Though the American media has been distracted in recent weeks with the Olympics and, now, the Democratic Convention, tensions in Georgia remain.  Yesterday, Russia formally recognized the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, sparking protests from the US and Europe.  Although, given the overextension of the US military in Iraq, I do not believe that US words can be backed up with military action, there remains a possibility of a direct US-Russia conflict.  It's in times like these that I find myself wondering: What would Sun Tzu do?

  The first thing that comes to mind is Sun Tzu's notion of "ground."  In the Art of War, the first meaning of this term is, literally, the physical context and conditions surrounding a particular military contingent.  In Chapter 8, "The Nine Variables," five different sorts of ground are mentioned – low-lying ground, communicating ground, desolate ground, enclosed ground and "death ground" – each with its own potential for shaping the outcome of battle.  It is in this chapter, too, that some sage advice is proffered:

    In chapter 10, "Terrain," Sun Tzu describes six qualities of "ground," and in Chapter  11, "The Nine Varieties of Ground," he discusses, well, nine varieties of ground.  There is overlap in these various categorizations but the main point is obvious: geo-strategic context is of the utmost importance in determining whether military action is prudent.

     In looking at Georgia, from an American perspective, it is all but impossible to conclude that a US attack or counterattack could be effective.  Russia has every advantage, tactically, logistically, and strategically.  In sorting through Sun Tzu's various points about ground, it is not clear how his analysis might translate into a contemporary, trans-oceanic situation.  But he makes a rather stark statement: "Do not attack an enemy who occupies key ground." (11.12).  "Key ground" is said to be "equally advantageous for the enemy or me to occupy," which, at first blush, does not seem to apply to Georgia, which Russia would have a very much easier time occupying.  Other connotations of "key ground" include "contestable ground" that is "strategically important."  I think what is suggested here is that once the enemy has already taken this kind of ground, he then holds what advantage it confers.  Trying to win back this specific ground would raise the costs and lower the chances of success for any counterattack.  And that sounds rather like Georgia, no?

     I do not want to be overly literal with Sun Tzu here.  Rather, it is his general caution that is important: careful consideration of the physical and geo-strategic qualities of a particular situation must determine the use or non-use of military force.  And it is precisely the lack of that kind of careful consideration underlying John McCain's hawkish, knee-jerk "we are all Georgians now" reaction that makes him unfit to be Commander-in-Chief.  I hope that Obama listens to his more prudent advisers to find non-military responses to the Georgia situation.