geopolitics

Europe, Melos, and the Return of Geopolitics

The Lesson of Melos (image created with AI)

In 416 BC the powerful city of Athens confronted the neutral island of Melos during the Peloponnesian War. The Melians appealed to justice and neutrality. The Athenians answered with the cold logic of power.

“The strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must.”

Soon afterwards Athens besieged the island. When Melos fell, the men were executed and the women and children enslaved.

Thucydides recorded this episode not to glorify power, but to expose how international politics sometimes works when survival, fear, and prestige dominate the decisions of states. For Europe today, the uncomfortable relevance of that ancient dialogue is becoming increasingly clear.

Europe’s Great Experiment

For seventy years Europe has pursued one of the most remarkable political projects in history. After two world wars the continent tried something radically different: replacing power politics with rules, institutions, and economic integration. The European Union became a system in which borders opened, sovereignty was shared, and disputes were managed through law rather than force. Inside Europe, that experiment worked astonishingly well. Outside Europe, however, the world never fully adopted the same logic.

The Return of Hard Geopolitics

Over the past decade Europe has rediscovered that it still lives in a wider international system shaped by power. The Russian invasion of Ukraine reminded Europeans that territorial war has not disappeared from the continent. Military strength and deterrence — concepts that many hoped belonged to the past — suddenly became central again. At the same time Europe faces instability along its southern horizon. Tensions involving Iran, Israel, and the United States affect energy markets, shipping routes, and regional stability. A wider conflict in the Middle East would quickly reverberate through Europe’s economy and politics. Above these regional crises lies a deeper transformation: the long-term strategic rivalry between China and the United States, which is reshaping global trade, technology, and alliances. These developments are not separate events. They are parts of a single geopolitical landscape in which the balance of power is shifting again.

Europe Between Power and Rules

Europe today occupies a unique position in that landscape. Economically it is one of the largest powers in the world. The European Union’s combined economy rivals that of the United States and China, and its regulatory influence shapes global markets. Yet in strategic and military terms Europe remains fragmented and still depends heavily on American security guarantees through NATO. This creates a fundamental tension. Europe believes deeply in a rules-based international order. But the stability of that order ultimately depends on power — military, economic, and political — capable of defending it.

The Lesson of Melos

The tragedy of Melos did not happen only because Athens was powerful. It happened because Melos had no reliable structure of power around it: no strong alliances, no credible deterrence, and no ability to shape the strategic environment in which it lived. Europe today is obviously not Melos. It is far larger, richer, and more influential. But the ancient story still raises a question that Europe cannot ignore. A political order based on rules works only when those who believe in it also possess the capacity to defend it. Europe has spent seventy years building one of the most successful political systems in modern history. The challenge of the twenty-first century may be learning how to protect it in a world where power politics has returned.

Further Reading

Thucydides — History of the Peloponnesian War (Book V, Melian Dialogue)
Donald Kagan — The Peloponnesian War
Richard Ned Lebow — The Tragic Vision of Politics
Graham Allison — Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap?
Mark Leonard — The Age of Unpeace
Timothy Garton Ash — Homelands

Are We on the Brink of World War III? Echoes of 1938–1939

Professor Darin Gerdes.

In a sobering analysis released on May 15, 2025, Professor Darin Gerdes draws striking parallels between today’s geopolitical tensions and the volatile prelude to World War II. His YouTube video, “Are We on the Brink of WWIII? 1938–39’s Grim Clues!”, walks viewers through an eerie comparison between the global landscape of 1938–39 and our current moment.

A World on Edge

Gerdes opens with a survey of ongoing global flashpoints: the unresolved tensions between India and Pakistan, the persistent conflicts between Israel and its neighbors, the dangerous proxy war in Yemen, and most alarmingly, the war in Ukraine. That last conflict, he warns, remains the most plausible spark for a wider war, especially if it escalates into NATO territory.

Add to that China’s posturing over Taiwan, North Korea’s provocations, and Iran’s destabilizing role in the Middle East, and you have a dangerous convergence of authoritarian powers testing the limits of the current international order.

History’s Familiar Patterns

To understand how these scattered conflicts might stitch themselves into something far larger, Gerdes turns to history. The late 1930s were full of similar unrest: the Spanish Civil War, Japan’s invasion of China, the Nazi annexation of Austria, and the infamous Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact that divided Eastern Europe. At the time, international institutions failed to act decisively, and authoritarian regimes pushed aggressively into neighboring states.

Then, as now, the world seemed fragmented and distracted—until suddenly, it wasn’t.

Similarities—and Crucial Differences

Gerdes outlines the many parallels:

  • Multiple simultaneous conflicts

  • Authoritarian expansionism

  • Weak international institutions

  • Economic strain and disrupted trade

  • Rapid changes in military technology

But he also notes key differences. Most significantly, today's world is shaped by nuclear deterrence—a force absent in the 1930s that both restrains and complicates modern warfare. In addition, while global alliances today are less defined than the Axis and Allied powers of the past, they still exist—particularly through NATO.

Another difference lies in information speed. Unlike the 1930s, today’s public sees conflicts unfold in real time, with live updates, satellite images, and constant commentary. This visibility might deter rash action—or inflame it further.

What Comes Next?

Gerdes stops short of declaring a third world war imminent. Instead, he suggests we are at a crossroads. The lessons of 1938 and 1939 don’t guarantee the same outcome—but they should serve as a warning. History doesn’t repeat itself, he reminds us, but it does echo.

To hear Professor Gerdes explain the full historical context and his complete analysis, watch the full video here:
▶️ Are We on the Brink of WWIII? 1938–39’s Grim Clues!