This paper examines how Sun Tzu's core strategic principles — deception, indirect attack, mobility, surprise, and moral influence — have been applied and tested in modern military history. Drawing on Robert Harvey's analysis of maverick military commanders, the paper contrasts commanders who successfully adapted Sun Tzu's methods, such as General Vo Nguyen Giap during the Tet Offensive and Dwight Eisenhower at Normandy, with those who rejected them, such as Robert E. Lee at Gettysburg and General Westmoreland in Vietnam. The paper argues that adherence to Sun Tzu's indirect approach consistently produced superior strategic outcomes, while reliance on frontal assaults and wars of attrition led to unnecessary casualties and defeat.
Sun Tzu believed in freedom of action, mobility, surprise, deception, and indirect attacks rather than frontal assaults. His method was always to "entice the enemy, to unbalance him, and to create a situation favorable for a decisive counter-stroke," while avoiding sieges and prolonged wars of attrition (Harvey, 2008, p. xlii). This was the opposite type of strategy from the commanders of the First World War or the American Civil War, who hurled masses of men against powerful defensive positions and inflicted mass casualties on their own armies for no real strategic purpose.
Basil Liddell Hart, who was "horrified by the waste" of World War I, agreed with Sun Tzu that the indirect approach was superior, particularly when using the mobility that tanks and air power provided (Harvey, p. xxxv). Most of the great commanders of history — George Washington, Bernard Montgomery, Douglas MacArthur, and George Patton — followed these principles and placed heavy emphasis on both the morale and the morality of purpose in warfare. They also had "an almost political ability to charm and inspire their men" (Harvey, p. xv).
Like Sun Tzu, these commanders were generally not from elite or aristocratic backgrounds but were more self-made men who were talented enough to break through the barriers of social class, which were far higher in earlier eras. Commanders who followed these principles — including General Vo Nguyen Giap in the Vietnam War and Dwight Eisenhower at Normandy — had more successful outcomes than those who failed to do so, such as Robert E. Lee at Gettysburg, who repeatedly launched futile attacks against an opponent holding the high ground and strong defensive positions.
General Vo Nguyen Giap, the great North Vietnamese commander, is one of the most striking examples of the successful adaptation of Sun Tzu's methods to the twentieth-century battlefield, demonstrated in the wars against both the French and the Americans. General Giap understood that political will, patience, and strategic deception could offset enormous material disadvantages.
By contrast, General William Westmoreland failed to understand the strategy of his enemy in the Vietnam War and therefore had no effective means of countering it. He pursued a war of attrition through search-and-destroy missions against an enemy that was prepared to absorb large casualties over many years and keep fighting. Even more critically, Westmoreland never fully recognized that the enemy controlled the timing and terms of almost all engagements — approximately 80% of the time. Giap's Tet Offensive caught him completely by surprise in January 1968, when the Viet Cong launched over 100 separate attacks simultaneously in a single night with more than 80,000 troops.
It took Giap nine months of careful planning and preparation to organize the Tet Offensive, making use of many of Sun Tzu's principles: deceit, misdirection, diversions, and surprise. Like Sun Tzu, Giap had great faith in intelligence and espionage. His spy network was so effective that he knew precisely where and when the Americans would strike. He used camouflage and deception to smuggle weapons into South Vietnam and conceal them in large underground tunnel complexes.
Before the offensive began, he ordered diversionary attacks at Khe Sanh to misdirect and confuse the Americans — a strategy that succeeded all the way up to the level of President Lyndon Johnson. In doing so, he was following Sun Tzu's famous maxims: "use an indirect attack to win" and "let your plans be as dark as night, then strike as a thunderbolt." In this respect, the Tet Offensive was a masterwork of Sun Tzu-inspired planning.
However, Giap's forces violated another of Sun Tzu's principles — that of moral influence — when they massacred approximately 5,000 people at Hue and turned the civilian population against them. Once the locations of the small and isolated Viet Cong units were revealed, the U.S. military was able to destroy them quickly with its superior firepower, especially when the anticipated popular uprising in the cities never materialized. Nevertheless, Giap won a decisive moral victory with public opinion in the United States, which turned against both the war and President Johnson politically. In that respect, the offensive was a major strategic victory even though it had also been "a military disaster for North Vietnam."
"Allied deception operations before the Normandy landings"
"Patton's flanking maneuver and the Sun Tzu parallel"
Commanders who did not follow Sun Tzu's strategy and got bogged down in prolonged wars of attrition, or who launched frontal attacks against strong defensive positions, often ended up losing the war. Generals in both the Civil War and World War I, for example, ignored his maxims to "only fight if a position is critical" and "there is some ground that should not be contested" — to their detriment and that of the men they commanded. The historical record consistently supports the conclusion that Sun Tzu's indirect approach, when applied with discipline and creativity, produces superior strategic outcomes.
You’re 68% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.