People’s understanding of sea power has evolved with the trends of the times, as well as scientific and technological development. There has not been authoritative definition of sea power since the concept came into being. In the 21st century, influenced by globalization, scientific and technological innovation and the rapid rise of China’s maritime forces, a new debate over sea power and subsequently a new understanding of it has emerged in the United States, leading to adjustments of relevant strategies and policies, which will have far-reaching influences on the regional and international security situation.Ĭoncept and Two Major Theories of Sea Power in the West It serves as a major pillar for the global hegemony of the United States, where the sea power theory was originated. 1330.Sea power is the basic and decisive factor in traditional maritime security. Mahan, ‘Reflections, Historic and Other, Suggested by the Battle of the Japan Sea’, Journal of the Royal United Services Institution, vol. Mahan, Naval Administration and Warfare: Some General Principles (Boston, 1908) p. Mahan, Naval Strategy Compared and Contrasted with the Principles and Practice of Military Operations on Lan d (Boston, 1918) p. Mahan, The Influence of Sea Power Upon History 1660–1783 (Boston, 1890) p. See also Mahan to Thursfield, 28 October 1899 in Letters and Papers, ii, p. Livezey, Mahan on Sea Power (Norman, 1981) p. Mahan, Lessons of the War with Spain and other Articles (Boston, 1899) p. Mahan, The Major Operations of the Navies in the War of American Independence (Boston, 1913) p. Jomini, Traité des Grandes Opérations Militaires (Paris, 1851, iii) pp. See also John Shy, ‘Jomini’, in Makers of Modern Strategy from Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age (Princeton, 1986) pp. Earle (ed.), Makers of Modern Strategy (Princeton, 1943) p. 154.Ĭrane Brinton, Gordon Craig and Felix Gilbert, ‘Jomini’, in Edwin M. Turk, The Ambiguous Relationship: Theodore Roosevelt and Alfred Thayer Mahan (Westport, 1987) p. Michael Howard, ‘Jomini and the Classical Tradition’, in The Theory and Practice of War (Bloomington, 1967) p. Russell Weigley, The American Way of War (Bloomington, 1973) pp. Hattendorf (eds), The Writings of Stephen B. René Albrecht-Carrie, A Diplomatic History of Europe since the Congress of Vienna (New York, 1973) p. Hattendorf, compiler, Register of the Alfred Thayer Mahan Papers (Newport, 1987). The main collection of Mahan manuscripts is in the Library of Congress, but for a guide to the complementary collection at the Naval War College, see John B. Hattendorf, compilers, A Bibliography of the Works of Alfred Thayer Mahan (Newport, 1986). This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.įor published documents and bibliography, see Robert Seager II and Doris Maguire (eds), The Letters and Papers of Alfred Thayer Mahan (Annapolis, 1977) 3 volumes These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. In so doing he persuaded naval thinkers and writers to accept a new conceptual basis. Mahan found the literature of naval history largely a record of battles, and he was the first successfully to convert it to a subject which related activity at sea to foreign policy and the general activity of nation-states. From either point of view, Mahan’s contributions must be seen as part of the development of naval thought and, although he had precursors, Mahan is the proper starting-point in an outline of the progression and refinement of naval thinking in the English-speaking world during the twentieth century. By contrast, in Britain Mahan’s works are now regarded as old and outdated. 2 In the United States his name is known to every officer in the Navy and his authority is often evoked and applied to issues of naval strategy. Much was written by Mahan 1 and much has been written about him.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |