Analysis Of Mahan's Advocacy For Sea Power Against Mackinder's Views On A Nation's Economic Prosperity And Security

Mahan posed many important points in his writings that would influence the United States, as well as many others, in their naval policy and development of strategy. He also influenced the idea of what a Navy should be used for, for example, he rejected the idea that a navy was the best tool to defend a coast and should not be used defensively as it is a waste of resources that could be utilized more efficiently. Land based works are better suited for defense, except in the sense that a large navy in itself provides an inherent defense as a deterrent. Mahan’s writings are very complex and contain a wealth of jargon and is written for a scholar of naval history, but can be easily surmised with the idea that the United States should follow in the footsteps of Britain in having a large navy able to project its power and capability around the globe in order to become a great power. He did this by using historical evidence to back up his assertions. This differed from Julian Corbett’s writing to affect Britain’s policy as

The book is introduced with Russia. Although seventy-five percent of Russia’s population expands into Asia, it is not considered to be an Asian power, essentially because only a limited 22 percent of its population lives there. A majority or Russia’s wealth comes from Siberia. Siberia carries a great deal of minerals, oil and gas. The second chapter focuses on China. China is one of the fastest growing countries with a whopping population of 1.4 billion people. Along with an expanding community, China has also recently become a naval power, after

Alfred Thayer Mahan’s seminal work, The Influence of Sea Power upon History, 1660–1783, published in 1891, is an influential work of military theory. Although he is a revered military theorist, Mahan was criticized for “not being a systematic.” For example, he failed to consider social and cultural conditions in the rise of sea power; the rise of the English middle class, American agrarian discontent, and the rise of Russia. He also neglected to properly define the term "sea power," of which he claimed to have invented. Even so, two main interpretations of sea power do start to emerge. Firstly, the command of the sea through naval superiority and second, that combination of maritime commerce, overseas possessions, and privileged access to foreign markets that produces national wealth and greatness. Mahan also theorized that a naval fleet should never be divided and that victory at sea is only possible by fleet concentration, his most important principle in naval warfare.

He quotes, “The history of sea power is, largely, though by no means solely, a narrative of contests between nations, of mutual rivalries, of violence frequently culminating in war.” Mahan saw sea power as thoroughly intertwined with war. His argument was that a great navy was essential for national prosperity through military and economic expansion.

During 1890 U.S. foreign policy was heavily influenced by Alfred T. Mahan who wrote The Influence of Sea Power upon history, 1600-1783, which advocated the taking of the Caribbean Islands, Hawaii, and the Philippine Islands to establish Naval bases to protect both U.S. shores. More importantly, Mahan also promoted the building of a canal to enable fleet movement from ocean to ocean which later led to the construction of the Panama Canal ("Spanish-American War - The World of 1898: The Spanish-American War (Hispanic Division,

From its inception, America has been in a continual state of growth and expansion. Influenced by their grandfathers’ westward expansion in the early 19th century, expansionists in the turn of the 20th century expanded American influence and control worldwide. Various sources brought American desire of faraway land, through both individuals and through developments of the period. However, this Manifest Destiny didn’t always result in positive development, as shown with later problems incurring from the U.S. occupation of Cuba and the Philippines.

Frederick Jackson Turner, Alfred T. Mahan, Herbert Spencer, and John Fiske were all controversial philosophers of their time who argued their theories about American imperialism from 1890 to 1914. Frederick Jackson Turner believed in the relation between westward expansion and the success of the United States as a nation. He believed that all expansion to the west is necessary for the United States to become a successful and independent nation. Alfred T. Mahan was a naval strategist and was extremely influential in concepts involving naval superiority. His belief was that countries with the greatest and most powerful navy would have the most influence in the oceans. For example, the U.S. imperialism in the Philippines was due to naval superiority

In 1890, Mahan wrote The Influence of Sea Power Upon History, 1660-1783, which, at the time, was widely considered to be the most influential book on military theory and strategy since Carl von Clausewitz's 1832 work, On War.

Imperialism and industrialism highly impacted 19th century Europe along side the writings of Alfred Thayer Mahan. These two “isms” were what seemed to define which nations were considered powerful. Mahan was a long time naval officer who lectured on naval history and strategies. One of the most significant writings of this time period was Mahan’s book, “The Influence of Sea Power Upon History.” This prestigious work touched on topics forcing not only Europe’s governing class, but many of the other great world powers’ militaries to realize the importance of a robust Naval service.

We understand that imperialism is not greatly, or even close to being about mechanism of control.II The developments of studies, of theories, of concepts concerning social matters, and the use of indigenous languages alongside with the writings of the traditional historian have demonstrated that both sides to an uneven equation, despite being uneven, must be studied.

There are two conflicting opinions about setting a Navy or not during the end of 18th century in America. The important part in this discussion is to pay attention to the period of time that is being examined. Thus, the point of view must be shaped accordingly.

No one can ever deny the fact that the British Empire contributed to most of the world history. The British imperialism has impacted various aspects of the world, even until today; however, there is a constant debate on whether it yielded more of positives or negatives. For instance, Niall Ferguson in his book “Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power” argues for the positive values of the British imperialism. On the other hand, Fanon in “Concerning Violence” and Orwell in “Shooting an Elephant” offer a negative view on imperialism and colonialism. In the paper, the argument based on the comparison of the claims made in these three articles, states that the argument made by Ferguson is exaggerating

So the theory suggests that because democracies externalise their interstate norms, they resolve disputes with other states like them in a peaceful way. Hence domestic inner-state policies influence their foreign policies. However, this proclamation is disputed by C. Layne who argues that the ‘crux’ of this theory is that if the assumption that democracies promote their peaceful inner-state norms and beliefs, then they shouldn’t ever threaten other democracies, especially not in a crisis. I will use the case study of the ‘Trent affair’ to provide evidence of how war was avoided. I will argue that in this case, war was avoided not because of the domestic pacific influence on foreign policy but because of other strategic reasons.

Afghanistan is the largest, though arguably the poorest, state in Central Asia, and while it does not provide much interest to the global markets, it has long been of strategic interest to foreign powers. Indeed, Afghanistan has been invaded repeatedly for the past 2,000 years by forces commanded by Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan as well as contemporary armies like the British, Soviet, and American forces. Throughout this period, Afghanistan has remained somewhat unconquerable, suffering heavy losses but ultimately sending invaders packing. The following essay compares and contrasts the Anglo-Afghan Wars, the Soviet-Afghan Wars, and the American war in Afghanistan to understand that what unites these conflicts is not necessarily imperialism or their failure but their approach to conquering a land that has resisted occupiers throughout time.

During Napoleon’s rise to power, most of the world was colonized and claimed by European countries. With the one of the mightiest of navies, Great Britain went head to head against France, with an equally formidable armada, competing for claimed land in ‘exotic’ Asia. Great Britain feared that