Thus, though we have heard of stupid haste in war, cleverness has
never been seen associated with long delays.
This concise and difficult sentence is not well explained by any
of the commentators. Ts‘ao Kung, Li Ch‘üan, Mêng Shih, Tu Yu, Tu
Mu and Mei Yao-ch‘ên have notes to the effect that a general,
though naturally stupid, may nevertheless conquer through sheer
force of rapidity. Ho Shih says: “Haste may be stupid, but at any
rate it saves expenditure of energy and treasure; protracted
operations may be very clever, but they bring calamity in their
train.” Wang Hsi evades the difficulty by remarking: “Lengthy
operations mean an army growing old, wealth being expended, an
empty exchequer and distress among the people; true cleverness
insures against the occurrence of such calamities.” Chang Yü says:
“So long as victory can be attained, stupid haste is preferable to
clever dilatoriness.” Now Sun Tzŭ says nothing whatever, except
possibly by implication, about ill-considered haste being better
than ingenious but lengthy operations. What he does say is
something much more guarded, namely that, while speed may
sometimes be injudicious, tardiness can never be anything but
foolish—if only because it means impoverishment to the nation.
Capt. Calthrop indulges his imagination with the following:
“Therefore it is acknowledged that war cannot be too short in
duration. But though conducted with the utmost art, if long
continuing, misfortunes do always appear.” It is hardly worth
while to note the total disappearance of 拙速 in this precious
concoction. In considering the point raised here by Sun Tzŭ, the
classic example of Fabius Cunctator will inevitably occur to the
mind. That general deliberately measured the endurance of Rome
against that of Hannibal’s isolated army, because it seemed to him
that the latter was more likely to suffer from a long campaign in
a strange country. But it is quite a moot question whether his
tactics would have proved successful in the long run. Their
reversal, it is true, led to Cannae; but this only establishes a
negative presumption in their favour.