As the USA and China face off in the 21st century clash of civilizations, we need to delve back into history to see whether there are parallels we can learn from.

I have previously pointed out how the Thucydides Trap, first described by Greek historian Thucydides on the Peloponnese War between Athens and Sparta and more recently identified by Harvard Professor Graham Allison may not be the most appropriate analogy for the modern age.

Advertisement

A more interesting historical clash of great powers would have been Rome versus Qin China around 200 BC to 200 AD. But that never happened. In comparative terms, the Roman empire had an estimated 50 to 90 million people, roughly 20 per cent of the world’s population, covering an area of 5 million square kilometres, compared with the larger Han Empire of roughly 60 million people covering an area of 6.5 million kilometres.

Rome was both a land and maritime power, whereas Han China was essentially land-based. The two empires never clashed, because they were separated by vast geographical distance.

The only recorded link between the two empires were Roman emissaries sent to the Han Court, during the reign of Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antonius (161-180 AD). The more telling clash of empires was between Rome and Carthage during the three Punic Wars (264–146 BC). Carthage was essentially an older (beginning 8th century BC) Phoenician maritime power that controlled trade in the Mediterranean Sea, backed up by rich fertile lands in Northern Africa.

Rome was the rising power expanding outward at the time of the first Punic wars. Carthage was more interested in pushing trade and guarding its trading monopoly in the Western Mediterranean, whereas Rome was more interested in expansion through conquests.

The first Punic War (264-241 BC) began with Carthage being the dominant naval power, with Rome basically a strong land-based army. Before 264 BC, Rome and Carthage had good commercial ties and friendly relations, but one could imagine that Carthage probably ran trade surpluses with Rome since she controlled the Mediterranean trade.

Rome could not afford to run large debts to Carthage. The Carthaginian ruling oligarchy’s attitude towards conflict was split between the trading faction and the landed faction, with the latter loath to supply manpower and funding for war. Hence, Carthage relied more on mercenaries, and less on her own citizens to conduct war.

Rome, on the other hand, had mostly citizensoldiers whose fortunes depended on victory and conquest. Consequently, once Carthage began to lose her naval superiority, there was a period of attrition in which both sides fought indecisively with ruinous finance to both. In 241 BC, Rome won decisively the naval battle of Aegates, conquering Sicily, and Carthage sued for peace, paying terrible reparations.

After its loss, Carthage had to fight off a mercenary rebellion (241- 238 BC) against discontented unpaid mercenaries, joined by a rebellion of Africans in Carthage’s oppressed territories.

To defend the empire, the Carthaginian general Hamilcar consolidated control over the Iberian peninsula (today Spain and Portugal), raising an army eventually to launch the Second Punic War (218-201 BC) by his son, Hannibal, who took the war to the Italian peninsula by marching through the Alps and fighting on Roman territory.

After initial losses, the Romans regrouped and once the Numidians rebelled against Carthage in 213 BC, the Roman general Scipio landed in Africa in 204 BC and with his Numidian allies, marched on Carthage. Hannibal was recalled from Italy but was soundly defeated in the famous battle of Zama (202 BC). After suing for peace, Carthage was stripped of all its territories and had to pay ruinous reparations. In the interregnum, the Numidians ate at Carthaginian power, with Carthage being finally totally destroyed in the Third Punic War (149- 146 BC).

Carthaginians were sold to slavery and the whole region was incorporated as a Roman province, becoming effectively Rome’s breadbasket providing more than half a million tonnes of grain to Italy every year (Morris, 2011). When the Germanic Vandals conquered Carthage in 439 AD, it was the end of the Western Rome empire.

The Punic wars basically demonstrated that ultimately political will, military technology and discipline, plus economic power over food, energy and minerals mattered in great power rivalry. Great Power conflicts have their origins in national, sectoral and personal (all human) interests, but historically, they occurred without caring about the natural environment.

Roman deforestation of Western Europe, as well as the Spanish conquest of Latin Americas all had serious climatic consequences that only became apparent later. Historian Geoffrey Parker (Global Crisis, 2013) documented how the mini-Ice Age in the mid-17th century saw revolutions and the collapse of Ming China (1644 AD), the PolishLithuanian Commonwealth and the Spanish Monarchy, with rebellions in the Ottoman, Russian and Mughal empires, Sweden, Denmark and Holland.

That mini-Ice age came about because the devastation of the native American population in the 16th century caused a reforestation that cooled global temperatures, with famines across different parts of the world.

We are thus witnessing the confluence of climate change, technology, demographics, growing social inequality, and geopolitical rivalry all converging into a planetary state of disorder, in which no single nation is powerful enough to restore order.

Most of us are disorientated by an age of misinformation and disinformation, where societies and communities are polarized by narratives which push towards extreme fundamentalist positions.

There is no centrist coalition strong enough to restore a balanced view of moderation and tolerance. Balance has been lost because populists and elites alike profit from imbalance. The Punic wars showed that more often than not, human beings fight over short-term interests rather than working hard towards building long-term peace.

All too often, wars that appear glorious ended up with long, ruinous trauma on both humans and the planet. It is easier to shout for war, than to work hard for peace. For those who care about our future generations, give peace a chance.

(The writer, a former central banker, is a distinguished fellow at the Fung Global Institute.) Special to ANN