chijiuzhan-san-jieduan

R — Original Text (Reading)

"China will move from inferiority to parity to superiority, while Japan will move from superiority to parity to inferiority; China will move from defense to stalemate to counterattack, while Japan will move from offense to conservation to retreat—this is the process of the Sino-Japanese War, and its inevitable trend." — On Protracted War (May 1938)

I — Methodology Framework (Interpretation)

1. When facing a strong enemy, don't fantasize about a quick victory (quick victory theory) or assume certain defeat (national subjugation theory). The correct understanding is: the weak can eventually win through a protracted war, but the process is long and phased.
2. Three-phase model:
   • Defense Phase: The enemy is strong and we are weak. The core task is to "survive". Hold onto the basic market, avoid head-on confrontation, and accumulate strength.
   • Stalemate Phase ("Turning Hub"): The strength of both sides tends to balance. This is the most painful and critical phase. Deeply cultivate niche areas, accumulate data and trust, and wait for the opponent to make mistakes.
   • Counterattack Phase: The advantages we have accumulated begin to be released, and the opponent's weaknesses are exposed. Expand comprehensively in areas beyond the opponent's reach.
3. The driving force of the three phases is not time but the transformation of contradictions: four pairs of contradictions (strong/weak, big/small, progressive/regressive, more support/less support) change dynamically. The strong consume strength, the weak accumulate strength, and the power balance is eventually reversed.
4. Each phase has different strategic tasks and operational principles—you cannot use counterattack-phase tactics in the defense phase, and vice versa.
5. The second phase (stalemate phase) is the most painful but also the most critical. Whether you can survive the stalemate phase determines the final outcome.

A1 — Application in Books (Past Application)

Application 1: On Protracted War — Construction and Verification of the Three-Phase Model

• Problem: In the early stage of the War of Resistance, two wrong views prevailed: "national subjugation theory" (China is doomed to perish) and "quick victory theory" (the war will end in three months), making it impossible to form a correct strategy.
• Method Application: Mao Zedong constructed the three-phase model only 10 months into the war. He did not rely on intuition, but deduced it based on the changing rules of the four pairs of contradictions over time: the enemy's advantages will be consumed in the first phase, both sides tend to balance in the second phase, and China's accumulated advantages will be released in the third phase.
• Conclusion: The three phases of protracted war: defense -> stalemate -> counterattack, and final victory belongs to China. The key is not to launch a full-scale attack in the first phase (quick victory theory) nor to give up because you think you can't win (national subjugation theory).
• Result: The actual process of the eight-year War of Resistance (1937-1945) basically developed according to the three-phase model, verifying the predictive power of this framework.

Application 2: A Single Spark Can Start a Prairie Fire — Long-Term Development Prediction of Weak Forces

• Problem: In 1930, the Red Army was extremely weak, and pessimism about "how long the red flag can last" prevailed within the Party.
• Method Application: Mao Zedong did not use empty encouragement, but used contradiction analysis to demonstrate the inevitability of the development of weak forces: irreconcilable contradictions within the ruling class -> warlords' scuffles -> power vacuum in rural areas -> red political power can exist and develop.
• Conclusion: It is not that "we hope to win", but that "we will win logically". The power balance will change over time.
• Result: From the Red Army of less than 10,000 people in 1930, after wave-like advancement, it finally achieved national victory in 1949.

A2 — Trigger Scenarios (Future Trigger)

1. Giant Entry: A large company announces entry into your track, and the team panics or wants to surrender. Users will say: "Google/Tencent/Bytedance is also doing this", "They have money and people, how can we fight", "Should we pivot?"
2. Extreme Resource Disadvantage: Competitors have far more capital, teams, and brand influence than you. Users will say: "The opponent's resources are 10 times ours", "They can sustain losses for three years, but we can't".
3. Stalemate in War of Attrition: The competition with the opponent has fallen into a stalemate, with no end in sight. Users will say: "We've been in a stalemate for a year", "Who will collapse first", "When can we win?"
4. Low Team Morale: Long-term inferiority leads the team to doubt the direction. Users will say: "The team is starting to doubt if we can win", "Some people want to give up", "Morale is very low".
5. Impulse for a Desperate Gamble: When the situation improves slightly, there is an urge to launch a full-scale attack. Users will say: "The opportunity is here, should we launch an all-out attack?", "I think we can confront them head-on now".

• vs Concentrate Superior Forces to Annihilate the Enemy: This skill = timeline planning for the overall war (strategic level), the latter = tactics for specific campaigns (tactical level)
• vs Contradiction Analysis Method: This skill is a specific application of the contradiction analysis method in the "weak vs strong" scenario
• vs Strategy-Tactics Dialectics: This skill plans the macro phase rhythm, while the latter handles dialectical issues such as "offense within defense" in each phase

E — Executable Steps (Execution)

Step 1: Determine the Current Phase

• Evaluate the power balance between us and the enemy using four pairs of contradictions (resource comparison, scale comparison, growth momentum/innovation ability comparison, external support/ecological advantage comparison).
• Determine which of the three phases we are currently in: If the opponent is launching a full-scale attack and we are contracting = Defense Phase; If both sides are in a stalemate and strength tends to balance = Stalemate Phase; If we start to take the initiative in certain areas = Counterattack Phase.
• Completion Standard: Clearly answer "We are currently in the ___ phase, and the basis for judgment is ___."

Step 2: Develop Phased Strategies

• Defense Phase Strategy: Hold onto core customer groups and differentiated barriers, avoid full-scale head-on confrontation. The goal is to "survive", with indicators being cash flow and core customer retention rate. Cut non-core expenses and concentrate resources on core defense.
• Stalemate Phase Strategy: Deeply cultivate niche areas, accumulate data/user trust/industry know-how that the opponent cannot replicate. The goal is to "establish asymmetric advantages", with indicators being vertical market share and user stickiness. This is the most painful phase, so prepare mentally in advance.
• Counterattack Phase Strategy: Expand comprehensively in areas beyond the opponent's reach. The goal is to "expand gains", with indicators being market share and revenue growth. Use accumulated trust and data advantages to advance rapidly.
• Stop Points: If there is an urge to launch a full-scale attack in the Defense Phase (quick victory theory impulse), stop immediately — return to defense. If you are overly cautious in the Counterattack Phase (cowardice), increase investment immediately — the opportunity window is limited.
• Completion Standard: Produce a phased strategy card — "Current phase ___, core goal ___, key indicators ___, absolutely do not ___."

Step 3: Set Phase Transition Conditions and Review Nodes

• Set clear "transition signals" for each phase: What data/events indicate that we can enter the next phase?
• Defense -> Stalemate: The opponent slows down the attack rhythm + our core customer churn rate stabilizes
• Stalemate -> Counterattack: We rank first in market share in the niche area + the opponent reduces investment or withdraws from the niche area
• Set quarterly review nodes to re-evaluate the power balance of the four pairs of contradictions.
• Completion Standard: Write a "Phase Transition Conditions List" — When ___ occurs, we move from the ___ phase to the ___ phase.

B — Boundary

Non-Applicable Scenarios

1. Evenly Matched or Advantaged Position: The three-phase model is designed for "weak vs strong" scenarios. If both sides are evenly matched or you have the upper hand, use more direct competitive strategies.
2. Short-Term Solvable Challenges: If the problem can be solved within 3-6 months, there is no need for long-term three-phase planning — concentrate forces to resolve it quickly.
3. Non-Competitive Decisions: The three-phase model is not needed for non-competitive scenarios such as internal management and product development.

Failure Modes (from Counterexamples)

• Quick Victory Theory (ce05): Eager to engage in decisive battle in the Defense Phase — "Impatient quick victory theorists cannot endure the difficult journey of protracted war and attempt to win quickly". As soon as there is some progress, they want to "take down" a bigger target. This exactly plays into the hands of the strong: the strong fear protracted war the most and hope the weak will rush into decisive battle.
• National Subjugation Theory/Capitulationism (ce06): Give up directly in the face of a strong enemy — "Can't beat them, better surrender or pivot". Fail to analyze the four pairs of contradictions behind strength and weakness, only seeing the surface resource gap.
• August Failure (ce03): Advance rashly when conditions are not mature — adopt tactics of the next phase without analyzing the current phase. Adopted a rash strategy suitable for the period of internal division of the opponent during a period when the opponent was temporarily stable.
• Flightism (ce16): Jump from the extreme of rash advance to the extreme of flight when encountering setbacks — give up completely without rational analysis.

Author's Blind Spot

• Mao Zedong's three-phase model is based on the special conditions of the War of Resistance (justice/injustice, large country/small country, etc.) and cannot be applied mechanically. In business competition, the "strong" may become stronger (winner-takes-all internet effect), and the "weak" may not naturally accumulate advantages. It can only be applied after analyzing the actual conditions of contradiction transformation.

Related Skills

• Contradiction Analysis Method (depends-on): The three-phase model of protracted war is a specific application of the contradiction analysis method in the "weak vs strong" scenario — deriving the three-phase strategy from the transformation of four pairs of contradictions (strong/weak, big/small, progressive/regressive, more support/less support). Master the contradiction analysis method first to understand the derivation logic of protracted war.
• Strategy-Tactics Dialectics (composes-with): Protracted war plans the macro timeline of the three phases, while strategy-tactics dialectics handles micro operations such as "offense within defense" in each phase. Cooperation between macro phase planning and micro offense-defense dialectics.
• Strategic Contempt and Tactical Attention (composes-with): The long-term nature of protracted war requires the team to maintain strategic confidence ("We will eventually win"), while operations in each phase require tactical prudence (no rash advance, no cowardice). Strategic contempt and tactical attention provide mindset management throughout the three phases.