Six Timeless Lessons from Sun Tzu on the Art of War

25 years ago I created a marketing plan for a new product rollout in which I borrowed practical wisdom from Sun Tzu's The Art of War. It was fun, creative and (best of all) successful. 

This week I've been revisiting the book for the first time in a while. This time around I've been noticing something. So much of the advice Sun Tzu gives has been utterly ignored in so many of the conflicts that have taken place during my lifetime.

Here are a handful of statements from Sun Tzu's masterwork, with examples of how they were carried out or disregarded. My comments are in blue.

"Victory is the main object in war. If this is long delayed, weapons are blunted and morale depressed."
The Vietnam War illustrates this vividly. Not only was morale depressed amongst the troops, the entire country seemed to become weary with these years of conflict. The Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan suffered a similar fate, a lesson the U.S. evidently failed to pay attention to as we proceeded to later make the same mistake there.

"Generally in war the best policy is to take a state intact; to ruin it is inferior to this."
Apparently Vladimir Putin missed this passage in Sun Tzu's manual. Our carpet bombing of North Vietnam likewise reveals our own generals' ignorance in these matters. 

"To win one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill."
If you were to study the career of Napoleon Bonaparte, you'd see how much of Sun Tzu's wisdom Napoleon took to heart. He once said, "Read and meditate upon the wars of the great captains. This is the only means of learning the art of war." This passage can be illustrated in several of Napoleon's remarkable victories, battles that were won without ever firing a shot.

"Treat your captives well and care for them."
Our shameful behavior at Abu Grahib illustrates once more how far we've veered from being moral leaders of the free world, though this hardly compares to many past regimes in history. Genghis Khan's brutality in the 13th century was legendary. The Spanish Conquistadors route of the Aztec and Inca empires was likewise cruel and brutal.

"He whose generals are able and not interfered with by the sovereign will be  victorious."
The Granada invasion is a perfect example of this principle, or rather, what happens when this principle is violated. Norman Schwarzkopf, in his memoir, describes the rapid success their surprise invasion achieved with no loss of a single American life. Unfortunately, there was a phone call from the White House requesting that the troops check on the students at a university in another part of the island. The unplanned additional mission led to a helicopter collision that took the lives of 24 GIs. When Schwarzkopf was asked to take the lead in Desert Storm, he replied, "Yes, under one condition." That condition was that he would be in charge and there would be no phone calls from the White House asking for favors or telling him what to do. Lesson learned.

"There are occasions when the commands of the sovereign need not be obeyed."

It was General Grant who masterminded the Vicksburg Campaign that broke the back of the Confederacy during the Civil War. After crossing the Mississippi below Vicksburg, he broke his army off from Union supply lines and led a zigzag encirclement of the city from behind. His commanding officer, General Halleck, had sent orders to Grant to turn back, but it took 30 days to find Grant because his army was forraging while fighting a number of other battles to get in position for a siege. When Grant saw Halleck's orders, he sent back a reply: "If you knew where we were and what was happening here, you would not have sent these orders." Halleck's orders were not obeyed, which made Halleck furious. If I remember correctly, Halleck tried to court-martial Grant, but President Lincoln would have none of it. Rather, Lincoln was thrilled to find a general who was bold and would do whatever it took to get the job done, selecting Grant to head the Union armies and press the war to its conclusion.

* * *  

In a Crisis, It's All About Spin Control

After cutting his teeth as a journalist in Chicago, Seymour Hersh moved to Washington to cover the big game. To his surprise, the hard-working Hersh was shocked at the somewhat lazy journalism taking place in D.C. The Pentagon would have press briefings about what was going on in Viet Nam, and the journalists seemed to swallow it all without any serious questioning, turning it into tomorrow's news. 

Now throughout this time, the Pentagon was spinning. And the press went along with it. Hersh didn't, but even when he uncovered explosive stories, the editors at the Associated Press would water them down. 

Frustrated, he broke free and wrote independently, focused primarily on the war. When he learned of a story about an incident in My Lai that the Pentagon was burying, he used his bloodhound instincts to track down Lt. Calley, who was hidden away at the time. When the news broke, it not only shocked Americans but it also  alerted other journalists to stop sleeping. There were stories to be told that the American people needed to hear. The My Lai Massacre story earned Hersh a Pulitzer Prize in 1970.

* * * 

While going through some old files this week I came across a lengthy 1993 article from CFO magazine titled Spin Control. The article is primarily written for C-suite executives to improve the way they work with the media during a crisis. 

The author, Anne Monroe, interviewed three industry veterans with regard to the "fine art of communicating bad news." Although CEOs are certainly on the firing line in a crisis, it's CFOs who interface with the financial community who must sell the spin on Wall Street. 

The article proceeds to tell a tale of three companies that faced different issues and how they handled them. Tim Metz, who had experience on both sides of the desk, stated that "you have only two things to sell: your competence in framing an effective message and your integrity. In all, you must make sure you remain firmly rooted in the facts."

* * * 

What happens when there are no facts, only perceptions? This seems to be the current status of life within the Beltway. You can hardly turn around without running into another crisis. 

The article closes with a series of statements regarding how crises are mismanaged. 

HOW TO MISMANAGE A CRISIS

1. Ignore or deny the problem.
(Isn't this what's happening at the border right now?)

2. Compartmentalize
(Another form of denial in which the blame is laid elsewhere. "Not my fault.")

3. Lie, or Tell Misleading Half-Truths
(Lying is unacceptable, but maybe we can downplay the problem by revealing only part of what's really happening or its consequences.)

4. Dribble Out Bad News
(One way to ensure that the story continues instead of making a clean breast of things so you can move on.)

5. Assign Blame
(That's the name of the game in D.C., isn't it?) 

6. Panic and Paralysis
("Looks like we'll have to order a few more pizzas. It's gonna be a late one.")

7. Overreact
(It happens. "We have to take action!" 
"Yes, sir, but we don't have the facts."
"Who cares about facts? It's time for action. I have to look like I've got things under control."

* * * 

This week was President Biden's first summit with international leaders. The spin doctors were busy scripting long before the events of this week began. What really happened is hard to say. If you read a cross-section of media outlets you'll find find every shade of spin. Perceptions are quite malleable. Here's some commentary extracted from the Twitterverse.

Biden comes out stronger from this summit. Look how much smaller Putin seems today than in Helsinki in 2018.

The big summit. Biden shows up with cue cards. Putin shows up with brains.

Did Biden make us proud or what! So much stronger & smarter than the last guy!

Biden is dominating Putin in this summit, and both men know it.

Pres. Biden declared the summit a success at his solo press conference, saying "I did what I came to do."

Biden blew the summit as soon as he sat down

Schiff: The Biden-Putin summit "marked a new turn in America’s relationship with Russia – one defined by a strong and forceful rejection of Putin's authoritarianism, adherence to our values, support for human rights around the world, and the advancement of American interests."

NY Post: Biden bumbles and Putin preens at summit.

Who knows? It was an event, and the really important things that came out of this may not be known for 20 years. 

Meantime, life goes on....

Related Link
He Who Controls the Narrative Controls the People