I concede that this is a pattern that I enjoy contemplating and could be confirmation bias. A "Go" philosophy, if it were indeed a thing, is in itself certainly not morally superior, as it ultimately tries to surround and eliminate enemy pieces in an attempt to control most of the board. Chess on the other hand also includes plenty of moves that are intended to control the board or provide small longterm advantages that are hopefully not fully clear to the opponent.

I do think that the Eastern way of avoiding direct confrontation is a major cultural difference to the West, and is reflected in both Go and geopolitics.

Going back to the article, any Strategist should probably study a wide range of games to maybe gain a small improvement in strategic thinking.