Thucydides’ maxim is being challenged in modern conflicts: In the Russia-Ukraine and US-Israel-Iran wars, relatively weaker states have demonstrated significant agency and resilience, proving that military and economic superiority no longer guarantee easy victory.

Ukraine and Iran have used asymmetry effectively: Ukraine leveraged drones, innovation, and Western support to resist Russia, while Iran used proxies, ballistic missiles, and strategic alliances to project power despite conventional disadvantages.

Global alliances and technology have shifted the balance: Weaker powers can now weaponize diplomacy, international solidarity, and low-cost asymmetric tools (e.g., cheap drones vs. expensive interceptors), redefining success in modern warfare beyond traditional conquest.

The ancient historian and general, Thucydides famously observed, “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” For millennia, this grim aphorism has served as the cornerstone of realism in International Relations. The contemporary battlefields of Eastern Europe and the West Asia however, have given a twist to Thucydides’ narrative. The ongoing Russia – Ukraine and Iran – US-Israeli wars are not merely exceptions to what Thucydides observed, but are fundamental refutations of the same. By leveraging several factors, relatively weaker powers have demonstrated that military and economic muscularity are no longer a guarantee of victory in the strategic terms.

The Ukrainian resistance against the Russian invasion serves as the primary case study in this paradigm shift. According to realism, Russia—possessing a military budget nearly ten times that of........

© Eurasia Review