When you make an open threat, there is always the chance that you might have to live up to it. Instead, it is better to do something that will make them stop and think.
For example, this might take the form of having a go-between send a message on your behalf concerning something terrifying you are capable of.
By letting the enemy “spy” on you and find out dangerous information you already meant for them to find, they will begin to view the situation more gravely than they would have had you issued an open threat.
The more unseen the danger you conjure up (whether real or not) the more effective it is. The danger should be visible enough that the enemy can perceive a coming danger, but cloaked enough so that he cannot know what exactly the terror he faces is…
A Veiled Threat
One morning in 1474, during a court discussion, the “Spider King” Louis XI of France (1423-82) – so named for the intricate plots and strategies he wove – suddenly went into a long, rage-filled rant against the duke of Milan. The usually calm and careful king shocked his courtiers who looked and listened on in amazement.
He complained that while the duke’s father had been a trusted friend of France, the son was working against France and was breaking their agreements. Out loud, he even considered acting against the duchy.
As he spoke, to the courtiers’ dismay, a man slipped out of the room. It was the Milanese ambassador to France who had just recently been received graciously by the king.
Had the king forgotten that the ambassador had been invited to the court discussion? This might prove to be a quite a diplomatic issue.
Later during that same day, Louis invited the ambassador into his personal lodgings and began a seemingly casual conversation. He spoke of the support he had for the duke of Milan and his fondness for him.
Then he asked the ambassador if he had perhaps heard the king’s comments during the court session. Were there any rumours? Maybe a courtier had informed him?
The ambassador confessed that he had been there personally to witness the words. He also assured Louis that the duke of Milan was a loyal supporter of France, and there was no need to worry.
Louis replied that he had cause to vent his anger towards the duke and then left the matter at that. The ambassador soon left his presence.
The next day the king sent a few councillors to the ambassador. Ostensibly, they were there to tend to his needs and to check whether he was comfortable, but soon they began to enquire if he would pass on the king’s words to the duke.
They assured his that it meant nothing more than that and the ambassador should simply forget the words. The king was merely venting, and the matter need not be blown out of proportion.
None of the men involved knew that the king had done this all deliberately, for the king knew full well that the ambassador was going to report his words in full detail to the duke – and that is exactly what he wanted.
Louis knew the duke was treacherous, and that is what he wanted the duke to realise. And the plan worked beautifully. Indeed, for the next few years, the duke was as obedient and dependable ally a king could find.
Analysis
Louis XI was known to weave plots that were always several steps ahead of his opponents. In this case too it was no different.
The king had a dilemma on his hands. The duke’s treachery was plain, at the same time, he did not want to act against the duke just yet. He wanted to send a warning that would be fully heard and understood – but how could he go about it?
He could not complain to the ambassador as this would come across as whining and would hardly reach the duke’s ears. Nor could he attack too directly as the duke would simply mouth empty words and go about business as usual.
No – the king came up with something much cleverer, something that made his warning stick. He set it up in such a way that the threat seemed as though it was never meant to be heard by the duke in the first place.
When the duke heard about it in this fashion it became truly ominous. After all, it is a principle based on human nature; when someone threatens us directly, it can be quite easily dismissed; when we hear of a threat via a third party… well then the matter suddenly becomes far more serious.
In using this method, the king let the duke know that he knew exactly what he was planning. This instilled an uneasy fear in the duke.
When under attack, often we resort to emotional responses such as making threats. When we do such things, we are inadvertently revealing our actions and plans. Since words do not always have an effect on an aggressor, we are suddenly put in a weak position.
But if we send a message through a different source, or subtly signal that we are acting against them, this will have a much better effect. So long as you can keep your full desires hidden from their view, their imaginations will run wild with possibilities.
It is the same (unfortunate) principle behind why torturers would sometimes simply show their equipment to the prisoner rather than actually torture them – the mind will do the job for them.
Footnotes & Further Reading
Greene, Robert. The 33 Strategies of War. Millionaire, 2006
