Chinese President Xi Jinping used a high-stakes diplomatic meeting in Beijing on Thursday to frame U.S.–China relations through the lens of what he called the “Thucydides Trap,” warning that the trajectory between the two powers could determine whether they avoid conflict or drift toward confrontation.
Speaking to President Donald Trump ahead of their meeting, Xi asked whether the two countries could avoid what he described as the historical pattern in which a rising power challenges an established one. According to CNBC, citing Chinese state media outlet CCTV, Xi questioned whether China and the United States can “overcome the ‘Thucydides Trap’ and create a new paradigm of major country relations?”
Xi has referenced the concept for more than a decade, and it has become a recurring theme in Beijing’s framing of great-power competition. The idea itself originates from ancient history, named after the Greek historian Thucydides, who chronicled the conflict between Athens and Sparta in “History of the Peloponnesian War.” In that account, he described how the rise of Athens and the fear it generated in Sparta helped make war likely.
The modern political science interpretation of the concept was popularized by Harvard scholar Graham Allison, who argues that tensions between an emerging power and an established one have historically created conditions for conflict. In his research, Allison identified multiple historical cases in which such dynamics emerged; he found that most resulted in war, while a smaller number avoided it.
Xi also used the meeting to deliver a pointed warning regarding Taiwan, one of the most sensitive issues in U.S.–China relations. According to Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning on social platform X, Xi argued that “‘Taiwan independence’ and cross-Strait peace are as irreconcilable as fire and water,” underscoring Beijing’s long-standing position on the issue.
The Thucydides Trap framework has been widely debated in international relations circles, particularly in the context of U.S.–China competition over trade, technology, and regional security. Allison has previously pointed to historical examples including the U.S.–Japan rivalry in the early 20th century, which culminated in World War II after Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor, as well as Cold War tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union, which remained largely contained despite proxy conflicts.
Other historical comparisons sometimes cited include post–Cold War Europe, where Germany’s rise through economic integration rather than military expansion is viewed as a case that avoided direct conflict.
Thursday’s exchange reflects ongoing efforts by both Washington and Beijing to define the boundaries of competition while managing the risk of escalation. Xi’s invocation of historical analogy signals that, from Beijing’s perspective, the central question is not only economic or strategic rivalry, but whether history’s most dangerous pattern can be avoided altogether.
