Lions and hyenas are recognized as the first and second brothers in the African savannah, and usually the lion's individual combat ability is much greater than that of the hyena, and the cooperative combat effectiveness of the lion group is far greater than that of the hyena group. The two were organized and large-scale battles, and most of the lions eventually won, but the fact was that the lions and hyenas coexisted in a balanced state. Why don't lions launch a complete war of annihilation for their own survival?
Carnivores are often born with lethal weapons, such as sharp fangs and melon seeds. But they are more aggressive than many "harmless" vegetarian animals, and will pay attention to reducing the damage caused in the fight between their companions, avoiding the influence of subsequent predatory activities. On the contrary, herbivores that fight in the limited space will not be so civilized, and blood is inevitable. Why is that? This mainly depends on what the purpose of the war is, whether to save itself or to destroy the enemy.
"On Protracted War" has long been devoted to this question, "To preserve oneself is to destroy the enemy, and to destroy the enemy is to preserve oneself." Returning to the above question, why carnivores are more restrained from aggression than herbivores. Carnivores mainly rely on hunting, and once injured affect hunting, it may directly cause their own death and even the demise of the population. Therefore, don't say that it is a hyena, it is a "flat-headed brother" with a bad temper, and the lion does not dare to provoke it at will!
So, putting aside the human influence, what will be the outcome of the war between lions and hyenas, and will one side disappear from the African savannah?
The Thucydides Trap has been almost regarded as an iron law of international relations. The Thucydides Trap theory stems from the view of thucydides, a prominent Greek historian, who argued that when a rising power competed with an established ruling hegemon, both sides faced dangers – just as the Greeks faced in the 5th century BC and the Germans in the late 19th century BC. Most of these challenges end in war. In the 5th century BC, the dramatic rise of Athens' achievements shocked the land powerhouse Sparta. Threats and counter-threats between the two sides sparked competition, and both countries were destroyed after the end of the 30-year war. He concluded that "what made the war inevitable was the growing power of Athens and the fear it caused in Sparta".
The "Thucydides Trap" translates into contemporary language: a newly rising power must challenge the existing great powers, and the existing powers must respond to this threat, so that war becomes inevitable. It has been found that since 1500, there have been 15 cases of a rising power challenging an existing power, including 11 cases of war. What do you think about the question, the rise of great powers, can the Thucydides Trap be avoided?