How medieval diplomacy rules the Middle East: The ransom doctrine of buying peace

Saudi Arabia’s $1 billion offer to the Houthis -brokered by Tehran- to buy an end to their attacks brings to light a historical analogy: it strongly echoes the tactics of medieval diplomacy, practiced extensively by the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire.

Constantinople, facing continuous raids across its provinces, frequently resorted to paying “subsidies” (tribute or annual grants) to various Slavic tribes and other neighboring peoples to secure a temporary peace.

Historical examples: In the late 6th century, Emperor Maurice was forced to pay enormous sums of money to the Avars and their Sclaveni (Slavic) allies to halt their plundering in Thrace and Macedonia.

Later, in 681 AD, Constantine IV Pogonatos was compelled to accept the payment of an annual tribute to the Bulgars (who had also incorporated Slavic populations) to cease their invasions.

In 896 AD, following his defeat at Boulgarophygon, Leo VI the Wise signed a peace treaty with Simeon, likewise committing to an annual financial subsidy.

When an empire or a powerful state chooses to pay ransom to an aggressor rather than deter them militarily, it is not conducting modern foreign policy, but rather employing a tactic of buying time.

This mindset is not exclusive to the Middle East. The European Union demonstrated a similar medieval logic with its 2016 agreement with Turkey, offering billions of euros to contain migration flows toward Greece and Bulgaria.

In both cases, channeling resources to the entity that threatens and extorts functions as protection money, effectively encouraging future extortion.

Resorting to such medieval and extortionist practices in the Middle East proves that the region remains trapped in a medieval past.

It is light-years away from the principles of the secular democracies of the Western Enlightenment, where sovereignty, international legality, and the rule of law are neither negotiable nor purchasable through ransom.

The continuous slide of the Middle East into cycles of violence, extortion, and predatory tactics brings a fundamental historical lesson back to the fore: this region experienced true stability, peace, and cultural flourishing only when it was under the influence of the Greek rational spirit and Greek governance.

As the course of history demonstrates, the problem is not located exclusively in Islam as a religious system, since similar structures of arbitrariness, tribalism, and barbarism prevailed in the region even before its appearance.

On the contrary, the only period during which local societies were civilized, structured on the basis of civic life, and integrated into an organized institutional framework was during the Alexandrine, Hellenistic, and Eastern Roman centuries.

The absence of rationalism and moderation -the value pillars bequeathed by Greek civilization- leaves room for practices reminiscent of marauding behaviors, where the rule of the strongest and extortion replace diplomacy.

Unless the broader region reconnects with these universal principles of reason and well-ordered governance, the risk of dragging the entire surrounding region into a new, dark Middle Age remains immediate and visible.