A Different Way

It seems as though every country and even person has a different approach to war and tactics. Every individual holds an opinion on what works best for war in terms of succeeding. One man with an unusual perspective on was Sun-Tzu. Sun-Tzu was a Chinese general around 500 B.C.E. His ideas regarding military strategy were different because he also incorporated philosophical thinking, specifically Taoist principles. Taoism promotes a way of life that emphasizes natural being and interpersonal development and relationships – followers support harmony and virtue. At face value, this does not seem to work well with any aspect of war, an event that is disruptive and destructive.

In a situation that is at its very core destructive, Sun-Tzu’s interesting approach on doing the best to maintain harmony and balance seemed counter-intuitive. However, Sun-Tzu looked at war as a means for peace. He refused to “consider war a sport” (Ancient) and instead focused on the nation being in “peace or in peril” (The Art of War, 2.20) as the result of the campaigns. This is especially seen in the beginning of his writings where he describes the preliminary plans for war.

In addition to writing specific ideas for approaching war, Sun-Tzu also covers larger ideas represented in the Taoist philosophies. He mentions yin and yang and the harmony between counteracting forces. Every action should be natural and create balance in the world. Sun-Tzu’s works demonstrate an ability to work in a rather unnatural environment.

The environment at the Naval Academy is definitely unnatural. Since the beginning, midshipmen are taught stoicism, this goes against natural ways where you have to go out of your way to hide emotions. In fact, a military bearing is so important that our emotions are often used against us. The thought behind this emphasis is that the enemy will not be able to read what you are thinking and, as a result, not be able to predict future moves. The strict schedule at the academy also creates an unnatural and negative influence on the midshipmen. These young adults stay up late and wake up early for mandatory workouts or events, which ultimately tire them out and limit cognitive functions.

Sun-Tzu’s main goal in war was to defeat the enemy and end the war, instead of prolonging the activities and the conflict. Society approaches war as a game almost, like battleship. It seems as though news of conflict hit headlines and the public is fascinated. Society feeds off of the conflict and destruction, which is very much against Taoism.

Overall, a mixture of the two perspectives would be most effective. Military leaders should handle war as a means for peace. I agree that stoicism in the face of the enemy is an important factor in success because the enemy should not know our weaknesses or strengths. A blend of Taoism and modern approaches would definitely create an intriguing attitude towards military conflict, probably one that has not been seen before. Just as Sun-Tzu paved the way for different ideologies, every leader will have his or her own approach to techniques and tactics for war.

Corinne DeSpain

Word count: 513

https://www.ancient.eu/Sun-Tzu/

Rogue One: Athens Strikes Back

The ancient Athenian empire shares many similarities with the Galactic Empire of the Star Wars saga, most of them having to do with the fact that both empires were involved in conquests to take over and consume the resources of other small, less powerful colonies with the intentions to expand their empires and acquire more power. A very vivid picture of how the Galactic Empire was involved in such conquests takes shape on Jedha, a planet rich with the very valuable Kyber crystals, during the installment of the saga called Star Wars: Rogue One. The Galactic Empire desired to build a very powerful death machine, a planet destroyer, in order to make them the most respected power in the galaxy. They began conquering different planets and eventually came to Jedha where they found Kyber crystals. These Kyber crystals were essential to providing energy to power the planet destroyer. The Empire occupied the planet and forced the native people to assist in mining operations, and they Empire also enacted a very strict code of conduct for the natives and enforced it with terror tactics such as parading the streets with military vehicles. Once the Empire had mined all they wanted, they used the planet destroyer to destroy Jedha. The Empire was known for this type of behavior, taking advantage of weaker planets for their resources, then laying waste to and abandoning the planet.

The ancient Athenians exhibited very similar behavior during the Peloponnesian War. Thucydides enlightens us on some of the Athenian war tactics, telling us, “Putting out from Epidaurus they wasted the lands of Troezen, Halieis, and Hermoine (all places along the coast of the Argolid in the Peloponnesus). From there they sailed to Prasiae, a small maritime town of Laconia. There they wasted the land, took the town, and sacked it.”[1] The Athenians were preparing for war against the Spartans and expanding their empire, and they did not care what territory they needed to destroy in order to acquire the necessary war materials. Similar to how the Empire conscripted natives to work in the Kyber mines, the Athenians used slaves to fight in the military to waste villages and acquire war materials.

Both of these empires embarked on their conquests to amass wealth and power for war, and they eventually faced their opponents in battle. The Empire fought the rebels, the Athenians fought the Spartans, but both empires tasted bitter defeat in the end. The campaigns of the Athenians and the Galactic Empire portray how conquests based on the belittlement of other nations and the greedy expansion of power will eventually lead to defeat nations focused on such conquests.

Andrew Mitchell

Word Count: 443

[1] Thucydides, Military Operations

The American Autocracy

The United States Senate: once the greatest law-making body on the face of the planet, it now is a partisan tool of the presidency. Obsequious at its highest level (though not always at its lowest), the Senate has proven itself to be an extension of the executive branch, affording the President undue power over the course of the nation. To understand the danger of this naked partisanship, look no farther than the Roman Principate.

Augustus, in his Res Gestae, claimed to have “transferred government from [his] own authority to the sovereignty of the senate” (34.1). Of course, this was a farce. Augustus was force behind policy in the Principate, and the Senate existed to provide a seemingly democratic vehicle to enact policy. Later, under the emperor Vespasian, the Senate had similar function. Though it existed as a deliberative body Vespasian declared “whatever…has been done, executed, decreed, ordered by Emperor Caesar Vespasian Augustus or by anyone at his order or mandate, these things shall be legal and valid, just as if they had been done by the order of the people” (Lex de imperio Vespasiani). In other words, the Senate did nothing the emperor would not approve of.

Sound familiar?

In early January, amidst the longest (though partial) government shutdown in United States history, the House passed a bill that would reopen government and allow time for negotiation on Homeland Security funding. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell blocked it from even coming to a vote in the Senate. Why? Because President Trump had indicated he would not sign. Thus, Mr. McConnell openly demonstrated he was unwilling to deviate from the wishes of the President. While in the long run, a bill would have to be signed into law by President Trump, stopping a vote on a bill trying to pay American families at the behest of a different branch of government undermines the separation of powers. That is not to say President Trump is truly an autocrat; such a designation is not possible without flagrantly flouting the Constitution. It does go to show, however, that the line between the legislative and executive branches is blurrier than it should be.

In the Flavian model of government (that of Vespasian), the emperor wielded complete power and disguised this fact (officially) with the maintenance of the Senate. However, there was no question who was really calling the shots. This does differ from what has been seen in American government. Though President Trump has exerted a perhaps undue influence upon the operations of the Senate, Leader McConnell still chose to act independently. And when a Democrat funding bill finally made it to the Senate, it received more votes than its Republican counterpart (though both failed the 60-vote threshold needed), clearly rejecting the will of the White House.

Nonetheless, it is important to recognize the imperial trappings of the modern political environment. The deterioration of bipartisanship and the increase in what Arthur Schlesinger termed the Imperial Presidency pose a legitimate threat to the survival of healthy and effective political discourse and progress. A Senate free from executive puppetry best serves the American people.

Tom Vilinskis

Words Count: 462

Sources:

[1] McConnell blocks House bills to reopen government https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/shutdown-showdown-senate-prepares-to-vote-on-competing-bills-after-trump-agrees-to-postpone-state-of-the-union-speech/2019/01/24/7b65e314-1fc7-11e9-9145-3f74070bbdb9_story.html?utm_term=.c7252800f704

[2] Lex de imperio Vespasiani https://droitromain.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/Anglica/vespas_johnson.html

[3] Res Gestae Divi Augusti

[4] Shutdown Showdown https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/shutdown-showdown-senate-prepares-to-vote-on-competing-bills-after-trump-agrees-to-postpone-state-of-the-union-speech/2019/01/24/7b65e314-1fc7-11e9-9145-3f74070bbdb9_story.html?utm_term=.c7252800f704

Sun Tsu vs. Naval Academy

Sun Tsu’s Art of War is very practical and in many ways applies to our own military in America. The philosophy of Sun Tsu consists the essentials of winning a war to include how one must lead, follow, and perform tactics. He has five fundamentals that he bases his path to success: The way, heaven, earth, command, and discipline. With these fundamentals, there are both overlapping and opposing teachings between Sun Tsu’s Art of War and the Naval Academy.

Sun Tsu provides some common requirements to winning a war. He promotes tactics such as, “Attack where he is unprepared; appear where you are unexpected”[1] (7). He believes that with a successful military, an organized approach is necessary. There must be a ranking system with a leader who must be obeyed to the fullest. The leader must show obvious traits in a frontrunner like courage and integrity. I believe that the Naval Academy heavily teaches us two of Sun Tsu’s fundamentals: command and discipline. In our leadership and ethics classes and in many of our trainings, they harp us on characteristics we should contain as future officers. They especially reiterate integrity. The honor system here is very harsh for a reason. It is important to do the right thing, even when there is nobody around watching. Integrity is easy to lose and near impossible to earn back once lost. At the Naval Academy, you will get in a lot more trouble for cheating on a test than driving under the influence. The idea seems a little obscure but makes sense. It is important to set an example to our subordinates by being trustworthy. We are also taught to be leaders with courage. We learn about distinguished graduates all the time. One thing they all share is that they have done something that is very distinctive that required an enormous amount of courage.

We practice discipline at the Naval Academy every single day. We have a chain of command that we rely on and use on an everyday basis. We also have a very structured organization in everyday requirements and schedule. We are obligated to go to formations in the morning and lunch time, go to classes, participate in sports period, do homework, sign taps, and attend any other military duties. This follows closely to what Sun Tsu believes leads to a successful military. His other fundamentals to include: the way, heaven, and earth not taught here in the Academy. Of course we are taught that there is a chain of command that is above you and should be followed. But we are also taught that we shall only carry out lawful orders. If a Captain gives you an order that you believe is wrong, you are expected to respectfully challenge that order. Sun Tsu would not agree with this sense of what we call watch-team-backup. He says, “The way causes men to be of one mind with the rulers” (5). I believe that this is a hazardous approach to conduct dangerous tasks, especially in the military. Regardless of how experienced somebody may be, everybody makes mistakes. This is why we are taught to have a questioning attitude and not to blindly follow orders.

Sun Tsu teaches principles that worked for war in Ancient China. Although some of his teachings has evolved over time, the Naval Academy still engraves some of the same foundations as Sun Tsu. The biggest similarity between his teachings and what we learn now is the organization that includes a chain of command. The biggest difference is the fact that we are expected to have a questioning attitude and to challenge our leaders respectfully. This goes to prove that we still base our military on past experiences and teachings.

-Kevin Semma

Word count: 597

[1] Sun-tsu, The Art of War. Trans. John Minford. London: Penguin, 2009

Star Wars in Antiquity

The Empire in Star Wars shares numerous similarities with the Roman Empire, which dominated the known-world for centuries. Common features between both empires include their swift rise to power, rapid expansion of territory, followed by their crumbling defeats, which were largely due to rebellion and poor allocation of resources.

Augustus Caesar, the first emperor of the Roman Empire, gained power over Rome and its Republic in 27 BCE in the same way Emperor Palpatine monopolized the galactic senate following the collapse of the Republic. Following Augustus’s claim of the role of emperor, the pax Romana (Roman peace) period ensued. These years of relative “peace” during the pax Romana under Augustus directly mirrors the collapse of the Republic in Star Wars with Palpatine in control.[1] Following the period of peace, and utilization of its army and resources, the Roman Empire was able to conquer almost all of modern-day Europe, as well as regions in North Africa and Western Asia. However, Rome’s superiority mindset and vast overreach of their power contributed to their defeat by rebel groups in nearly all of its territories.[2] This goes hand-in-hand with the Empire in Star Wars and its lack of ability to keep track of every planet and its happenings (i.e. rise of Luke Skywalker). Ultimately, both Empires grossly overreached their power, which resulted in their collapse from isolated cases of rebellion.

Even though we may not think of the United States as an empire, a lot of its global influence reflects that of the Empire in Star Wars. Even though the United States’ influence is on a much smaller scale than the Empire, it controls much of the current global policy. At first glance, both superpowers may seem starkly different, but both the United States and the Empire are able to utilize the threat of force to enforce their power over nearly any territory.[3] For example, the United States has the most powerful military in human history, along with the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, effectively rendering other nations subordinate in terms of retaliation. This is directly comparable to the might of the Imperial Army and the infamous Death Star that the Empire possesses due to the influence of fear they have on the rest of the galaxy.[4] Although the United States and the Empire share some militaristic qualities, there are very few traits that they have in common. This is largely because the Empire was based off of Nazi Germany prior to World War II, which starkly contrasts the underlying principles of freedom and democracy the United States strives for. Although the Empire and United States possess great amounts of power, they are incomparable when it comes to their organization and freedoms.

— Griffin Hamilton

Word Count: 484

[1] Star Wars Episode III, 2003, Star Wars Episode IV, 1977

[2] Class Google Folder, Spodek Ch. 6, Rome and the Barbarians

[3] Constitutional Rights Foundation, America’s Foreign Policy, http://www.crf-usa.org/war-in-iraq/foreign-policy.html

[4]Star Wars Episode IV, 1977

(Space) Operatic Empires

It is often anecdotally noted how life mimics art, but should it not be rather expected that the reverse is true? After all, where else do artists draw their inspiration from other than real life? George Lucas’ Star Wars is a perfect example of art mimicking life to a noticeable extent. Though the Empire — their aesthetics, their tactics, their aura — is primarily intended to mimic Nazi Germany, many other analogies arise, especially in the plot and narrative regarding the transition from “republic” to empire, with Ancient Rome.

Since the dawn of known time, human nature has yearned towards order amidst chaos, desiring structure and rule to enforce common principles. However, in the process of achieving these ends, the means by which the ends are attempted to be achieved often skew and circumvent said principles, erring on the side opposite the values once sought to be protected. The process of attempted fair governance devolving into relative chaos, only for a sovereign ruler to rise to the head of the “Leviathan” repeats itself over and over in human history, Ancient Rome being a prime example. In the wake of Greek democracy, its failures, and its successes, the Romans attempted to institute a government representative of the people, yet not too volatile, in the form of a republic. The Roman Republic, however, as expected in our 20/20 hindsight, degenerated into a corrupt group of the social elite controlling an enormous populace.

Out of dissatisfaction with the Roman Elite, a figure named Augustus Caesar rose above the rest in the eyes of the people. His achievements as in the Roman civil war — reuniting the “republic” — earned him the support of the people. In the Star Wars universe, perhaps a figure with less virtuous intentions yet just as much popularity achieved through nearly the exact same means arises in Emperor Palpatine, formerly Chancellor. The Star Wars Republic, undergoing a seemingly unending civil war, “won” under the continually extended, “emergency wartime powers” leadership of Chancellor Palpatine. When the (concocted) opportunity arose, Palpatine catapulted himself into the position of permanent emperor. Both republics’ degradation into autocracy is perfectly described by Thomas Hobbes in The Leviathan:

“The attaining to this Soveraigne Power, is by two wayes…The other, is when men agree amongst themselves, to submit to some Man, or Assembly of men, voluntarily, on confidence to be protected by him against all others.”¹

Augustus Caesar and the Emperor both left their republican government intact, not doing away with a powerless entity out of fear of the people’s potential uproar, but rather stripping them of what little powers they had left. Both rulers ruled absolutely, there is no doubt. However, rulers never last forever. In a twist akin to his adoptive father, Emperor Palpatine was betrayed by his most trusted subordinate, ending the Galactic Empire, at least temporarily.

In modern-day America, we see history repeating itself just the same as it always does. In relatively recent history, the executive branch has amassed an amount of power our forefathers would never have envisioned. Starting with the expansion of bureaucracy in the New Deal, WWII, and beyond, the executive branch, especially the presidency, has a disproportionate amount of power relative to the other ideally equal branches of our government. More recently, the War Powers Act of 1973 gives the President control over the military unprecedented, not dissimilar to the “temporary” powers “Chancellor” Palpatine was given to conduct his “war”.

With the perfect hindsight of history available to Americans today, it should surprise us when we see its negative aspects repeating itself. However, it appears that human nature, in art, in Ancient Rome, or today, inevitably drifts towards the condition of a sovereign, unitary, autonomous ruler.

— Gregory Mathias

Word Count — 582
¹Hobbes, Thomas, 1588-1679. Leviathan. Baltimore :Penguin Books, 1968.

The Galactic Empire: A Reflection of Augustus’ Rome

Great empires have risen and fallen throughout history, but in the modern age of fiction and fantasy, the term “Empire” often elicits an entirely different image: the Galactic Empire from George Lucas’ Star Wars. However, the Empire of a long time ago in a galaxy far far away is not so different from the more recent Roman Empire. After analysis of the rise and development of the Roman Empire under Augustus, it is clear many of the Empire’s elements in Star Wars derive from the history of Rome.

For example, many of the elements of the Empire’s rise to power come from the history of Augustus’ rise to power. In his Res Gestae, Augustus writes, “I raised an army with which I liberated the state, which had been oppressed by a tyrannical faction,” (1.1). Similarly, Palpatine overthrew the existing government of the Galactic Republic, which he perceived as dominated by the tyrannical faction of the Jedi Order, using his clone army procured through the Senate. The major difference here is that Palpatine was already a member of the Senate in the Republic before overthrowing the government, while Augustus was appointed a consul in the Roman Senate only after overthrowing the previous administration.

However, while slightly out of order, aspects of how Augustus went from the Senate to the new Emperor of Rome bear close similarities to the manner in which Palpatine rose from Senator to Emperor. Augustus states, “the senate passed honorific degrees admitting me to its order… as well as granting me the right to state my opinion as a consular, and granted me imperium,” (1.2). He later says he earned other positions of power, saying, “I was a member of the triumvirate… I have been princeps senatus… I have been pontifex maximus, augur… consul for the fifth time…” (7.1-7.3). Just as Augustus was granted roles of power and influence, Palpatine, too, was elected to a prestigious position of power as Chancellor of the Senate. Augustus goes on to write, “[The Senate] ordered me as propraetor to take measures… to ensure that the state come to no harm,” (1.3). In the same manner, Palpatine was voted emergency powers as the Chancellor, which allowed him to bypass the senate and do what he deemed necessary to win the galactic civil war. While these events were slightly out of order in the Star Wars universe, the events that gave Palpatine the opportunity to seize power clearly derive from those that set Augustus on the path to Emperor.

Both Emperors also carried out the expansion of their empires in similar manners. Augustus left many regional rulers in power, delegating responsibility for governing to local rulers and controlling puppet governments in various conquered regions (27.2). Palpatine, too, left his Moffs (governors) in charge of conquered regions, dividing rule amongst puppet governments all serving one Empire. Additionally, some regions were willingly submitted to the rule of both empires out of fear alone. Augustus states, “the whole of Italy of its own accord took an oath of allegiance to me,” (25.2). In cases such as this, regions were so terrified of Roman power that they joined Augustus’ Empire willingly, out of fear of being overrun by his forces. Likewise, many systems willingly accepted Palpatine’s rule when faced with the threat of the Death Star. Both empires used these tools of fear and the strength of their military and navy to expand, conquering and absorbing new territories to heighten their power. Augustus describes such expansion, saying, “I extended the frontiers… pacified the Gallic and Spanish provinces… brought peace to the Alps… I added Egypt to the empire…” (26.1-27.1). Palpatine likewise pushed the frontiers of his Empire into the outer rim, like the planet Tatooine, eventually reaching the border of known space and the “Unknown Regions.” Both emperors pushed their influence to the edges of the known, Rome reaching as far as Spain and Egypt and the Empire to the Unknown Regions.

Clearly, many of the aspects of Roman history were adapted to the fictional story of the Galactic Empire in Star Wars, from the rise of the new Empire to the methods through which its emperor governed and expanded his influence. While Star Wars may be a work of fiction, the methodology and strategy behind the Empire is actually quite similar to historical facts from the Ancient Roman Empire under Augustus.

-Nate Forrest

Words: 599

THE RES GESTAE DIVI AUGUSTI, Age of Augustus RG excerpts (687-703)

The Threat of Religion

Religion is a powerful motivator in the lives of many. It guides people’s thoughts and beliefs, and has the overwhelming ability to bring together large swaths of people from different backgrounds. Religion has the ability to span across cultures and Christianity did this the best by preaching and being open to all peoples. These factors of unity and motivation are what the Roman empire feared the most. The Romans feared the “cult” of Christianity would unify all the dissatisfied subjects of their vast empire and lead to widespread revolt. If this occurred, the Roman Empire would have been faced with multiple wars, and if they lost against one of the revolts, it would only embolden the others. The Romans believed they were in danger of losing their power, wealth, and prestige throughout the world.

The Roman fear of Christianity was valid from the standpoint that the Romans did not understand the religion and they viewed it as a cult that was aligning the people of their empire against Roman values and the empire itself. Pliny in his letter to Trajan relays what he had discovered about the teachings of Christianity and states Christians, “… bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so” (Pliny).Upon hearing what Christians believed and their way of life, it is clear the Romans did not fully understand the religion. This was the source of their fear because as humans, we fear what we do not understand. This misunderstanding can be seen in the Christian practice of consuming the body and blood of Christ. Christians consumed bread and wine that through transubstantiation had become the body and blood of Christ. However, this practice made the Romans believe Christians were a cannibalistic cult because they did not understand it nor the meaning behind it. The main teachings of Christianity outlined by Pliny benefited society, but the Romans convinced themselves the values and lifestyle of Christianity were bad for the people of the Roman empire. However, it was the belief in one God and the renunciation of the divinity of the emperor that really divided the Romans and Christians.

Monotheism was a major factor that caused the Romans to fear Christians. The belief in one God went against the polytheistic Roman teachings on religion and the divinity of the emperor. It could be seen as an attack on the seat of the emperor itself. The monotheistic aspect of Christianity caused much fear among the leaders of the Roman empire.

Even though the Romans feared Christianity, it did not give them the right to try and stamp out the religion. Christianity was not threatening the empire through any form violence and even some of the Romans saw Christianity as more of a fad. Pliny states in his letter to Trajan, “…it seems possible to check and cure it. It is certainly quite clear that the temples, which had been almost deserted, have begun to be frequented, that the established religious rites, long neglected, are being resumed, and that from everywhere sacrificial animals are coming, for which until now very few purchasers could be found. Hence it is easy to imagine what a multitude of people can be reformed if an opportunity for repentance is afforded” (Pliny). This viewpoint along with the fear of the Romans shows any action against Christians would be purely preemptive. The fear among Romans had nothing to do with what Christians were doing, but with what they might do. Rome had built a vast empire and had defeated armies and ideologies in order to do so. Rome was still in charge and they had the power to step in if Christianity took a turn to threaten the empire, however, until then Christianity was just a growing religion the Romans did not understand nor did they want to understand.

-Ethan Fessler

Word Count: 547

Works Cited:

Pliny, Letters 10.96-97 from Apuleius, Apologia: Seminar, faculty.georgetown.edu/jod/texts/pliny.html.

(Pliny’s Letter to Trajan)

Sun Tzu vs. CAPT Chadwick

If I had a nickle every time I have been told to prepare myself, to take advantage of the opportunities and training here, for we are entering a profession of arms, I would be a rich man. Is the Naval Academy really developing leaders of a winning force? I would have to say that they are training us to win, but by teaching us how to accept defeat first. For Midshipman, it often feels as if it is a “them versus us” mentality. The Academy and the system are the victors, and we as Midshipman are the defeated. I believe that this is by design, for it is preparing us to be stronger men and women in the fleet, and better prepare ourselves for victory in warfare. Midshipman are intentionally given too many tasks in a day. The system bombards us with random briefs, a heavily loaded academic schedule, rigorous fitness standards, parades, formations, and leadership billets to top everything off. The idea is to teach us how to prioritize, manage time, and ultimately to be ready for the unexpected and be able to adapt. Sun Tzu preaches that you must confuse and overwhelm an enemy, and this is often time how the Academy feels. He also teaches that a strong leadership of officers must be in place to have an effective force.

The majority of small unit leadership and day to day activities are run by fellow Midshipman. It is commonly known that peer leadership is the most difficult of all leadership roles. Having an inexperienced leader that dictates the daily battle rhythm of the day is a difficult place to be, and is not necessarily the best system to lead us to success. This is useful though, for a multitude of reasons. For one, it teaches that leader the most effective leadership style for themselves. Some Midshipman are naturally great leaders and thrive in a billet position, while others need this time to develop before going to the fleet. Secondly, this experience of being led by individuals who may have not found their style yet allows the rest of the brigade to learn from their mistakes. This often makes for confusion amongst the ranks, just as Sun Tzu speaks of, but in the end we will all be stronger leaders for it.

To many, it may seem as if the day to day trials that we deal with as Midshipman is busy work or useless, and at the end of the day, the system will always win. In the grander picture, the hardships we face here that are posed to us by the “system” are developing into warriors who will be ready to face hardships, know our leadership style, and know how to defeat the enemy, as often times we feel the Academy does to us.

LaRue: 468

Success Beyond the Battlefield

Militaries throughout time have relied upon various styles of planning, training and rules. A truly outstanding strategy and set of values will be instilled in each man and woman in uniform and carried forward beyond their time of service to better impact the world. Sun Tzu of ancient China attempted to fulfill this by writing “The Art of War,” which is a meditation on the rules of war and military strategy. Similarly today, USNA and the Navy attempt to achieve victory on the battlefield and in society through specific codes and values. Due to its broader application to all military members, the strategy of USNA provides a more effective foundation for military members.

Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War” largely focuses on the importance of planning and decision-making on the battlefield. Throughout his work, he emphasizes the importance of strategizing before the actual battle, as war “is to be pondered carefully … [this is] the difference between survival and extinction” (2). Tzu centralizes his writing on “Five Fundamentals” of war: the Way, Heaven, Earth, command, and discipline. By fully grasping and internalizing these fundamentals, Tzu states that you will win; failure to grasp them will mean defeat. According to Tzu, victory or defeat largely rests on the leader. The general is in charge of knowing the Way, being on the side of Heaven and Earth, and instilling command and discipline. Strategizing and decision-making will ultimately be up to the person in charge, and soldiers are meant to follow their every word. Tzu’s final major argument is about capitalizing on your strengths and the enemy’s weaknesses, as he states that “if you know self, not the enemy, you will suffer defeat” (1).

USNA’s strategy has a similar set of goals and planning to that of Tzu. Close to the “Five Fundamentals,” USNA focuses on three core values of honor, courage and commitment. These values are supposed to be prevalent not only in our military careers, but in our personal relationships as well. It is the responsibility of each Navy enlisted and officer to “have an uncompromising code of integrity” and to “join together as a team to improve the quality of our work, our people, and ourselves” (1). Also similar to “The Art of War,” USNA emphasizes that war should not be taken lightly, as we remember our fallen brothers and sisters in uniform. One difference from Tzu’s strategy is while we are told that strategizing and planning is valuable, we are taught that it ultimately comes down to performance on the spot under stress. Additionally, the Navy’s set of values is more applicable to the entire chain of command, rather than just the general in charge. Every sailor and officer will be in charge of decision-making and authority should be questioned if there is a moral or legal violation.

It is clear that both techniques described by Tzu and USNA are successful. Tzu’s military philosophy has persisted through centuries and can be applied beyond battle to business, sports, and public-speaking skills. USNA’s strategy has similar success, as the US Navy has consistently been victorious on the battlefield and USNA has graduated some of the most impactful citizens in the US. While a blend of both techniques would be best, the Naval Academy’s strategy reigns supreme over Tzu’s “The Art of War”. The Navy’s set of values can be better applied to both followers and leaders, rather than the focus on solely generals in Tzu’s piece. Followers were only mentioned in Tzu’s piece to denote discipline and obedience, while USNA blends those aspects with active followership and taking responsibility throughout the chain of command.

Lauren McDonnell

Word Count: 600

Sources:

“Annual Ethics Training,” Department of the Navy. Accessed 20 March 2019.
Sun-tzu, “The Art of War.” Trans. John Minford. London: Penguin, 2009.