The Melian Dialogue
A False Sense of Security:
Crisis Bargaining in International Relations
The insatiable longing for power, arguably rooted in human nature, has driven the course of history for thousands of years. The most memorable emperors and prosperous civilizations mastered the art of consolidating power while spreading and strengthening their influence. In “The Melian Dialogue”, drafted during the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides brings into question the role of power in relation to statecraft and international relations. As the Athenians continue to expand their Aegean Empire, they come into contact with the island of Melos, an isolated colony of Sparta. The Athenian generals send representatives to negotiate with the Melians rather than immediately using sheer military force to conquer them. In the resulting dialogue, Thucydides manages to articulate the complexity of international relations while primarily supporting the argument power guarantees the achievement of one’s will. The situation in which the Melians find themselves may appear to be relatively simple; however, the convoluted underpinnings that make up the conflict address the most profound theories behind interstate relations. The heart of all wars is the conflict over things that states value such as territory and policies. Therefore war’s ultimate purpose is to obtain rather than fight. The process in which states attempt to resolve conflicts is referred to as bargaining.1 In this case, the dialogue is an example of crisis bargaining, in which one actor threatens the use of force. The Melian dialogue is a discussion over the bargaining range of the two actors, that is, what each side is willing to give up or accept over the use of military force.2 Although the Melians raise several liberalist arguments addressing their common interests, the Athenians dominate the dialogue by discussing the most basic
Crisis Bargaining in International Relations
The insatiable longing for power, arguably rooted in human nature, has driven the course of history for thousands of years. The most memorable emperors and prosperous civilizations mastered the art of consolidating power while spreading and strengthening their influence. In “The Melian Dialogue”, drafted during the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides brings into question the role of power in relation to statecraft and international relations. As the Athenians continue to expand their Aegean Empire, they come into contact with the island of Melos, an isolated colony of Sparta. The Athenian generals send representatives to negotiate with the Melians rather than immediately using sheer military force to conquer them. In the resulting dialogue, Thucydides manages to articulate the complexity of international relations while primarily supporting the argument power guarantees the achievement of one’s will. The situation in which the Melians find themselves may appear to be relatively simple; however, the convoluted underpinnings that make up the conflict address the most profound theories behind interstate relations. The heart of all wars is the conflict over things that states value such as territory and policies. Therefore war’s ultimate purpose is to obtain rather than fight. The process in which states attempt to resolve conflicts is referred to as bargaining.1 In this case, the dialogue is an example of crisis bargaining, in which one actor threatens the use of force. The Melian dialogue is a discussion over the bargaining range of the two actors, that is, what each side is willing to give up or accept over the use of military force.2 Although the Melians raise several liberalist arguments addressing their common interests, the Athenians dominate the dialogue by discussing the most basic