Sea Power

The great American naval strategist Alfred Thayer Mahan does not define the phrase sea power very explicitly, even though he coined it himself. What he meant by the phrase must largely be inferred. Such ambiguity is common and sometimes impedes communication. People use the same words but often seem to mean somewhat different things by them. When it comes to sea power some focus on navies, while others include the civilian uses of the sea as well.

Sea power has to be seen both as an input and an output. The obvious inputs are navies, coast guards, the marine or civil maritime industries broadly defined, and, where relevant, the contribution of land and air forces. As an output, sea power is not simply about what it takes to use the sea (although that is obviously a prerequisite). It is also the capacity to influence the behavior of other people or things by what one does at or from the sea. This approach defines sea power in terms of its consequences, its outputs rather than the inputs, the ends rather than the means.

Moreover, sea power concerns the sea-based capacity to determine events both at sea and on land. As that other great master of maritime thought, Sir Julian Corbett, frequently remarked, the real point of sea power is not so much what happens at sea, but how that influences the outcome of events on land. In recent years, indeed, there has been a marked shift in naval attention from power at sea, to power from the sea.

From this bald summary of the conclusions of Mahan and Corbett, two conclusions can immediately be drawn. The first is the simple point that there is more to sea power than gray-painted ships with numbers on the side. Sea power also embraces the contribution that the other services can make to events at sea, and the contribution that navies can make to events on land or in the air. Sea power also includes the nonmilitary aspects of sea use (merchant shipping, fishing, marine insurance, shipbuilding and repair, etc.) because these contribute to naval power and because they can also influence the behavior of other people in their own right. This is a useful reminder that the sea is far more than a medium for the exercise of political power; it is also a rich source of resources, the major means of transportation for international trade, a means of communication, and a crucial physical environment. The sea, in short, really matters.

Second, sea power is a relative concept, something that some countries have more of than others. The real issue is the matter of degree. Nearly all countries have a degree of sea power, whether it be through their naval strength, their shipbuilding, their skills in marine insurance, their capacity to supply seafarers, or a combination of all of these characteristics and others. But the point is that some countries have more sea power than others, and it is that relationship that is strategically significant in peace and in war.

...