How Would Sun Tzu Negotiate with Russia/Putin? Based on Sun Tzu’s 4 Major War Principles, Should NATO Deploy Troops into Ukraine Despite the Threat of Nuclear War?

How would Sun Tzu negotiate with Russia/Putin if he were NATO? Based on the Art of the War, the first thing he would ask is if he should participate in a war?

We will give a score out of 10 for every Sun Tzu war principles below. The higher the rating, the more NATO should officially declare war on Russia from a strategic point of view. 

Sun Tzu’s First Principle of War – “Know one’s enemy, know oneself” (8.5/10)

Sun Tzu’s first principle when deciding whether to fight a war is how much you know of your enemy, AND of yourself. Sun Tzu states that if you know both your enemy and yourself well, you will never be in the losing side of the war. Believe it or not, I feel that NATO can answer the former question more easily – Putin has basically laid out its invasion plan of Ukraine and what his demands for a cease fire are, not to mention that Anonymous Hackers and US intelligence can and have practically penetrated into the depths the Russian government, hence virtually the whole world knows Putin’s strategy and goals of the war. The harder bit is if NATO actually knows itself, and I will argue for why NATO doesn’t completely understand itself.

Going back to the importance of knowing your enemy, we know Putin’s strategy, goals and demands, but we don’t fully understand Putin’s character and mental state, since humans are by definition hard to predict. However, based on Putin’s past history, Putin is actually quite a predictable dictator. He never hid his disappoint at the Soviet Union’s collapse, going as far to say that it was the biggest catastrophe of the 20th century – his ultimate goal has always been to reinstate the Soviet Union and combined with the fact that he actually said this in front of TV cameras, we know that he is somebody who is quite direct and would actually follow through with his threats, as we can see in his current war actions in Ukraine, as well as how he attacked Georgia in 2008 and annexed Crimea in 2014.

Putin is also somebody who respects strength, not weakness. He saw weakness in the Obama and Biden administration and was ready to pounce both times. Trump, he thought, was highly unpredictable and might actually retaliate against Russia strongly should he make a wrong move, hence he decided not to invade any countries during Trump’s presidency. Putin is right (so far) that NATO has decided not to militarily intervene with troops.

Putin’s direct demeanor and non-compromising style has unfortunately, indicated that he has a high possibility of following through with his threats of a nuclear war should NATO intervene. This argument is supported by Fiona Hill, a foreigner affairs specialist and close Putin/Russia watcher (https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/02/28/world-war-iii-already-there-00012340). In fact, Russian troops have attacked Ukraine’s nuclear facilities, which again shows that he is not afraid to go nuclear. This must be assessed as part of the risk imposed to NATO should they intervene militarily, which is discussed later in this article.

So we know Russia well, we know Putin well to a large extent, but does NATO understand itself? NATO consists of 30 different countries and hence, 30 different cultures – this alone shows how hard it is for NATO members to fully understand one another well. So far, NATO has reacted very quickly and in unity when deciding to financially sanction Putin and Russia, but would it react as quickly and as united if one of its NATO members got attacked, or if Ukraine’s situation continues to worsen? Whether it’s a yes or no or in between, NATO must answer this question confidently before it decides to go into war with Russia. Also, since NATO members are not dictatorships, it must consider the public opinion of all of its member states. Does NATO have a good enough grasp of what NATO citizens demand? Most seem to support military intervention based on recent public opinion polls.

Sun Tzu’s Second Principle of War – “Right Timing, Favorable Geographical/Environmental Conditions, Favorable Social Conditions” (6/10)

From a humanitarian standpoint, of course NATO should intervene militarily, but whether we like it or not, when weighing “to be or not to be”, we must consider the geographical politics of the entire world, not just within the EU and Russia.

A major geographical uncertainty at present is whether China will invade Taiwan. It seems that the chances of this happening grows by the day. The question that NATO must ask is if it intervenes militarily in Ukraine, does it have enough resources to fight a potential two-front war with China? The answer seems to be yes, given the US’ military strength, but it depends on human psychology as well – are the majority of NATO electives and citizens psychologically ready for a potential two-front war? Unfortunately, the answer seems to be no. In the case of China, let alone an all-out war, it is quite clear that NATO as a whole is not psychologically ready to sanction China financially. With China’s well-documented infiltrations in western societies, and the world’s reliance on Chinese goods, it seems that it will take time and significant mental preparation for most of the world to directly confront China, both financially and militarily.

This leads to the issue of timing and social conditions. Insufficient mental preparation is another phrase for wrong timing, and unfortunately for Ukraine, it does take time for countries to whip up public opinion to actually make life or death decisions. Ukraine has already requested a no-fly zone but Joe Biden from the US has already directly rejected this request. This unfortunately is in part of US public opinion – the US does not seem to view Putin as unfavorably as do most EU member states. In fact, a fair share of conservative voters is strongly against US troop deployment into Ukraine. To convince this part of the population to join in the current Russian-Ukrainian war will likely take a lot of effort, albeit most citizens in the EU seem to support the deployment of NATO troops into Ukraine. Social conditions are hence far from perfect for a full scale war, and NATO needs to consider whether a military intervention into Ukraine will lead to a full blown war.

Sun Tzu’s Third Principle of War – “Ensure That One Won’t Lose” (2/10)

Putin’s Threat of Nuclear Weapons & How it Affects NATO’s Calculations

Sun Tzu has always maintained that before discussing about the possibility of winning, we must first analyze our chances of loss prevention. If one can’t even prevent his/her own loss, one shouldn’t really be talking about winning.

Of course, we can’t oversimplify the result of a war as a dichotomous choice of win or lose, but we must assess how much potential rewards and losses will stem from an all-out war. The biggest threat now is again, if Russia will deploy nuclear weapons. As mentioned in my analysis above, Putin does not seem one who won’t follow through on a threat, so unfortunately, I would have to classify the chances of Putin deploying nuclear weapons as a result of NATO’s military intervention as “medium to likely”.

However, this poses another question – where should the line be drawn? If Putin keeps making nuclear threats and the world keeps retreating, wouldn’t Putin be able to conquer the whole world? The psychology of negotiations is fascinating. When one realizes that the threats made by the other party are going to happen anyway, and the costs of succumbing to such threats become too high, one is likely to let the threats become reality since there’s nothing to lose. The determining factor here for NATO is what the costs are of succumbing to Putin’s threats. They must also factor in how much further Putin would go (i.e. would Putin invade NATO countries in the future and how would NATO respond if he threatens the world with nuclear weapons again?) This is not to mention how China would respond if it sees weakness in NATO’s response.

Based on Putin’s worldview, it seems that he won’t stop in Ukraine in the long run, but will continue AT LEAST until all former territory from the Soviet Union is conquered once again.

To calculate NATO’s potential loses is not that difficult – the most notable variable is the extent of nuclear destruction, and this is built on top of three variables – the extent to which Putin’s deployment of nuclear weapons, the extent to which NATO countries can reduce the actual damage of nuclear weapons and how well kept Russia’s nuclear weapons are. In terms of the latter, it is safe to assume that most of Russia’s nuclear weapons are not well kept due to the high cost attached to their maintenance. Russia’s economic fragilities really began after its annexation of Crimea, and it will be very surprising if Russia has a big budget to maintain the condition of its nuclear weapons. However, it is still likely that Russia has at least a small part of nuclear weapons ready for deployment, and if Putin uses them, in the best case scenario, a few EU countries will be totally destroyed.

There are of course other unpredictable factors, such as whether Putin’s regime will be toppled, but it seems that NATO’s losses will be quite significant if it does enter into the Russian-Ukrainian war. However, as mentioned, when will Putin stop if he gets away with the threat of nuclear weapons? Can NATO avoid the same losses in the long run even if it doesn’t intervene in Ukraine? From a psychological standpoint, giving Putin what he wants will further embolden him to invade other countries in the future. Unfortunately, the loss of a few countries due to nuclear war cannot be ruled out and may happen either way, hence there is a strong case to be made to intervene. However, from Sun Tzu’s point of view, a war that could lead to significant loss is not a war to participate in.

Sun Tzu’s Fourth Principle of War – “Conquering one’s enemy without a fight” (2/10)

It is quite apparent that there is no way for NATO to avoid losses if they get embroiled into a war with Russia. Based on Putin’s recent actions, he does not seem to act rationally anymore and it is a near certainty that he will escalate the situation if NATO joins the fight. The question therefore is how can NATO strategically reduce losses as much as possible if they do join the fight. Based on this measure alone, it doesn’t seem like Sun Tzu would recommend NATO to join the fight but again, can NATO actually avoid war eventually with Russia? (hint: look at what Hitler did in WW2)

How Sun Tzu Would Negotiate with Russia/Putin

If Sun Tzu were negotiating with Putin, he would never back Putin into a corner and use threatening language – Putin is at a state where he is not afraid of escalations and would not back down from his demands, whether NATO declares war on Russia or not.

I believe Sun Tzu would instead sit down with Putin peacefully and focus on the topic of a potential nuclear war. Given the above four principles, Sun Tzu would only be 50/50 about starting a war with Russia at this moment in Time, but he would also know that Russia doesn’t have any sort of leverage over NATO, except the possibility of a nuclear war. Sun Tzu would peacefully lay out the possibility of NATO’s nuclear weapon capabilities and indirectly tell Putin how they can neutralize Russia’s nuclear attacks before Russia even starts an all-out nuclear war.

Given that we know what Putin wants, and his dream of re-establishing the Soviet Union, Sun Tzu would show Putin a way forward on how Russia can still become center of the world stage, without focusing on the topic of Ukraine and NATO. Sun Tzu would also realistically remind Putin gently that the West can play chess too and that he shouldn’t underestimate the West’s resolve. Putin, like many Russians, is somebody who has great interest in Chess, hence Sun Tzu would try and establish a connection with Putin by discussing tactics, sometimes even providing ideas to Putin on how he can tactically navigate out of this situation despite not getting all his demands met.

In summary, Sun Tzu would still try and talk sense into Putin first but neither in a threatening way nor offering any concessions – he would build a connection with him first through the topic of tactics, whilst trying to assess the possibility of getting Putin to stop. Since Sun Tzu would know that the possibility of avoiding an all-out war from Russia is slim anyways, he would make good use of his time to get public opinion on his side to prepare for an eventual war.

All in all, Sun Tzu’s fourth principle is extremely hard to achieve for NATO, so Sun Tzu will focus most of his time to improve geopolitical conditions related to the first three principles, and in particular, how NATO can reduce its losses during an all-out war. Sun Tzu would definitely be trying to assess NATO and Russia’s true capabilities so as to minimize casualties, whilst maintaining casual conversations with Putin on how a nuclear war could play out. This is so that Sun Tzu can get to better understand the enemy, with an ultimate goal to reduce losses for NATO whilst whipping up public support for the war.

To conclude, it is likely that Sun Tzu will persuade NATO to attack anyway somewhere down the line, since Putin is unlikely to back down, but he will extend negotiations with Putin until it comes to the point where the timing and public opinion is favorable enough for him to take action, whilst using the time he bought to strategize a way to reduce losses as much as possible.

Just a final word – the longer a negotiation goes on, the more unpredictability goes into the equation, and the more chance Putin may decide to de-escalate.