A term paper on Strategic Studies The Relevance of Sun Tzu in War on Terror

Submitted to:

Md. Abdul Mannan. Course Teacher, Strategic Studies(301). Assistant Professor. Dept. of International Relations. University of Dhaka.

Submitted by:

Md. Ali Siddiquee Course: Strategic Studies(301). Roll No. SM-113. 3rd Year; 2nd Batch 5th Semester. Session: 2007-08 Dept. of International Relations. University Of Dhaka.

The Relevance of Sun Tzu in War on Terror

Contents: 1. Preamble: The core philosophy of Sun Tzu. 2. The relevance of Sun Tzu in War on Terror. 2.1. Laying Plans. 2.2. The role of deception. 2.3. Protracted war. 2.4. Non-Military ways to win war. 2.4. A. Diplomatic. 2.4. B. Economic. 2.4. C. Psychological. 2.5. The role of intelligence: know yourself- know your enemy. 3. Termination: the need for indirect approach.

1. Preamble: The core philosophy of Sun Tzu.

The contribution of Sun Tzu is totally different from other western strategic thinkers. His philosophical work is associated with indirect approach. His The Art of War is the oldest military treatise in the history of strategic thinking of the world & China as well. Its the oldest text of military strategy. Because of excellence his work is still relevant. This paper will identify the fronts, on which the philosophy of Sun Tzu fits well with an example of important & ongoing war- US declared war on terror. The classic is comprised of twelve chapters, among which the following sections are important, on which the example-war on terror will be illustrated:

1. Laying plans. 2. The role of deception. 3. Protracted war. 4. Non-Military ways to win wars. 5. The role of intelligence.

2. The relevance of Sun Tzu in War on Terror

The September 11, 2001 attacks against the United States launched a war on terror that aimed to end radical Islam & terrorist organizations. It is now nearly a decade after the declaration of war. The war on terror is failing; it is no longer identifiable, the issues and targets are blurred and newer complications enmeshing social discourse with political and military agendas continue to deplete resources that far exceed monetary cost. Sun Tzus strategic thinking would provide the ways why the war flawed & also would draw its relevance itself in twenty first century.

2.1. Laying Plans.

Sun Tzu emphasized the art of war is of vital importance to the state. The art of war is governed by five constant factors as following: 1. The Moral Law. 2. Heaven. 3. Earth. 4. The Commander. 5. Method & Discipline. The Moral Law causes the people to follow their ruler regardless of their lives, undismayed by any danger. Heaven signifies night & day, cold & heat, times & seasons. Earth comprises distances, great & small; danger & security; open ground & narrow passes; the chance of life & death. The commander stands for the virtues of wisdom, sincerely, benevolence, courage & strictness. Marshalling of the army & its subdivisions, graduations of the rank, maintenance of supply, roads & control of military expenditure are being understood by Method & Discipline. These five keys would lead a general to victory.1 The war on terror was primarily directed to oust Taliban regime & Bin Laden in Afghanistan, the brainchild of USA & remove tyrannical Baathist regime with Saddam from Iraq, the former enemy. USA suspected there was a linkage between Al Qaeda & Saddam. However, these pseudo-objectives were able to manipulate the public opinion of the US & allies after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. The soldiers also followed their rulers who masterminded war on terror.2 Heaven & Earth comprised no problems as the initiators were experienced from Gulf War I & the modern technologies would overcome these complexities. Its proved that, the Commanders who masterminded the war & responsible for the Method & Disciplinereferring the overall manipulation of the joint forces, were informed about the plans of invasion in Afghanistan & Iraq prior to 9/11 attacks. But these issues became defective at present.

Lionel Giles, Sun Tzu on the Art of War in The Project Gutenberg Etext, Etext no. 132, year. May, 1994, pp. 1-2, available at. http://all.net/books/tzu/tzu.html, accessed on June 6, 2010. 2 Shireen Qudosi, HOW TO WIN WAR ON TERROR , available at http://www.scribd.com/doc/21582094/War-onTerror, accessed on June 6, 2010.

Although US led forces captured Afghanistan but Laden was still out of reach. The coalition force was successful to remove Saddam & Baathist regime from power but the aim of spreading democracy over there remained utopia as we see post war situation are more unstable & threatening to US & allies.3 Everydays casualties decreased the moral power of the soldiers to kill indiscriminately innocent civilians over there. The public opinion for sending more troops & continuing war is near zero. The modern technologies are failing to decrease casualties in Iraq & Afghanistan. High casualties of civilians made the war unpopular. The flaws of the objectives of wars are revealed, that is not the terrorists but oil of Iraq & footstep to the pivotal Afghanistan to control Central Asian resources.4 The perpetrators are widely criticized in media & received hatred from the people of the world. In this front the war on terror is failed.

2.2. The role of deception.

Sun Tzu suggested all warfare is based on deception. When one is able to attack, must seem unable; when using force, must seem inactive; when one is near, must make the enemy believe he is far away; when far away, he must make the enemy believe he is near. If enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is superior strength, evade him. Sun Tzu suggested distracting enemy. If opponent is of choleric temper, seek to irritate him to tempt to grow arrogant. Give enemy no rest if he is at ease. If enemy force is united, separate them. Attack him where hes unprepared, appear where you are not expected.5 The war on terror is based on deception from both sides of belligerents. Thirsts for oil in Iraq & future domination over the resources of Central Asia were hidden objectives of Bush Administration. Taking over former ally, the pivotal Afghanistan would be fruitful to this aim. The war on terror is nothing but propaganda war against the Muslims; this is revealed through their own documents. The US led coalition force, from the very beginning taking deception as their strategy for securing interests in Middle East & Asia. Bush tried to spread propaganda that there a formal tie exists between Saddam & Al-Qaeda, & Saddam is trying to transfer WMDs to the terrorists. Therefore, Bush sought to attack junction, Afghanistan with Iraq, to separate united Al-Qaeda, grew giant in Afghanistan. They tried to wipe out Talibans & Al-Qaeda totally, but failed & there was a re-insurgency within the region.
3

Available at http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=20726&Cr=Iraq&Cr1=, accessed on June 6, 2010. Michel Chossudovsky, Americas War on Terrorism (Qubec: Center for Research on Globalization, 2005), pp. 63-79. 5 Lionel Giles, op. cit, p.3.
4

But, in real battlefield, the so called insurgents in Iraq & Talibans in Afghanistan practically adapted the strategies of Sun Tzu in this front. Insurgents use guerrilla tactics including: mortars, missiles, suicide attacks, snipers, improvised explosive devices (IEDs), car bombs, small arms fire (usually with assault rifles), and RPGs (rocket propelled grenades), as well as sabotage against the petroleum, water, and electrical infrastructure. The US led coalition force in Iraq is facing swarming attacks from the fighters of former Fedayeen & Baath Party Loyalists6 as well as from Mahdi Army, Islamic Army of Iraq, Ansar al-Sunnah & other Resistance Forces7. The Talibans & members of Al-Qaeda were driven from Afghanistan, but they reconstituted themselves in Federally Administered Tribal Areas in Pakistan & worldwide in a more strong manner & developed more effective transnational networks.8 They adopted more dangerous methods to panic the invaders. Now a day the coalition force is facing guerilla attacks even in their most secured armory. In all aspects of the war on terror, both in Afghanistan & Iraq, the US led coalition force weakened & became captive from the deceptive warfare of the belligerents.

2.3. Protracted war.

There is no instance of a country having benefitted from protracted warfare. In a prolonged warfare mens weapons will grow dull, their ardor will be dumped & strength will be exhausted, all treasures had been spent & resources of the state will not be equal to the strain. Hence, other chieftains will spring up to take the advantage of the extremity & impossible to avert the consequences that must ensue.9 A decade had been passed since the war had declared. Its lengthier than World War II. US had not benefitted from the wars. Major Andrew Torelli said from the very nature of the war on terror, its a prolonged warfare & diverged from strategy of Sun Tzu.10 The moral of the soldiers is very low; the will to fight had been diminished. Governments are reluctant to send more troops, as public opinion & casualties growing. The consequences are shifting against the
6 7

Available at http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030327-fedayeen02.htm, accessed on June 16, 2010. Scott Peterson, "The rise and fall of Ansar al-Islam", available at http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1016/p12s01woiq.html, accessed on June 16, 2010. 8 Ashley J. Tellis, Pakistan and the War on Terror: Conflicted Goals, Compromised Performance in Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, year. 2008, available at http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/tellis_pakistan_final.pdf, accessed on June 22, 2010. 9 Lionel Giles, op. cit, pp.3-4. 10 Andrew Torelli, Sun Tzu s Theory of War, Outcomes of Terrorist Campaigns , available at http://www.sonshi.com/sun-tzu-terrorism.html, accessed on June 16, 2010.

coalition force. The enemies of the coalition force are now attacking them at the very secure points with more destructive effects. The US led coalition force has very few objectives to exploit from the war. The prime objective- Bin Laden, is still out of reach. A few developments had been made to fight terrorism. Terrorism got new dimension from this protracted warfare, & developed more advanced techniques. Retreat with Honor may not be possible for US this time, which made earlier in Vietnam War. President Obama declared full withdrawal from Iraq within the end of 2011.11 For being a protracted warfare US failed to achieve objectives declared prior to the war.

2.4. Non-Military ways to win war.

Generally in war the best policy is to take a state intact. The acme of skill is to subdue enemy without fighting. Supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemys resistance without fighting. A skillful general always sought for non military ways to win war. He always attacks enemys plan, prevents the junction of the enemy forces, spreads dissension in enemy camp by employing spies, destroy alliance of enemy forces. The last option is to attack enemys army if all nonmilitary ways seemed failed.12 US had primarily taken the military ways to fight terrorism rather than non-military ways. In fighting non-militarily ways, as identified by Torelli, USA tried diplomatic, psychological, economic & intelligent solutions.13 Whatever steps had been taken by Al-Qaeda against USA seems to increase their power. USA would starve this organization of power to the point at which its too weak to do anything against US.

2.4. A. Diplomatic
Sun Tzu suggested interference of enemy coalition to deny them of outer support that leads to the abandonment of the war plan, or better separate the enemy to rapid defeat. Diplomatic & political methods had been applied to combat terrorism. Ambassador J. Coffer Black, coordinator of counter terrorism had said- Diplomacy helps us take the war to the terrorists; to cut off the resources they need & depend upon to survive.14 But there is no convergence
Obama s Speech at Camp Lejeune, N.C. available at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/27/us/politics/27obama-text.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1, accessed on June 22, 2010. 12 Lionel Giles, op. cit, pp.5-6. 13 Andrew Torelli, op. cit, p.1. 14 Andrew Torelli, op. cit, p.1.
11

between military & diplomatic method. Andrew Torelli identified the current non-military strategy-USA is relying on host nations to fight terrorism & to deny safe heavens & sponsorship through the changes of political, law enforcement & economic policy.15

2.4. B. Economic
This is the second non-military ways to fight terrorism striving by USA. USA is providing numerous economic assistances to fight terrorism. In 1990s USA froze some of Osamas international accounts. USA also trying to disrupt money laundering & other sources of funding relied by terrorists for their operations.

2.4. C. Psychological
War on terror has a psychological impact over the terrorist organizations & support base as well over the soldiers of coalition force. After the campaign the supreme leaders of Al-Qaeda dispersed away from the safe heaven & spurred with worldwide spread to attack US & its allies interests. Now US led coalition force have a situation that they dont know where to attack & what to defend. This is the cause that made the war protracted & its becoming unpopular & hence few political objectives to exploit.16 This has psychological effects over the soldiers.

2.5. The role of intelligence: know yourself- know your enemy.

This front has direct applicability to combat terrorism. Sun Tzu suggested to know yourself & to know enemy. If you know both enemy & yourself you need not fear the result of hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.17 This is a non-conventional war- against an organization & ideology: Al-Qaeda & Terrorism. This is fought by US led coalition force against non-state actors, on mere speculation over the possession of WMDs by Saddam. The war is aimed to destruct terrorist camps anywhere in the world, having no geographic limit.18 Soon after the campaign the Talibans in Afghanistan & Resistance Force in Iraq dispersed away.

Andrew Torelli, op. cit, p.2. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed, THE WAR ON FREEDOM: How and Why America was Attacked, September 11th, 2001(California: Tree of Life Publications, 2008), pp. 236-279. 17 Lionel Giles, op. cit, p.6. 18 Zbigniew Brzezinski, A Tale of Two Wars: The Right war in Iraq and The Wrong One in Foreign Affairs, vol.88, no.3, May/June 2009, pp.150-152.
16

15

The re-insurgency developed with an aim to destruct US led coalition force for Talibans in Federally Administered Tribal Areas in Pakistan. Now theyre guiding attacks from the middle of nowhere. These proved nothing but that coalition force knows themselves but not their enemies. Therefore for every successful military operation in Iraq & Afghanistan, theyre receiving defeats for other operations.19 The role of intelligence is greater than any other techniques fighting terrorism. The specialists argue that war on terror is the result of intelligence failure guided by whim of the masterminds, & proven as not a single item of WMDs found from Iraq.20 They also suggested the captured terrorists could provide valuable information of the enemy camp. Because of the organizational structure, tactics, techniques & procedures its difficult to achieve decisive victory over the terrorist organizations. Sun Tzu emphasized the use of spies & agents & secret operations are essential in war. Torelli argued that- only through the use of intelligence preparation of the battlespace, indications & warning, targeting, predictive analysis, may the US better understand the terrorist mindset concentrate on the mind of the enemy & gain information superiority.21

3. Termination: the need for indirect approach.

From every strategic angle the US led coalition force is failed to follow the strategies of Sun Tzu: both military & non-military. Perhaps the oppositions strategy is similar like he prescribed. The relevance of Sun Tzu had been testified in every approaches of the coalition force. The urgency of following Sun Tzu had been asked in every moves of the coalition force. Fighting terrorism required better understanding of Sun Tzus strategy. Direct confrontation with terrorists would not be a viable strategy for USA & allies. To win such a non-conventional war, USA & allies must adhere to the non-military ways in greater response than military ways. Military strategy would be the last resort fighting terrorism. Coalition force must have to avoid prolonged warfare & ties with the allies & host nations must have to increase. Hence, Sun Tzu is most appropriate to counter-terrorism in twenty first century.

19

Michel Chossudovsky, op. cit, pp.149-198. Zbigniew Brzezinski, op.cit. 21 Andrew Torelli, op. cit, p.3.
20