Strategic consistency and strategic surprise

I attended an online seminar recently and it made me think about the issue of strategic consistency versus strategic surprise. I link it back to Sun-tzu's Art of War, to the concept of orthodox 正 and unorthodox 奇.

Strategic consistency is the orthodox. By acting in a consistent manner, a nation earns the trust of its allies because its allies know what to expect. At the same time, it allows adversaries to predict each other's actions and map out their own responses. While this may seem boring and predictable, it prevents strategic miscalculations which may result in disaster for both sides.

However, a predictable contest is a boring one, and one in which the winner is more or less fixed. What makes international relations so interesting is the concept of strategic surprise. While strategic consistency means we know more or less what a nation will do, once in a while, a strategic surprise can be used to gain an advantage. Strategic surprise is built on strategic consistency, though. It is precisely because, due to strategic consistency, we expect a nation to act in a certain way, that when it does something else, it becomes a strategic surprise.

So strategic consistency sets the ground and fixes mindsets, while strategic surprise is like the winning blow. In that case, why not just rely on strategic surprise?

Because strategic surprise without strategic consistency is no longer a surprise; it is just strategic inconsistency. When a nation acts in an inconsistent manner all the time, no one knows what it will do. Allies cannot trust it. Adversaries, since they cannot make reliable predictions, will be all the more cautious to guard against all possibilities. Strategic inconsistency not only alienates allies, it also makes adversaries more prepared.

Giving an example, look at the United States. Before Trump was elected, the United States was consistent in its policies, and this strategic consistency allowed it to gain the trust of allies as well as other like-minded nations. When Trump was elected, the United States became more unpredictable. While it was a strategic surprise at first, as allies and adversaries both realise the lack of consistency in U.S. policy, we see allies becoming uncertain about how much they can rely on the United States. And adversaries become more cautious as they guard against more possibilities, but also more bold since they see U.S. allies becoming less trusting of the United States.

Strategic consistency with strategic surprise is the masterful application of orthodox and unorthodox methods. Strategic inconsistency, however, is just being consistently inconsistent, and is purely orthodox without the winning blow of the unorthodox.