As part of the series of historical reviews, Haim Mazar takes us to a Chinese sage from 2,500 years ago, whose writings are still relevant today
introduction
Sun Tzu's book "The Wisdom of War" written 2500 years ago, is the first book in written history dedicated to the nature of the conduct of war. The author's approach is not value-oriented. He does not discuss the questions of whether war is a good thing or a bad thing and whether it is just or unjust, and he does not deal with the behavior of the lone soldier on the battlefield. Implicitly, the war is seen as something given. The nature of the book can be learned from its opening sentence: "The wisdom of war is of vital importance to the state" (p. 17). That is, the way the war is conducted is the important thing. It is the wise use of the military forces that will determine whether the war will be successful or not and in quite a few cases will determine the fate of the country. From a contemporary point of view, Sun Tzu's basic approach is classical realpolitik. Another conclusion implied by these words is that the war is not an isolated phenomenon, but is related to the whole of what is happening in the country that sends its army to fight. Although Sun Tzu's reference to the state itself is limited, a careful analysis of the few sentences that deal with it can shed light on various aspects of Sun Tzu's conception of the state.
Public Opinion
Says Sun Tzu: "The moral law causes the people to be in complete agreement with their ruler, in such a way that they follow him without sparing their lives, and without being deterred by any danger in the world" (p. 17). Sun Tzu is not a democrat and in his day the concept of democracy was foreign to the social political world view and the cultural being of China. And yet he understands that it is important to know what the public thinks. Going to war may also cause damage to the country and sometimes will also spell its fate, therefore it is important for a ruler to gain the legitimacy of the public. He has to give a good reason why it is essential to go to war, and why the soldiers will be willing to risk their lives. If not, they will indeed go to war, because the ruler's order requires them to do so, but they will not be motivated and there are chances that the army will be defeated. The ruler must therefore have an information mechanism that will bring his word to the public.
Against the background of these things it is possible to understand what Sun Tzu says near the end of the book. "No ruler would send soldiers to war just to appease his anger. No general should go into battle out of anger alone... Therefore, the enlightened ruler will be moderate and the good general will be cautious. This is the way to preserve the safety of the country and the safety of the public" (p. 75). The ruler must completely separate his personal feelings and needs from the needs of the state. Going to war is not a matter of whims and one should not go to war just because he feels that another ruler has caused him personal harm or insulted him. The same goes for the commander of the military forces. Both are supposed to be reasonable people and should check their moves very carefully. Although Sun Tzu is a man of realpolitik, one can distinguish here the humanistic side of his thinking. No war is worthy if, due to the ruler's personal feelings, soldiers go to war and do not return alive. In Sun Tzu is looking for the figure of the heroic ruler or commander. Although it is possible to lose a war and damages will be caused to both the country and the army, but the same consideration is the minimum thing that the ruler must do before going to the battlefield. Sun Tzu is independent in his attitude towards the ruler as such. The desired ruler for him is the wise ruler.
military and economy
Establishing an army and maintaining it require heavy logistical assessments and appropriate allocation of resources. "In war operations, when there are on the field a thousand fast vehicles, a heavy vehicle, and a hundred thousand soldiers wearing armor, and with them an army of 21 li, the rate of expenses in the country inside and on the front, including hospitality, trifles such as glue and paint, and amounts spent on the vehicle and armor, will reach the total All of a thousand ounces of silver per day. This is the price of establishing an army of one hundred thousand men" (p. 22). During a war the state does not stop functioning and the essential expenses for the army are divided between those used on the battlefield and those used on the home front. Within the complex of current activities in the country there are activities that also contribute to the battlefield. Glue and paint, for example, can be used for both civilian and military purposes. From this the conclusion is required that there must be an intelligent allocation of resources that will not harm civilian life and at the same time the fighting ability of the army will not be impaired. This allocation of resources must be based on economic policy including cost calculations. It is this policy that will determine the duration of the war. "If the war campaign is protracted, then the state's treasures will not be in them to finance the effort... We have not found a single country that benefited from a protracted war" (p. 24). (As a framed article, this statement can be seen as an allusion to comparative studies between countries done at least by Sun Tzu). The economic constraint according to Sun Tzu's method obliges the ruler not to prolong the war, otherwise the reward of the victory will be his loss. The country cannot withstand the economic burden due to war. A situation may certainly arise in which the ruler will win military victories, but the economic price he will collect for this will be so high that the country will be irreversibly damaged. Against the background of these words, it is possible to understand his words that "in war, therefore, victory is what you want and not a number of long campaigns" (p. XNUMX). This is actually a reference to the army commanders. These, by virtue of their role and more due to the desire to justify their activity as those who operate the military system, may strive for prolonged wars and present themselves as heroic figures and use this as political capital. The ruler must know how to stop them ahead of time. In his face, only the good of the state should stand and not the personal good of the military personnel.
Referring to the masses of the people during wartime, Sun Tzu states "and since the peasants are impoverished, they will suffer under the weight of the burden of lawsuits, because their status is destroyed and their power is weakened, the houses of the people will be emptied and three tenths of their income will be wasted" (p. 28). The masses of the people will not agree to continue living under such a heavy burden and they will lose their energy. The ruler may lose all the support he won on the eve of going to war. They will not be in complete agreement with their ruler and his soldiers will not be ready to sacrifice their lives. Although Sun Tzu recommends taking advantage of the enemy's property falling into the hands of the fighting forces, this loot is not infinite either. In any case, it is better that the war be as short as possible. The duration of the war and the expenses involved in it must be planned on the basis of cost/benefit, the basic assumption bubbling under the surface, in Sun Tzu, is that the ruler in his activity in general and in his military activity in particular, must be a rational person. Going to war not at any cost.
The interrelationship between the ruler and the ruler
Two of the key phrases in Sun Tzu's book are: "In war, the commander surrenders, to the king's command" (p. 43), "In war, the commander surrenders to the king's command, mobilizes his army and concentrates his forces" (p. 48). Although the commander is responsible for preparing the army for war, he does not determine when to go to war and against whom. The commander is responsible for the operative side, but he does not determine the goals of the war. This is determined only by the king. The second quote is an extension of the first quote and it precisely defines what the army commander is actually responsible for. There is a complete separation between the government and the army. The commander-in-chief of the army, including the commander of the military forces, is a civilian.
One of the criteria that can determine the fate of the war is the question presented by Sun Tzu: "Who will win - who has the military ability and the king does not interfere in his actions" (p. 28). Since the war broke out, the king has not interfered in the commander's actions. The commander is sovereign for his actions on the battlefield. The king should give Sambiya complete independence regarding the conduct of the war both as regards tactical moves and as regards strategic moves, what is important is the victory. The ruler must have complete trust in the ruler.
But in the same breath as these words, Sun Tzu says "There are roads that should not be followed, there are armies that should not be besieged, there are cities that should not be besieged, there are positions that should not be fought over, and there are orders of the king that should not be obeyed" (p. 48). These are things that contradict the categorical statement that "in war, the commander disobeys the king's order", and the question that can be asked is why? This contradiction can be reconciled based on what we saw earlier, because one goes to war only when one is sure that victory is within reach and that the duration of the war should be as short as possible. A prolonged war will end up burdening the country's economy and the reward of victory will ultimately be in its loss. Since in ancient times battles were sometimes fought far from the house, the one who saw to it that things were safe was the commander. It was impossible to convey real-time information to the ruler about what was happening. When the commander sees that the war is becoming more and more protracted, he must stop the war or not fight in the first place, if according to his assessment of the situation there will be no victory, or the army will be defeated. The obvious conclusion is that the best interests of the state and not the best interests of the king must be at the top of the commander's mind.
Confirmation of these things is in situations where "if it is acceptable to you (the commander) that a war will lead to victory, you must fight, even if the ruler forbids you to do so, if it is acceptable to you that a war will not result in victory, you are not allowed to fight even if the ruler ordered it for you" (p. 60 ). The second part of the quote is actually an explanation of the cases in which it is forbidden to fight. But what about the first part of the quote? Why fight when the ruler determines that there are no fighters? A possible answer to this is in advance intelligence information that gives the commander a full perspective as to the more likely possibility that victory will be achieved in the war and as Sun Tzu puts it: "The natural configuration of the land is the best of a military man's allies. However, the ability to stand up to the nature of the opponent, to maintain in your hand the control of the forces that bring about victory, to see with an open eye difficulties, dangers and distances, this is how a great soldier will be tested. He who knows these things, and in war upholds his knowledge in action, will win his battles. He who does not know and does not observe them, is guaranteed to be deceived" (p. 60). From this set of things, it can be seen that this conflict between the ruler and the commander occurs when they do not see eye to eye on the battlefield and this can be due to various reasons that Sun Tzu does not specify. We stood for one reason earlier, when we diagnosed a situation in which a war takes place far from home. Another possible reason is when the ruler shows signs of hesitation or lack of self-confidence. Whatever the situation may be, the good of the country must always stand before the commander's eyes. In such situations there is a danger that the commander will take the place of the ruler and carry out a military coup. Sun Tzu does not stand for this danger.
foreign policy
As for relations with other countries, Sun Tzu refers to only one type of relationship and that is alliances and about this he says: "We are not allowed to make alliances until we have stood up to the intentions of our neighbors" (p. 45) and much later he insists on this again although with a slight change "We cannot enter into an alliance with neighboring princes until we stand up to their intentions" (pp. 69-70). Sun Tzu speaks exclusively of neighbors, that is, of countries bordering China. It does not refer to more distant countries. The reason for this is the desire to maintain the country's borders, safe and quiet borders, to prevent invasions into it by the neighboring countries. When going to sign alliances with these countries, it should be done on the basis of their intentions only. Sun Tzu does not refer at all to the military capabilities of these countries, but to their intentions - their political and military goals. And these can be both overt and covert. Tracking these intentions can only be done through good intelligence, whose virtues Sun Tzu mentions at the end of his book (pp. 76-80). When it is deemed appropriate to sign an alliance, it must be done in one way only: "Peace proposals that do not require an oath, a sign of a conspiracy" (p. 54). The covenant should be made in a formal and binding manner when it is accompanied by a ritual of normative commitment. If it is not done in this way, the potential covenant member will see himself as exempt, as long as he deems it appropriate to break the covenant. Sun Tzu is interested in a permanent alliance.
The signing of the covenants should be done wisely. "A warrior prince who will attack a strong country, the talent of the commander is evident in his prevention of the concentration of the enemy's forces. He terrorizes his servants, and his allies refrain from uniting against him. Therefore he does not aspire to make an alliance with different people. Nor does he cultivate the power of other countries. He carries out his own secret plans, when they were afraid of his opponents" (pp. 70-71). The prince should be strong enough to deter other countries from joining an alliance with the enemy. Through his power of deterrence he prevents the formation of coalitions against him. Since he decided to establish an alliance with other countries, he does not train their armies and this is for the reason that any help he gives to these countries could reveal his intentions. Not knowing is used by him as a deterrent, always to maintain the element of surprise. It also seems that there is another psychological factor here, not to create a feeling in the partner of the alliance that the latter will feel obligated towards him for reasons unrelated to the alliance itself. He is not interested in creating a thicket of additional future obligations among the potential allies. Such obligations may create a reluctance among the members of these alliances to enter into these alliances. Sun Tzu tells the prince to accept your allies as they are.
Summary
In his book "The Wisdom of War" Son Tso cultivates a systematic sub-field in the field of political science. All there is is a number of theorems that are at the point of interface between political science and the theory of warfare. From the analysis of these few sentences it can be seen that it touches a number of distinct areas of political science and they are public opinion, economy and military, military government relations and foreign policy. The picture that emerges of Sun Tzu is that of a pragmatist thinker. He does not desire a battle, but must be prepared for war, if the good of the country requires it. His approach is free of ideological markers. Sun Tzu is the classic realpolitik man and at the same time a humanist in nature.
מקור
Sun Tzu - The Wisdom of War, Systems Publishing, 1998.
2 תגובות