In literature, the term "statecraft" is frequently deployed to capture the multifaceted nature of governing and political strategy. For Rousseau [1], the word delineates a form of governance limited to a specific, almost mercenary, faction of society rather than a unified civic duty. Twain [2] employs the term to highlight the consequences of its absence, suggesting that without the guiding force of statecraft, civic disorder and oppression proliferate. Meanwhile, Burgess and Park [3] use statecraft as a counterpoint to cultural and ethnic distinctiveness within the Roman Empire, framing it as an instrument aimed at imperial unity. Santayana [4] underscores the complexity of mastering statecraft alongside economic principles, hinting at the depth of intellectual engagement required. Finally, Griffis [5] illustrates statecraft as the dual tool of martial unification and the architectural shaping of national culture, reflecting its role in crafting both political order and cultural identity.