Strategic decisions are decisions made on major issues regarding the use and construction of military forces
from an overall perspective, and are the highest-level decisions in the military domain. Its main task is to
stipulate the strategic objectives, tasks, and policies of military conflict and army building, and determine the
method of military force utilization and construction methods in accordance with the characteristics of the
strategic environment, national interest requirements and military strategic thinking. Strategic decision-
making is the basic basis for strategic planning and implementation of strategic actions. It is directly related
to the success or failure of military conflicts, and even affects the future and destiny of the country.

Section One: The Main Characteristics of Strategic Decision-Making
Strategic decision-making has a macro-oriented and leading role. Compared with decision-making in other
fields, strategic decision-making has outstanding antagonism, risk, creativity, timeliness, and foresight.

1. Stark confrontation
Strategic decision-making is the decision made by the strategic instructor on the countermeasures we
should take in response to the other's attempts, possible actions, and security threats to us. It is obviously
antagonistic. It is not only a competition of the will and strength of the two parties, but also a game of
strategy and art between the two parties. It requires that the strategic director must give full play to his
subjective initiative on the basis of objective material.
Strategic decision-making is also manifested in the process of intelligent confrontation between the opposing
parties relying on and using military strength. It is a competition between the strategic directors of the two
sides to compete for superiority and active subjective guidance.

With the continuous development of human military practice activities, strategic evaluation has become an
indispensable and important link in military strategic guidance, and has a significant impact on the
development process of strategic activities. Practice has proved that after entering the information age, the
role of strategic evaluation has further risen, and strategic instructors must pay close attention to it.

Section One: The meaning and role of strategic evaluation
Strategic evaluation is produced in the long-term military conflict practice of mankind. It is an objective
requirement for the implementation of scientific guidance on strategic activities. Its meaning and role
continue to develop with the practice of military conflicts, and present the trend of the professionalization of
evaluation of the main body and scientification of evaluation method, and diversification of evaluation
content.
1. The meaning of strategic evaluation
Strategic evaluation refers to the process of using scientific methods to conduct qualitative and quantitative
comprehensive evaluation of strategic activities, and make corresponding evaluation conclusions. It
generally includes pre-evaluation, stage evaluation and effectiveness evaluation.
In the military field, although strategic evaluation activities have long existed, they are mainly characterized
by qualitative analysis. It was not until the 1980s that due to the development of computer technology,
strategic evaluation began to move from static evaluation to dynamic simulation evaluation, and qualitative
evaluation to qualitative evaluation. The combination of quantitative evaluation and development has
resulted in the emergence of a strategic evaluation system that adapts to different evaluation tasks, and the
evaluation theory has also been greatly developed. A professional evaluation agency and a special
evaluation system have been established.

Strategy implementation is a strategic practice activity that uses strategic means to achieve strategic goals,
in accordance with the requirements of strategic guidelines and strategic planning, and the development and
changes of the strategic situation. trategy implementation involves all aspects and each field of military work, and the content is very extensive, but it can be summed up mainly in two aspects: army building and preparation for military conflict; military conflict implementation.

Army building and preparations for military conflict are both closely linked and have differences. From the
perspective of the relationship between the two, the main aspects of army building and military conflict
preparations are the same and consistent. Army building is the basis of military conflict preparations, and
military conflict preparations for specific combat objects in a certain strategic direction are themselves. An
important content of army building, at the same time it can lead and promote army building. Judging from the
difference between the two, army building is a regular military activity, which is basic, comprehensive and
long-term, and pays more attention to ability traction; while preparations for military conflict are often carried
out in response to a certain actual security threat, and have a strong pertinence and phased nature, and put
more emphasis on demand traction. It can be seen that both are important content of strategy
implementation, and they can be planned and implemented as one at the same time.