The principles or methods
to win a war must be based on the success in politics, that is to say, military
outcome is determined by the strength of politics. Ancient Chinese strategists
and legalists looked at war from the angle of politics, regarding war as
political in essence and an extension of politics. Efficient governance and
social harmony among the people were the decisive factors of winning a war.
That “the methods of warfare must be based on the success in politics” is
an expression of the same idea as the Prussian military strategist Carl von
Clausewitz (1780-1831) in his On War when he suggested that war was the continuation of politics by another
mean, but the former is 2,000 years earlier than the latter.
This term means court calculation on major military and state affairs. The imperial court here refers to the place for officials to deliberate on affairs of state in ancient China. The purpose of calculation prior to war was to work out a strategy based on the state’s strengths and weaknesses. Sunzi’s view was that war was not merely a contest on the battlefield, but was also influenced by political, economic and other factors. Court calculation thus had to take into account different war scenarios and review a full range of circumstances in the state. Court calculation was a necessary preparation for war.
This saying comes from Sunzi, the well-known military strategist, who said that the best military strategy is “to defeat the enemy without going to war.” He listed two ways for achieving this: ( 1 ) the use of stratagems to foil the enemy’s plans; ( 2 ) the use of diplomacy to totally isolate the enemy. The opponent is thus forced into a hopeless situation and compelled to submit. This is an over-arching vision of military strategy that combines politics, force, and diplomacy, and has been the ideal of generations of successful commanders. This thinking is prevalent up to the present day in international relations, “business wars,” and other areas. At its heart is the dictum “build yourself and form alliances.”
The one who is benevolent is invincible. The benevolent refers to a ruler who has the virtue of benevolence or to a state with benevolent rule. In terms of political affairs, benevolence manifests itself as benevolent governance based on love and care for the people, use of penalties with restraint, lighter taxes, and benefiting the people to the greatest extent possible. In this way, the ruler will gain the support of the people and achieve unshakeable unity of will among his subjects and himself, so that the state will be invincible. The underlying principle is that a state’s source of strength lies in winning the hearts and minds of its people; if only the people are cared for, will the state be able to draw strength from this source.
Governance of a state should be guided by virtue. Confucius (551-479 BC) expounded this philosophy – which his followers in later eras promoted – on the basis of the approach advocated by the rulers in the Western Zhou Dynasty that prized high moral values and the virtue of being cautious in meting out punishment. Governance based on virtue stands in contrast to rule by use of harsh punishment as a deterrent. It does not, however, exclude the use of punishment, but rather highlights the decisive role of virtue in governance, and regards moral edification both as the fundamental principle and the essential means for achieving good governance.
This refers to efficient governance and harmonious people. Efficient governance means that the policies and decrees of the government are followed in all respects, and political affairs are handled in a smooth and effective way. The term “harmonious people” means that people are happy about their affairs, and commoners and officials are united and of one mind. It is close in meaning to the concept of “stable country and peaceful people.” However, this term puts more emphasis on the role of human agency, and the reciprocal relation between efficient governance and harmonious people.