中西傳統軍事思想與文化對比
現代英語：
Xu Sanfei
War and civilization always go hand in hand, and military traditions and cultural traditions always complement each other.
Once the ideological and cultural tradition, especially the military ideological and cultural tradition, is formed, it will produce an inertial force that cannot be underestimated. “In the source of Alexander’s victory, we can often find Aristotle.” The outstanding politicians, theorists and military strategists in history have all been influenced by the national ideological and cultural tradition, and their brilliant achievements have all shone with the glory of ideological and cultural tradition.
For thousands of years, the differences between Chinese and Western thought and culture have led to different emphases in the respective societies’ thinking about military activities and different characteristics in war practice, which directly affected the content and characteristics of Chinese and Western military thought and culture.
Guihe and Chongzheng
Human beings have created various civilizations in the long course of history. How different civilizations interact is an issue that no civilization can avoid. Chinese traditional thought and culture emphasize harmony, valuing harmony and pursuing harmony in diversity; while Western traditional thought and culture emphasize struggle, emphasizing control over everything and being the master of the world.
The culture of “harmony” is in the blood of the Chinese people, and “harmony” is the primary feature of traditional Chinese military thought and culture. When our ancestors created characters, they regarded “stopping war” as “martial arts”. In the late Western Zhou Dynasty, Shi Bo proposed that “harmony creates life, while sameness does not continue”, forming the idea of ”harmony but difference” in Chinese culture. The Book of History, Yao Canon, proposed that “the people are bright and the nations are in harmony.” After that, “harmony among nations” became a model of the Chinese worldview. In the early 15th century, Zheng He led the world’s largest fleet at the time and made seven overseas missions without causing any harm. Such a peaceful journey is unique in the world.
In contrast, traditional Western realism, as an important part of Western traditional thought and culture, believes that the world is essentially full of conflicts and confrontations of interests. The ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus believed that struggle is justice, and everything is created and destroyed through struggle. The famous ancient Greek reformer and military strategist Solon also believed that: “The reason why a civilization can grow and develop is because it has strong imperial ideals and desires for conquest; once these ideals and desires disappear, the entire civilization will dry up and die. Either conquer or be conquered, this is the law of survival of all civilizations.”
Now, some Western countries are trying to “format”, “standardize” and “unify” world civilization under the guise of “universal civilization”. However, one note cannot express a beautiful melody, and one color cannot depict a colorful picture. The unification of civilization will exhaust human creativity and lead to the rigidification and decline of human civilization. In this regard, historian Toynbee once said, “Humanity has mastered the means of highly technological civilization that can destroy itself, and at the same time is in the camp of extremely opposing political ideologies. The spirit it needs most is the essence of Chinese civilization – harmony”. “Harmony in diversity” can promote dialogue and integration of different civilizations and work together to build a community with a shared future for mankind that is inclusive of all civilizations.
Caution and militarism
War and peace are two major themes of human society. In terms of the basic attitude towards war, Chinese traditional thought and culture generally hold the concept of being cautious about war, while Western traditional realism is more inclined to praise and commend war.
In ancient China, wars were frequent. Many thinkers and military strategists closely linked wars with the lives of the people and the survival of the country. They put forward the idea of cautious warfare and pursued the “total victory” of “subduing the enemy without fighting”. Taoists believe that war is a major disaster. Laozi said: “War is an ominous tool.” The “Art of War” points out at the outset: “War is a major event of the state, a place of life and death, and a way of survival and destruction. It must be carefully considered.” Although Sun Tzu attached great importance to war, he also opposed war. In Sun Tzu’s view, “a destroyed country cannot be restored, and the dead cannot be resurrected. Therefore, wise rulers are cautious and good generals are vigilant. This is the way to ensure the safety of the country and the army.” He also clearly put forward three basic principles for limiting war: “Don’t move unless it is beneficial, don’t use unless it is necessary, and don’t fight unless it is dangerous.” Shang Yang also proposed that war is “fighting to end war”, and “the great law of war is to be cautious.” It can be said that the cautious warfare ideas of the pre-Qin scholars have continuously influenced later generations and gradually became the mainstream thought of China’s military tradition.
Western traditional realism holds a more positive view on war, believing that there is natural competition between people and that war itself is in line with human nature. Heraclitus said: “War is the father of all things and the king of all things.” In the eyes of the ancient Greeks, war is the main way to seek honor and become a hero. In Sparta, as long as “the monarchs give a little signal to fight, they will find many people who are willing to take up arms, and their only wish is to gain honor.” Since then, in the long history of development, traditional realism has always influenced the development of Western political philosophy and military philosophy. In modern times, the Western concept of advocating war and force has not been eliminated, and the two world wars have brought great disasters to mankind.
Today, after countless wars, more and more countries have realized that the law of the jungle is not the way for human coexistence, and militarism is not the way for human peace. Humanity is more capable than ever to move towards the goal of peace and development. However, we must also see that the world is not peaceful, and turning swords into plowshares is still a good wish of people. In order to win peace, we must make comprehensive preparations, which also includes research and preparation for war, in order to contain and prevent war. Therefore, being cautious in war should not only retain the traditional meaning of “winning without fighting”, but also add the meaning of “making peace without fighting” and build a mechanism to restrain war.
Kingly Way and Hegemony
In international exchanges, there has always been a debate between “kingly way” and “hegemonic way”. The core of kingly way is benevolence, while the core of hegemonic way is power. Mr. Sun Yat-sen once said that Eastern culture is kingly way, advocating benevolence, righteousness and morality; Western culture is hegemonic way, advocating utilitarianism and power.
It is a tradition of Chinese culture to first make a moral evaluation of war. Since the Han Dynasty, Confucianism has begun to dominate, and Confucian culture has occupied the dominant position in society. It has gradually formed a Confucian ethical order of “benevolence” inside and “ritual” outside, which is the cultural basis for the formation of China’s military tradition. Confucius once said: “Therefore, if people from afar are not convinced, cultivate culture and virtue to win them over.” Mencius also said: “Those who conquer people by force are not convinced by their hearts, because their strength is not enough. Those who conquer people by virtue are satisfied with their hearts and sincerely convinced.” Confucius and Sun Tzu also proposed that “those who have civil affairs must also have military preparations” and “command them with culture and unify them with military force.” In their minds, the benevolent are invincible in the world, and the virtuous are invincible. The way to win the world is the kingly way of practicing virtue and benevolence, not the hegemonic way of conquering by force. During the Spring and Autumn Period, the Five Hegemons who rose in the chaos of war used cultivating virtue and strengthening the army as an inseparable double-edged sword to establish their hegemony. To practice the kingly way, one must win people over with virtue, rely on virtue, use peaceful means, value justice and reason, win over distant countries with virtue, and adapt to foreign countries. Winning with virtue can make people sincerely convinced, which is the highest realm of winning.
Western traditional realism believes that power is the main content of politics, and regards war as a means to win by violence. Force is the main way to deal with relations between countries. Take ancient Greece and ancient Rome as examples. From the founding of the country to the establishment of the country, from the acquisition of rule to the consolidation and maintenance of rule, they always put the pursuit of power first, and regarded the expansion of force and iron-blooded rule as the foundation of the country. In military policy and even national policy, the will of the ruling class is implemented in society more by the iron-blooded spirit. Sparta even stipulated in law that the responsibility and obligation of citizens is to fight and die in battle. However, history and practice have shown that absolute hegemony pursued by force will also put oneself in trouble and will inevitably be defeated or buried by force in the end.
At present, global governance has entered a critical stage, and mankind is facing a historical choice of where to go. Those countries that still cling to the Cold War mentality, hegemonism and power politics are the root cause of world conflicts and turmoil. The concept of building a community with a shared future for mankind proposed by President Xi is a logical extension of China’s “internal harmony leads to external harmony, and internal harmony will inevitably lead to external harmony”, and is China’s value pursuit as a responsible world power. It brings to mankind not greed and demand, but the benevolence of “loving all people and all things”; it presents to the world not conquest, but the tolerance of “harmony among all nations”; it brings to mankind not war, but peaceful coexistence and common prosperity. This is precisely the wisdom contribution of the Chinese nation as an ancient nation with profound cultural heritage to the long-term development of all mankind.
Morality and interests
Human beings’ understanding and thinking about the origin of war has experienced a process of gradually rising from an intuitive and perceptual state to a logical and rational state. “Even war has rules.” On the ideological balance of balancing righteousness and interests, the Chinese and Western military traditions each have their own emphasis on the “moral” principle and the “interest” principle.
The view of righteousness and profit, “righteousness is in profit, and profit is in righteousness”, is an important essence of Chinese traditional culture, emphasizing that righteousness is more important than profit, giving up profit for righteousness, taking profit with righteousness, and thinking of righteousness when seeing profit. “A gentleman is concerned with righteousness, while a villain is concerned with profit” and “A gentleman loves money and gets it in a proper way”, these moral principles that every Chinese is familiar with have become an important cultural gene of our nation. In the ancient Chinese classics, history, and collections, there is almost no content that directly advocates that the purpose of war is to plunder profits, but more of it is accusations against such wars. The Mohists believed that wars were waged for the sake of moral punishment and to punish the unrighteous; Mencius pointed out that wars were waged to punish tyrants, such as the revolution of Tang and Wu; “Xunzi” emphasized that “war is used to suppress violence and eliminate harm”. Military strategists, who were in the main position of ancient military theory, usually used morality as the criterion for evaluating wars, and emphasized whether the use of troops should be considered in accordance with morality, and emphasized that “there is a legitimate reason for the war”, emphasizing that the purpose of war is to maintain morality.
The ancient Western thinking on the issue of war has always been based on the principle of interest struggle. Machiavelli, a famous scholar in the Renaissance, said bluntly: “In order to achieve national interests, no moral principles can be mentioned; as long as the goal is achieved, any means can be used.” Since the principle of interest was clearly running through early practice and cognition, wars in medieval Europe for the purpose of plunder were often naked. All the wars in the West have also confirmed this conclusion. No matter what the cause of the war is, there is a strong interest drive behind it.
Nowadays, some countries use their military superiority to interfere everywhere, and do things to grab interests under the guise of morality, which has torn the originally peaceful and tranquil countries into pieces and made the originally clear and peaceful world into a mess. War is the continuation of politics, and politics is not only the concentrated expression of morality, but also the economy. In the final analysis, war must reflect both the principle of interests and the principle of morality. Therefore, adhering to the correct view of justice and interests and insisting on the dialectical unity of interests and morality is the fundamental requirement of military activities. Only in this way can we avoid the strange phenomenon of winning tactically but losing strategically.
Spiritual and material
As the basic components of war power, people and things cannot be neglected. In this regard, Napoleon said that there are only two kinds of power in the world – sword and spirit. In general, Chinese traditional military thought and culture emphasizes strategy to defeat the enemy, adheres to the logic of wisdom plus strength, and pays more attention to the cultivation of military spirit, while Western traditional military thought and culture emphasizes strong soldiers to win, adheres to the logic of strength plus technology, and even develops into technological determinism.
Chinese traditional philosophy can be called wisdom philosophy, and Chinese traditional culture can be called integrity culture. The ancient sages often regarded reputation as more important than life, and attached more importance to the social significance and moral value of life. Ancient military strategists recognized the importance of morale very early, and often had classic discussions on this when discussing the view of war, strategic thinking and military management concepts, such as “to unite the army and gather the people, it is necessary to stimulate morale”, “if the morale is strong, they will fight, if the morale is lost, they will flee”, “victory is gained by prestige, defeat is lost by losing morale”, etc., and later in military books, there were special discussions on “inspiring soldiers”, “extending morale” and “moral warfare”. This reflects that the ancients attached great importance to the spiritual factors in combat. Han Xin’s battle with his back to the river and Xiang Yu’s burning of his cauldrons and sinking of his boats have become military practice models. Comrade Mao Zedong made a vivid interpretation when evaluating the War to Resist U.S. Aggression and Aid Korea – the enemy had “more steel and less morale”, while we had “less steel and more morale”. The strategic wisdom of maneuvering and calculating and the fighting spirit of facing death with indifference and marching forward courageously have always been our important magic weapon for creating miracles in war.
Western civilization’s thinking is often centered on nature, and focuses on applying the results of natural science. As early as the Peloponnesian War, the Athenian navy carefully designed and equipped warships, relying on the high speed, maneuverability and impact of warships to win. In the Middle Ages, the advancement of firearms technology finally broke through the shackles of feudal knight heroism. Since then, the West has placed more emphasis on keeping one eye on war practice and one eye on new technology. Since Copernicus published On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres in 1543, science and technology in the Western world have entered a period of rapid development. It was against this background that Western military technology emerged as a powerful tool for colonists to plunder and conquer the world. The West has always been extremely sensitive to accepting new technologies. Technological innovation and the equally important ability to respond quickly to such innovations soon became the characteristics of Western military culture.
At present, with the rapid development of science and technology and its continuous application in the military field, the great role of things in war is increasingly shown. In particular, the impact of advanced science and technology on the military field is unparalleled in any period in history. It is certainly one-sided to emphasize weapons and neglect spirit, but if it is overcorrected, it is also one-sided to emphasize spirit and neglect weapons. War practice tells us that although the spiritual power in war can make up for the disadvantages of weapons and equipment to a certain extent, it is not infinite. If we do not attach importance to weapons and equipment, the role of spirit in war cannot be maximized, and it will cost more to win in war. On the basis of adhering to the materialist view of history that “it is people rather than things that determine the outcome of war”, we must adhere to the dialectical unity of human factors and material factors, add scientific and technological wings to strategic wisdom and fighting spirit, continuously improve the proportion of scientific and technological composition of combat effectiveness, integrate human initiative with the basic role of things at a higher level, and comprehensively improve the combat effectiveness of the army.
Defense and Offense
Offense and defense are the most basic modes of warfare. Ancient China attached great importance to national integration and national unity, and emphasized the status of defense. It was necessary to maintain its national independence while not expanding outward. It adopted the strategic principle of active defense against foreign invasions. In ancient times, expansionism prevailed in the West, which mainly focused on dealing with foreign nations and paid more attention to offense.
Chinese civilization was born in the heartland of the Central Plains in the Yellow River Basin. It is an agricultural society and has been a multi-ethnic community since ancient times. Chinese traditional culture emphasizes stability, preservation, and restraint. Ancient China has always considered itself the center of the world. These are reflected in military thought, which is to cherish unity, focus on defense, regard internal peace as the top priority of military strategy, and place defense in an important position. There are many discussions about defense in ancient Chinese classics. During the Spring and Autumn and Warring States Period, when military strategists were most prosperous, military strategists such as Sun Wu, Wu Qi, and Sun Bin emphasized defense in general when discussing military affairs, and when discussing offense, they mostly discussed it from the perspective of combat and tactics. Mozi proposed the political and military concept of “non-aggression”. The book “Mozi” handed down from generation to generation describes Mozi and his school’s profound insights on military defense. The Great Wall of ancient China is a materialized symbol of defense thought, reflecting the guiding ideology followed by rulers of different periods in military strategy: advocating both maintaining the independence of their own nation and not expanding outward. The famous scholar John King Fairbank once said that China has always emphasized defensive warfare, which is completely different from the offensive theory of European imperialism.
The ancient West had a tradition of expansion to dominate. Western civilization originated from the Greek peninsula. The characteristic of maritime civilization that “the world is home” makes it mobile and aggressive. At that time, the national defense targets and war edges of those countries were mostly directed at foreign countries. In addition to fighting each other, the nations of Western Europe often united or independently used foreign forces. The places they went to were as close as the Mediterranean coast and as far as Asia, Africa and Latin America. They reflected the cultural characteristics of Westerners who admired force, liked expansion and adventure. For example, the Assyrian wars that broke out many times in history swept across West Asia and North Africa. With the Assyrian Kingdom as the center, various countries launched a melee. All countries that have been glorious and leading in the history of ancient Western countries have a strong desire for conquest. The rise of great powers is accompanied by expansion, hegemony and war. This is the theory in Western culture that a strong country must dominate.
The world is undergoing major changes unseen in a century, and in the face of an international situation characterized by chaos and changes, and to adapt to the new requirements for the development of national strategic interests, we must unswervingly adhere to the strategic thinking of active defense, strive to build a military force that is commensurate with my country’s status and consistent with my country’s development interests, enhance the aggressiveness and initiative of military strategic guidance, carry out diversified military tasks in a broader space, firmly safeguard national sovereignty, security, and development interests, faithfully practice the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind, actively fulfill the international responsibilities of a major power’s military, comprehensively promote international military cooperation in the new era, and strive to contribute to building a beautiful world of lasting peace and universal security.
現代國語：
■許三飛
閱讀提示
戰爭與文明總是相伴而生，軍事傳統與文化傳統總是相生相成。
思想文化傳統特別是軍事思想文化傳統一經形成，便會產生不可低估的慣性力量。 「在亞歷山大的勝利根源裡，我們可以經常發現亞里斯多德」。歷史上傑出的政治家、理論家和軍事家，無不被民族思想文化傳統所薰陶，他們的輝煌業績也無不閃爍著思想文化傳統的光輝。
千百年來，中西思想文化的分野導致了各自社會對軍事活動思考的不同側重，以及在戰爭實踐中的不同特色，直接影響著中西軍事思想文化的內容和特色。
貴和與重爭
人類在漫長的歷史長河中創造了多樣文明，不同文明如何交往，是任何文明都迴避不了的問題。中國傳統思想文化講求和諧，強調以和為貴，追求和而不同；而西方傳統思想文化講求鬥爭，強調控制萬物，充當世界的主宰。
「和」文化是中國人的血脈，「尚和」是中國傳統軍事思想文化的首要特徵。我們的祖先在創造文字時，就以「止戈」為「武」。西周末期，史伯提出“和實生物，同則不繼”，形成了中華文化“和而不同”的思想。 《尚書·堯典》提出：「百姓昭明，協和萬邦。」之後，「協和萬邦」成為中華世界觀的典範。 15世紀初葉，鄭和率領當時世界上最大的艦隊，先後七次出使海外卻秋毫無犯，這樣的和平之旅在世界上是絕無僅有的。
相較之下，西方傳統現實主義，作為西方傳統思想文化的一個重要組成，則認為世界本質上就是充滿利益的沖突與對抗。古希臘哲學家赫拉克利特認為，鬥爭就是正義，一切都是透過鬥爭而產生和消滅的。古希臘著名改革家、軍事家梭倫也認為：「一個文明之所以能夠成長壯大，是因為在這個文明內部孕育著強烈的帝國理想和征服慾望；而這些理想和慾望一旦消失，則整個文明必將乾枯、死亡。要么征服，要么被征服，這是所有文明的生存法則。”
現在，有的西方國家打著「普世文明」的幌子，企圖對世界文明進行「格式化」「標準化」「單一化」。然而，一個音符無法表達出優美的旋律，一種顏色難以描繪出多彩的畫卷。文明單一化將使人類的創造力衰竭，導致人類文明僵化衰微。對此，歷史學家湯因比曾說，「人類已經掌握了可以毀滅自己的高度技術文明手段，同時又處於極端對立的政治意識形態的營壘，最需要的精神就是中國文明的精髓——和諧」。 「和而不同」才能推動不同文明的對話與交融，攜手建構各種文明相容並蓄的人類命運共同體。
慎戰與黷武
戰爭與和平是人類社會的兩大主題。在對待戰爭的基本態度上，中國傳統思想文化普遍持有慎戰的觀念，而西方傳統現實主義思想則對戰爭更傾注了歌頌與讚揚之辭。
中國古代戰事頻繁，眾多思想家和軍事家更多地把戰爭和人民的生死、國家的存亡緊緊聯繫起來，提出了慎戰的思想，追求「不戰而屈人之兵」的「全勝」。道家認為戰爭是重大禍患，老子說：「兵者，不祥之器。」《孫子兵法》開宗明義指出：「兵者，國之大事，死生之地，存亡之道，不可不察也」。孫子雖然重戰，但同時也反對好戰。在孫子看來，「亡國不可以復存，死者不可以復生。故明君慎之，良將警之，此安國全軍之道也」。他還對限制戰爭明確提出了三個基本原則：“非利不動，非得不用，非危不戰。”商鞅也提出戰爭是“以戰去戰”，而且“兵大律在謹”。可以說，先秦諸家慎戰思想不斷影響後世，逐漸成為中國軍事傳統的主流思想。
西方傳統現實主義對戰爭較持有肯定的觀點，認為人之間天然地存在競爭，戰爭本身是符合人性的。赫拉克利特說：「戰爭是萬物之父，也是萬物之王」。在古希臘人眼中，戰爭是求得榮譽、成為英雄的主要途徑。在斯巴達，只要「君主們稍稍做出一點打架的信號，他們就會找到很多自願拿起武器的人，他們唯一的願望是取得榮譽」。此後，在漫長的歷史發展中，傳統現實主義思想一直影響著西方政治哲學、軍事哲學的發展。及至近代，西方這種推崇戰爭和武力的觀念並未消弭，兩次世界大戰給人類帶來了巨大災難。
今天，歷經無數次戰爭，越來越多的國家認識到，弱肉強食不是人類共存之道，窮兵黷武不是人類和平之計。人類比以往任何時候都更有條件朝著和平與發展的目標邁進。但也要看到，世界並不太平，鑄劍為犁仍然是人們的美好願望。我們為了贏得和平，就要做好全面準備，這其中也包括戰爭的研究和準備工作，以期遏制、防止戰爭。因此，慎戰不僅要保留傳統的「不戰而勝」的蘊意，還要增加「不戰而和」的蘊意，建構制約戰爭的機制。
王道與霸權
在國際交往中一直存在著「王道」與「霸道」之辯。王道的內核是仁德，霸道的內核是強權。孫中山先生曾說，東方的文化是王道，主張仁義道德；西方的文化是霸道，主張功利強權。
對戰爭首先進行道德評價是中華文化的傳統。自漢代以來儒家思想開始佔統治地位，儒家文化佔據社會的主體地位，並逐步形成了內“仁”外“禮”的儒家倫理秩序，這是形成中國軍事傳統的文化基礎。孔子曾說：「故遠人不服，則修文德以來之。」孟子也說：「以力服人者，非心服也，力不贍也。以德服人者，中心悅而誠服也。」孔子和孫子也提出「有文事者必有武備」「令之以文，齊之以武」。在他們心目中，仁者無敵於天下，有德者無往而不勝，能得天下的是以德行仁的王道，而不是以力徵伐的霸道。春秋時期，在戰亂中崛起的五霸，把修德和振兵當作不可分割的雙刃劍，來確立自己的霸主地位。行王道，就要以德勝人，以德作依托，用和平的手段，通過尚義重理、以德懷遠、順化外邦。德勝，可以使人心悅誠服，才是製勝之道的最高境界。
西方傳統現實主義則認為，權力是政治的主要內容，將戰爭作為手段，強調以暴力取勝，武力是處理國與國關系的主要途徑。以古希臘和古羅馬為例，從開國到立國，從取得統治到鞏固和維護統治，他們都始終把追求權力擺在首位，把武力擴張和鐵血統治作為立國根基。在軍事政策乃至國家政策上，更靠鐵血精神在社會上貫徹統治階級的意志。斯巴達甚至在法律上規定，公民的責任和義務就是徵戰和戰死。然而，歷史和實踐表明，靠武力追求的絕對霸權，也會將自己陷入困境，必然最終被武力戰勝或葬送。
當下，全球治理進入了一個關鍵階段，人類正面臨著往何處去的歷史選擇。那些仍牢牢抓住冷戰思維、霸權主義和強權政治不放的國家才是製造世界沖突和動蕩的根源。習主席提出的建構人類命運共同體理念，是中國「內和乃求外順，內和必致外和」的邏輯延伸，是中國作為一個負責任世界大國的價值追求。其帶給人類的不是貪婪索取，而是「民胞物與」的仁愛；呈現給世界的不是征服，而是「協和萬邦」的包容；帶給人類的不是戰爭，而是和平共處、共同繁榮。這正是中華民族作為一個底蘊深厚的古老民族對全人類長遠發展的智慧貢獻。
道義與利益
人類對戰爭起源的認識與思考，經歷了從直覺感性狀態，逐步上升到邏輯理性狀態的過程。 「即使是戰爭，也有規則。」在義利兼顧的思想天平上，中西軍事傳統各有側重地貫穿著「道義」原則和「利益」原則。
「義在利中，義中有利」的義利觀，是中國傳統文化的重要精髓，強調重義輕利、舍利取義、以義取利、見利思義。 “君子喻於義，小人喻於利”“君子愛財取之有道”，這些每個中國人都耳熟能詳的道德準則，已經成為我們民族的重要文化基因。在中國古代的經史子集中，幾乎沒有內容直白地宣揚戰爭的目的是為了掠奪利益，更多的是對此類戰爭的指責。墨家認為，進行戰爭是為了道義之誅，是為了誅無道；孟子指出，進行戰爭是為了誅獨夫，即如湯武革命；《荀子》強調，「兵者，所以禁暴除害也」。處於古代軍事理論主體地位的兵家，評價戰爭通常也以道德為準繩，講究用兵要考慮是否符合道德，講究“師出有名”，強調進行戰爭的目的是為了維護道義。
古代西方對戰爭問題的思考，始終貫穿利益之爭的原則。文藝復興時期著名的學者馬基雅維利直言：「為了實現國家利益，可以不講任何道德原則；只要達到目的，完全可以不擇手段」。由於在早期實踐和認識中都明顯地貫穿利益原則，歐洲中世紀以掠奪為目的的戰爭往往是赤裸裸的。西方歷次戰爭也在印證著這個結論，無論戰爭的起因是什麼，背後都有強勁的利益驅動。
如今，有些國家利用軍事優勢到處干涉，打著道義的幌子乾著攫取利益之事，把原本和平安寧的國家搞得支離破碎，原本清明祥和的世界搞得烏煙瘴氣。戰爭是政治的延續，而政治既是道義、更是經濟的集中表現，說到底，戰爭既要體現利益原則，也要體現道義原則。因此，秉持正確義利觀，堅持利益與道義的辯證統一，是軍事活動的根本要求，也只有這樣才能避免戰術上贏了、戰略上卻輸了的怪像出現。
精神與物質
人與物，作為戰爭力量的基本構成，不可偏廢。對此，拿破侖說，世界上只有兩種力量──利劍和精神。整體來看，中國傳統軍事思想文化強調謀略制敵，奉行智慧加力量的邏輯，更加重視軍人精神的培養，而西方傳統軍事思想文化重視強兵制勝，奉行力量加技術的邏輯，直至發展為技術決定論。
中國傳統哲學可稱為智慧哲學，中國傳統文化可稱為氣節文化，先賢們很多時候把名聲看得比生命還重要，更重視生命的社會意義及道德價值。古代兵家很早就認識到士氣的重要性，在論及戰爭觀、戰略思想以及治軍理念時對此常有經典論述，如「合軍聚眾，務在激氣」「氣實則鬥，氣奪則走」「勝在得威，敗在失氣」等，後來兵書中出現的「勵誌」「延氣」「氣戰」等專論。這反映出古人對作戰中精神因素的高度重視。韓信背水一戰、項羽破釜沉舟等成為軍事實踐典範。毛澤東同志在評價抗美援朝戰爭時做過形象的闡釋——敵人是“鋼多氣少”，而我們“鋼少氣多”。縱橫捭閔、神機妙算的謀略智慧和視死如歸、勇往直前的戰鬥精神，一直是我們創造戰爭奇蹟的重要法寶。
西方文明的思維常以自然為中心，並著重運用自然科學的成果。早在伯羅奔尼撒戰爭中，雅典海軍對戰船進行了精心的設計與裝備，是靠著戰船的高速度、機動性和沖撞力取勝的。中世紀，火器技術上的進步最終突破了封建騎士英雄主義的觀念桎梏。自此後，西方更加強調一隻眼盯著戰爭實踐，一隻眼盯著新技術。西方世界從1543年哥白尼出版《天體運行論》以來，科學技術便進入了狂飆突進的時期。正是在此背景下，西方的軍事技術異軍突起，成為殖民者掠奪和征服世界的有力工具。西方一直對接受新技術異常敏感。技術革新以及同等重要的對這種革新的迅速反應能力很快便成了西方軍事文化的特性。
目前，隨著科學技術飛速發展及其在軍事領域中的不斷應用，越來越顯示出物在戰爭中的巨大作用。特別是當下先進科技對軍事領域的影響是歷史上任何時期都無法比擬的。重器輕氣固然是片面的，但若矯枉過正，重氣輕器同樣也是片面的。戰爭實踐告訴我們：戰爭中的精神力量雖然在某種程度上可以彌補武器裝備的劣勢，但卻不是無限的。不重視武器裝備，精神在戰爭中的作用就無法最大限度地發揮出來，在戰爭中要取勝就會付出更大的代價。我們在堅持「決定戰爭勝負的是人而不是物」的唯物史觀的基礎之上，必須堅持人的因素與物的因素辯證統一，把謀略智慧和戰鬥精神插上科技翅膀，不斷提升戰鬥力的科技構成比例，把人的能動性與物的基礎性作用在更高水平上融合，全面提高軍隊戰鬥力。
防禦與進攻
進攻和防禦是作戰最基本的模式。古代中國非常重視民族融合與國家統一，十分強調防禦的地位，既要維護自己的民族獨立，又不向外擴張，而對於外來侵犯則採取積極防禦的戰略原則。古代西方則擴張主義盛行，主要著重對付外邦，更重視進攻。
中華文明誕生於黃河流域的中原腹地，是農耕社會，自古以來就是一個多民族的生存共同體。中國傳統文化強調穩定、守成、內斂，古代中國也一向認為自己是世界的中心。這些反映在軍事思想上，就是珍視統一、注重防禦，把安內作為軍事戰略之首務，把防禦擺在重要地位。中國古代典籍中，多見有關防禦的論述。在兵家最為繁盛的春秋戰國時期，孫武、吳起、孫臏等兵學大家在論兵時從總體上多強調防禦，而在論述進攻時，多從戰鬥和戰術的角度展開。墨子提出「非攻」的政治軍事觀念，傳世的《墨子》一書記述了墨子及其學派關於軍事防禦的深刻見解。中國古代的長城是防禦思想的物化標志，反映了不同時期統治者在軍事戰略上所共同遵循的指導思想：既主張維護自己民族的獨立又不向外擴張。著名學者費正清曾說，中國歷來強調防禦性戰爭，與歐洲帝國主義進攻理論截然不同。
古代西方具有爭雄稱霸的擴張傳統。西方文明發源於希臘半島，海洋文明「四海為家」的特性使其具有流動性和侵略性。當時那些國家的國防對象和戰爭鋒芒，多是指向異域外邦。西歐各民族除自己相互徵戰外，還經常聯合或獨立對外用兵，所到之處近至地中海沿岸，遠至亞非拉，處處體現了西方人崇尚武力、喜歡擴張與冒險的文化特徵。例如，歷史上多次爆發的亞述戰爭，其戰火席捲了西亞和北非，以亞述王國為中心，各國展開了混戰。凡是在西方古代史上擁有過輝煌，獨領過風騷的國家，無不具有強烈的征服欲。伴隨大國崛起的是擴張、霸權和戰爭，這就是西方文化中的國強必霸的理論。
當今世界百年未有之大變局加速演進，面對變亂交織的國際形勢，適應國家戰略利益發展的新要求，我們必須堅定不移堅持積極防禦戰略思想，努力建設一支與我國地位相稱、與我國發展利益相適應的軍事力量，增強軍事戰略指導的進取性和主動性，在更加廣闊的空間遂激進行、普遍安全的美好世界作貢獻。
中國原創軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/ll_208543/16269993888.html
