The Art of War

[Patrick Waterson]

This thread is intended for general military wisdom and discussion thereof, and will be spiced by sprinkling in a few of Sun Tzu's precepts and sayings.

First utterance from the self-professed master:

"Generally in battle use the normal force to engage and use the extraordinary to win."

This seems to be standard procedure for most pre-Roman armies, in that the run-of-the-mill troops (usually infantry) who made up 75-90% of the army would advance to occupy the enemy's attention and the best troops would be held back to crash through a weak point, wrap one or both flanks or otherwise be committed at the decisive point to decide the action - hopefully in one's favour.

Most armies have recognisable 'battlewinners', or what S-T calls 'extraordinary forces': the types a wargamer usually seeks to maximise when picking his army.  These are usually chariots, cataphracts, elephants and/or crack infantry (Egyptian guards and Sherden, Assyrian quradu, Persian Immortals, Macedonian Argyraspides, etc.)  Funnily enough, he reckons these battlewinners win battles.  So, it appears, did most ancient and classical generals of any note.

However, Sun Tzu never met Romans (he flourished around 500 BC so even if he had made the journey of over 10,000 li he would not have seen much anyway, as they had only been republican for 9 years or so).  Reading Roman literature, one gets the initial impression that they were such clever and courageous chaps that the ordinary legion sufficed to deliver victory in combat.  A closer inspection is less definite, as a number of Roman victories in the pre-Pyrrhus era are achieved by cavalry, and the fight against the Latins detailed in Livy VIII.8-10 is won by triarii.  However the general pattern seems to be that the Romans usually relied on their normal forces to win the victory.  Paradoxically, they did have 'extraordinary forces', and even called them 'extraordinarii', but not a single battle has success ascribed to the extraordinarii.

Sun Tzu has a very deterministic attitude to war, as in our next quote.

"Therefore the skilful commander takes up a position in which he cannot be defeated and misses no opportunity to overcome his enemy.  Thus, an army that will be victorious always seeks battle after his plans indicate that victory is possible under them, whereas an army destined to defeat fights in the hope of winning but without any planning."

In other words, do not fight fair: fight at an advantage, and with a viable plan.

He also has something to say about the nature of a battle.

"In the tumult and uproar, the battle seems chaotic, but there must be no disorder in one's own troops.  The battlefield may seem in confusion and chaos, but one's array must be in good order.  That will be proof against defeat."

Order triumphs over chaos.  Indeed, without good discipline and firm adherence to (sensible) orders, one's army will tend to be sucked into the maelstrom.  With clear (and sensible) orders and good discipline, it will hold - and master any less cohesive and purposeful force, or in the worst case be able to cut itself clear.

Note, incidentally, how little scope Sun Tzu leaves to chance.  For him, mastery is everything.  One final quote.

"In order to ascertain the results of a war, appraise it in terms of the five fundamental factors" [Sun Tzu was fond of fives] "and make comparisons of the different conditions of the opposing sides.  The first of these factors is politics; the second weather; the third terrain; the fourth the commander and the fifth doctrine."

These he explains as:

"Politics means the thing which causes the people to be in harmony with their ruler so that they will follow him in disregard of their lives and without fear of any danger."

Or not, as the case may be.  The point is that a keen population - one that believes in the war and in its leader - is harder to beat.

"Weather signifies night and day, cold and heat, fine days and rain, and change of seasons."

Time of day presumably goes in to avoid needing a separate heading.

"Terrain means distances, and refers to whether the ground is traversed with ease or difficulty and to whether it is open or constricted and influences your chances of life or death."

Fighting with a river at your back considerably influences these chances if you lose.

"The commander stands for the general's qualities of wisdom, sincerity, benevolence, courage and strictness."

This is an interesting list, because elsewhere he states that "war is based on deception".  The general's 'sincerity' means that he does not delude himself.

"Doctrine is to be understood as the organisation of the army, the gradations of rank among the officers, the regulation of supply routes, and the provision of military materials to the army."

Note how supply and equipment form a unitary whole with organisation and officering.  Tactics, interestingly, do not merit a mention.

And as a postscript, just to emphasise how deterministically Sun Tzu views warfare:

"It is according to the situations that plans are laid for victory, but the multitude does not comprehend this.  Although everyone can see the outward aspects, none understands how the victory is achieved."

Perhaps we can.

Patrick

[Patrick Waterson]

"A speedy victory is the main object of war."  Sun Tzu in fact states that the acme of skill is to subdue the opponent without a battle, but pragmatically devotes most of his work to subduing the enemy in battle.

If possible, he writes, the war should take place on enemy territory so that friendly forces can supply themselves there.  Because of lines of communication ('distant transportation'), he states:

"Hence a wise general sees to it that his troops feed on the enemy [sic], for one zhong of the enemy's provisions is equivalent to twenty of one's own and one shi of the enemy's fodder to twenty shi of one's own."

He is also a great believer in capture rather than destruction of enemy forces (given that all involved were Chinese, this was perhaps more feasible than when different nationalities or cultures are opposed to each other).  However he is quite prepared to countenance destruction, and even has a rule of thumb for how to do so, depending upon the relationship of forces.

"When ten to the enemy's one, surround him.  When five times his strength, attack him.  If equally matched, you may engage him with some good plan.  If weaker numerically, be capable of withdrawing."

He also provides five rules of thumb for predicting victory:

1) He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot [i.e. should not] will be victorious.

2) He who understands how to fight in accordance with the strength of antagonistic forces will be victorious.

Essentially, know your opponent's 'army list' and good and bad points, and your own, and plan around this.

3) He whose ranks are united in purpose will be victorious.

4) He who is well prepared and lies in wait for an enemy who is not well prepared will be victorious.

Hannibal would agree there.

5) He whose generals are able and not interfered with by the sovereign will be victorious.

Chinese armies were rarely commanded by the sovereign in person, but judging by other comments made by Sun Tzu this did not stop them trying to interfere with the conduct of campaigns.

[Patrick Waterson]

With his emphasis on knowing your enemy (and for that matter your own army), Sun Tzu believes he can predict the outcome of a war or campaign.  He has a checklist which he says must be 'appraised with the utmost care', i.e. no guesses or approximations:

1. Which ruler is wiser and more able?

2. Which commander is more talented?

3. Which army obtains the advantages of nature and the terrain?

4. In which army are regulations and instructions better carried out?

5. Which troops are stronger?

6. Which army has the better-trained officers and men?

7. Which army administers rewards and punishments in a more enlightened way?

He concludes:
"By means of these seven elements I shall be able to forecast which side will be victorious and which will be defeated."