War and peace are topics that are constantly being discussed. In 2012, Chan Kung has proposed his own theory of "competitive equilibrium" to explain the issues of war and peace in the world. He believes that war is competition, while equilibrium is a certain kind of systemic rule and order. Competitive equilibrium will become the main competition for the future world. The party that can accurately grasp the relationship of competitive equilibrium will be the leader of the future world.

The ten key points of Chan Kung's competitive equilibrium theory are as below:

1. The purpose of the strategy is to achieve equilibrium. This means, revising the order of rule and order, and not victory on the battlefields. Taking the U.S-Soviet Cold War as example, although the Cold War occurred over a very long period of time, it has always maintained a certain balance, thereby establishing a model of war in the future.

2. Cost factor is an equilibrium reason that cannot be ignored in modern warfare. The cost of modern warfare is quite alarming, and the same thing was true in the past. Imagine a Europe without the Marshall Plan, how would the situation be now? During the China-Vietnam War, Vietnam's inflation in 1986-1988 reached a staggering 300%-400%. Therefore, whichever party that wants to launch any warfare would have to be cautious.

3. The internet softens war. The cyberworld is an anarchic world in which personal reason plays an important role. Reason is the end and the determining factor. One can observe and express various interests and weight the social costs more easily in the cyberworld.

4. There is no boundary for competition in the form of war. Competing in the form of war will cause serious damages, and such damages may even exceed those caused by the enemy. Parties that involved in wars would often lose more than what they gain.

5. The fundamental purpose of war is to reshape the equilibrium. If the system rules and order under the equilibrium cannot be achieved, the war will lose its meaning, and it will be irrational choice, which is equivalent to suicide.

6. Social transparency has forced the those who would launch war to be more cautious. Social transparency makes the grounds for launching wars easy to fail. The "weapons of mass destruction" as the reason for the war in the Iraqi War is an example of this; such reasons must pass the social transparency.

7. The risk of war distortion has increased dramatically. Many wars were originally fighting for survival space, yet such space became smaller after the war; Japan in World War II is an example of this. In addition, the post-war ideologies are often not what the war initiators intended them to be.

8. Under the equilibrium conditions, the form of war has changed. This form of warfare is more of a confrontation in the state of communication, which has low intensity and high frequency.

9. There are varying form and means of warfare under equilibrium conditions, which include new forms like economic, information, and financial warfare. And warfare has become complicated than ever.

10. Warfare will disappear from the desk and conference room. A clear trend is the strategization of war conflicts; issues that can be solved with strategy will not lead to direct war conflicts.

Chan Kung believes that the theory of competitive equilibrium is a type of national value. He pointed out that China should uphold pacifism, yet it should not be afraid of wars and conflicts. China is the only country in the world that has not participated in any war that has caused large-scale death and injury of the poor in the past 35 years. China is fully equipped to become a world leader in peace, and this must be strategically understood and practiced.

At the same time, China should not be afraid of regional conflicts or even partial wars. For as long as China can adapt and meet the conditions of equilibrium, such wars and conflicts that seek system rules and order are controllable. Wars and conflicts under conditions of competitive equilibrium are all controllable operations in a strategic sense. After the world accepts certain national values, it will form the potential where people can rationalize wars and conflicts. This was precisely what happened in the Gulf War in the United States and the NATO-Serbian War.

Final analysis conclusion:

Strategy will decide victories or losses in the future world.