Karl Marx once said, “History repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce.” This idea fits well when we look at how powerful nations act on the global stage. Another famous quote by Winston Churchill—“The farther backward you can look, the farther forward you are likely to see”—also reminds us that today’s politics often follow the same patterns from the past.
The Melian Dialogue, recorded by the Greek historian Thucydides, stands as one of the oldest examples of power politics. It happened in 416 BC during the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta. Thucydides wrote about how the Athenians, the stronger side, demanded the surrender of the small and neutral island of Melos. The Athenians made it clear that justice didn’t matter—only power did. As Thucydides wrote, “The strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must.” This idea still shapes international politics today.
Let us look at how the story of Melos relates to modern times, especially U.S. actions in the Middle East—like in Iraq and Iran. And when they don’t intervene directly they have their pet hounds do the job for them as in the case of Israel’s 12 day war against Iran. Pakistan is also doing the dirty work on behalf of China and the West against India. Powerful nations often act in their own interests, harming the weaker ones.
What Happened at Melos?
In 416 BC, during the long war between Athens and Sparta, the Athenian army arrived at Melos, a small island in the Aegean Sea. Melos had stayed neutral, even though it had cultural ties with Sparta. The Athenians demanded that Melos surrender, pay tribute, and join their empire. The Melians refused.
During the talks, the Athenians were blunt. They told the Melians that justice and fairness didn’t matter in war. All that mattered was strength. The Melians countered, claiming justice, divine favour, and hope were on their side. They also expected assistance from other states. However, the Athenians ignored their pleas. When Melos continued to resist, Athens attacked. Melian men faced death, while the women and children were forced into slavery.
The Melian Dialogue became a key example of what scholars now call “realism” in international relations. Realism says that nations act to protect their own power and security, not based on moral values or laws. According to this view, strong countries do whatever they can, while weaker ones have little say.
How This Relates to U.S. Foreign Policy
Now let’s jump forward over 2,000 years. The United States is today’s global superpower. Like Athens in ancient Greece, it has often acted based on what it believes is necessary for its security or interests. Two clear examples of this are the U.S. interventions in Iraq and Iran.
The 2003 Iraq War
In 2003, the U.S. invaded Iraq, claiming that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and links to terrorism. Later, evidence revealed these claims to be false.
In a manner similar to Athens, the U.S. operated without the full support of the global community. The United Nations did not approve the war, and many countries opposed it. The U.S. forged ahead, claiming to act for global security and the region’s democratic future.
Iraq, like Melos, was far weaker. The war led to the fall of Saddam Hussein but also caused massive destruction. The war killed thousands of civilians, ruined the country’s infrastructure, and the resulting power vacuum led to years of sectarian violence and the rise of terrorist groups like ISIS.
Just like the Melian Dialogue showed, the U.S. used its power to impose its will. Iraq had little choice and ended up suffering greatly.
U.S. Policy Toward Iran
Another example is how the U.S. has treated Iran, especially during Donald Trump’s presidency. In 2018, the Trump administration withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal. Iran and six major powers, including the U.S., signed this deal in 2015 to limit Iran’s nuclear program in return for lifting economic sanctions. At the time of withdrawal, international monitors had confirmed that Iran was following the agreement.
The U.S. reimposed tough sanctions, which crippled Iran’s economy. In 2020, a U.S. drone strike killed General Qassem Soleimani, one of Iran’s top military leaders, in Iraq. The U.S. claimed it was a defensive move. Iran saw it as an act of war.
Like Melos, Iran appealed to international rules and fairness, but the stronger power, the U.S., acted based on its own interests. Iran had little power to respond in kind. The sanctions limited Iran’s options, and its people suffered.
The Same Old Story, Again and Again
This pattern of behaviour shows how Marx’s idea of history repeating itself plays out. First, it’s a tragedy—like the destruction of Melos or the suffering in Iraq. Then, it descends into absurdity—a repetitive process in which powerful nations persist in the same behaviour, under the illusion that their military or economic power guarantees control.
High-sounding terms—like spreading democracy, protecting human rights, or ensuring peace—often frame these actions. But in reality, they often lead to more chaos, more deaths, and long-term instability. Powerless individuals frequently experience suffering, a situation that reflects the Melian plight.
Churchill’s warning about looking backward to understand the future is important here. Athens, once powerful and proud, eventually overreached and lost the Peloponnesian War. It declined soon after. The U.S., by repeating similar patterns of dominance and disregard for global opinion, risks making the same mistake.
Realism and Today’s World
The Melian Dialogue offers insights beyond past conflicts. They still help us understand global politics today. One area where this is clear is the growing competition between the U.S. and China.
China’s actions in the South China Sea, such as building artificial islands, are increasing tensions with neighbouring countries. These smaller countries are like modern-day Melians. They can protest and appeal to international law, but in the end, they must either align with the powerful or risk suffering alone.
But, as usual, history throws up exceptions too. Putin’s Russia wants to resurrect the Czarist glory. However, it has faltered in its very first attempt. Ukraine is putting up a strong resistance and refuses to be another Melos. But for how long? This remains to be seen.
The U.S. uses its military bases, alliances, and economic sanctions to maintain influence around the world. These actions are often based on power, not moral principles. Again, the message seems to be: “We’re strong, so we’ll do what we want.”
Cyber Wars and Economic Pressure
The Melian Dialogue also applies to areas like cyber warfare and economic dominance. In the digital age, powerful countries—and even tech companies—can launch cyberattacks, spy on rivals, or use digital tools to influence elections or suppress dissent.
Smaller countries and poorer populations cannot compete in the same way. They have to rely on building alliances or appealing to global rules and institutions, much like the Melians appealed to justice and the hope of divine help.
Economic sanctions, too, are often a tool used by strong countries to punish weaker ones. These sanctions are sometimes justified on moral grounds, but they often hurt ordinary people more than the leaders they target. Again, it is the weak who suffer.
Can We Break the Cycle?
The Melian Dialogue paints a dark picture. But does it have to be this way?
In today’s world, we do have international institutions like the United Nations, the International Criminal Court, and various global agreements that aim to create fair rules for all. These are meant to prevent the kind of power-based bullying that Athens practiced.
However, these institutions often struggle. The five permanent members—China, France, Russia, the UK, and the U.S.—frequently deadlock the UN Security Council because they can veto any decision. So when big powers act in their own interest, there’s often no proper punishment or pushback.
Despite this, there’s still hope. Diplomacy, dialogue, and cooperation do sometimes work. Peace talks, trade agreements, and cultural exchanges can help build trust and prevent conflict. But for these to succeed, powerful countries must also be willing to restrain themselves and think beyond short-term interests.
Conclusion: Learning from Melos
The Melian Dialogue may be over two thousand years old, but its message is still very current. Thucydides showed how power silences justice and how the weak often pay the price when they resist the powerful.
The U.S. actions in Iraq and Iran show how these lessons are repeated. Just like Athens, the U.S. has often acted based on strength, not law or morality. And just like Melos, weaker nations have suffered.
Marx was right—these events first unfold as tragic mistakes, and then they are repeated as farce, with little change. Churchill was also right—we must study the past if we want to understand the future.
By reflecting on Melos and what happened afterward, we can ask better questions about today’s politics: How can we avoid repeating these cycles? Can justice ever have a place in global affairs? Will powerful individuals ultimately choose to act differently, driven by moral obligation rather than mere capability?
Melian Dialogue, Thucydides, Power Politics, Realism in International Relations, US Foreign Policy, Iraq War, Iran Sanctions, Geopolitics Explained, History Repeats Itself, American Imperialism, Athens and Melos, Global Power Struggles, Modern Realism, South China Sea Conflict, US vs China, International Relations, Political Philosophy, War and Peace, Karl Marx History Repeats, Winston Churchill Quotes, Middle East Politics, Global Superpowers, Realism vs Idealism, United Nations Failure, Ancient History Lessons, Voice of Sanity, Political Analysis YouTube, Simplified Geopolitics, Geopolitical Commentary, Foreign Policy Critique, American Hegemony
No comments:
Post a Comment