KUALA LUMPUR: As I was saying, I had the privilege of teaching a course on the development of modern strategy (with an ineluctable focus on warfare) over the past few months, and it set me thinking about the applicability of some of the successful strategies versus the not so successful ones in the history of international relations to modern, albeit domestic politics.

Without delving too much into the evolving theories of war or diplomatic strategy, there are glaring historical examples of nations and leaders who, with the unenviable benefit of hindsight, adopted strategies that might be said to have ultimately led to their doom or downfall. Napoleon Bonaparte was a great unifier of France at a time when the once-great nation was reeling from the excesses of the French Revolution. The Reign of Terror, as the horrifying period in the aftermath of the French Revolution came to be called, was all the rage with various ambitious and cruel leader figures alternately conniving their way to power, persecuting and executing other equally striving contenders, and just as suddenly fell from grace and were sent to the imposingly sharp edge of the guillotine. Napoleon made political alliances with generals and revolutionaries alike, alternately setting them at odds with one another to suit his purpose, as he adroitly rode to the pinnacle of French political power and stayed there to meaningfully lead the beleaguered nation. It was so far a political strategy that worked for the erstwhile lone lieutenant from the then only recently French island of Corsica, which the French had just wrested away from the Italians.