-economics scanning: anticipate choke points, export controls and market bifurcation.
M&A and JV design: mitigate rivalry triggers via governance, veto scopes and dispute playbooks.
Operating model shifts: manage internal power transitions (legacy BU vs growth BU) to avoid destructive infighting.
HOW TO APPLY
Define the dyad: who is rising, who is defending; specify the contested domain.
Map triggers: red lines, flashpoints, alliance commitments, tech dependencies.
Build guardrails: crisis hotlines, escalation ladders, confidence-building measures, transparency.
Design off-ramps: face-saving concessions, phased reciprocity, issue linkage.
Stress test: simulate incidents and decision latency; pre-authorise responses.
Define the dyad: who is rising, who is defending; specify the contested domain.
Map triggers: red lines, flashpoints, alliance commitments, tech dependencies.
Build guardrails: crisis hotlines, escalation ladders, confidence-building measures, transparency.
Design off-ramps: face-saving concessions, phased reciprocity, issue linkage.
Stress test: simulate incidents and decision latency; pre-authorise responses.
PITFALLS AND CAUTIONS
Determinism: it’s a risk pattern, not destiny; leadership choices matter.
Bad analogies: don’t force-fit business or tech situations without structural parallels.
Selection bias: history has peaceful transitions; institutions and interdependence can moderate risk.
Determinism: it’s a risk pattern, not destiny; leadership choices matter.
Bad analogies: don’t force-fit business or tech situations without structural parallels.
Selection bias: history has peaceful transitions; institutions and interdependence can moderate risk.