The Long Council
Who was selected, and why
Should China take control of Taiwan by military force?
The central tension
Strategic necessity versus catastrophic risk — whether achieving political objectives through force justifies the enormous military, economic, and human costs versus finding alternative pathways that preserve core interests without devastating consequences.
Selected members
Sun Tzu
Will argue: That military action should only be considered if political objectives cannot be achieved through other means, and that the costs of invasion likely outweigh the benefits
The foundational strategic theorist on when force achieves objectives and when it destroys them · The Art of War's principles on supreme excellence (winning without fighting), intelligence over force, and the costs of prolonged conflict are directly applicable
Deng Xiaoping
Will argue: That China should focus on internal development and long-term strategic positioning rather than premature military action that could derail China's rise
Architect of modern China's strategic doctrine including "hide your strength, bide your time" and the One China policy framework · His statements on Taiwan ("this problem can wait, time is on our side") and strategic patience doctrine are directly relevant
Lee Kuan Yew
Will argue: That military action would destabilize the entire region and force other Asian states to choose sides, ultimately weakening China's position
Small state survival strategist with deep understanding of US-China competition and regional stability dynamics · His analysis of US-China relations, small state positioning, and the risks of great power miscalculation
David Ben-Gurion
Will argue: That while security imperatives are paramount, successful state-building requires international legitimacy that military aggression would destroy
Practitioner experience in existential conflict, state-building under threat, and the relationship between military capability and diplomatic legitimacy · His decisions on preemptive action, alliance-building, and nuclear ambiguity provide relevant strategic precedents
Helmut Schmidt
Will argue: That the interconnected nature of modern economies makes military conflict economically catastrophic for all parties, requiring diplomatic solutions
Crisis management expert who navigated great power competition while maintaining alliance relationships and economic interdependence · His approach to managing US-Soviet tensions, alliance solidarity, and the primacy of avoiding scenarios worse than the status quo
Considered but not selected
Xi Jinping: Not included in the council roster as a living leader
Henry Kissinger: Would provide balance on great power realism but his framework overlaps substantially with Schmidt's crisis management approach
Thatcher: Her experience is primarily with middle-power projection rather than great power territorial disputes