Skip to main content

Operations and Capacities

  • Chapter
Gunboat Diplomacy 1919–1991

Part of the book series: Studies in International Security ((SIS))

  • 67 Accesses

Abstract

The purpose of this chapter is to examine the resources available to various governments for the political application of limited naval force and to consider how far their previous words or actions indicate their readiness to employ this expedient. Obviously this cannot be a comprehensive survey. The Military Balance2 lists over a hundred navies and, even if all those with good reasons for not venturing beyond their own territorial waters are excluded, too many remain for even cursory treatment in a single chapter. It may thus be better merely to attempt the definition and the illustration by example of zones of probability for the exercise of limited naval force. The object would be to establish the minimum naval resources required before a government could reasonably contemplate resort to this expedient at different levels. These are naturally purely naval calculations and necessarily subject to wide margins of error. A government may have enough ships, but lack the will to employ them; another may attempt operations beyond the true capacity of the naval resources available; a third may rightly believe that the personal qualities and professional skills of their sailors will outweigh the deficiencies of their ships. In principle, however, it should be possible to deduce from the state of a navy the kind of operational ceiling that was expressly proclaimed for Britain in 1966:

It is only realistic to recognize that we, unaided by our allies, could not expect to undertake operations of this character (the landing or withdrawal of troops against sophisticated opposition outside the range of land-based air cover).3

An American child crying on the banks of the Yangtse a thousand miles from the coast can summon the ships of the American Navy up that river to protect it from unjust assault. Wilbur1

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. The then US Secretary of the Navy in a speech of 7 May 1925 to the Connecticut Chamber of Commerce. Quoted in L.T. Beman, Intervention in Latin America (New York: H.W. Wilson, 1928).

    Google Scholar 

  2. The International Institute for Strategic Studies, The Military Balance 1991–1992 (London: Brassey’s, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Secretary of State for Defence, Statement on the Defence Estimates 1966, Part I: The Defence Review (London: HMSO) Cmnd 2901, p. 10.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Statement on the Defence Estimates 1971 (London: HMSO) Cmnd 4592, p. 12.

    Google Scholar 

  5. See Chapter 2.

    Google Scholar 

  6. See Chapter 3.

    Google Scholar 

  7. See the Chronological Appendix.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Le Monde, 25 February 1963. In the context, this ambivalent phrase may be rendered as ‘to express resentment’.

    Google Scholar 

  9. The particulars are to be found in an interesting scrap-book, entitled HMS ROYAL OAK 1936–1938 Commission: Executive Officer’s Log, in the National Maritime Museum at Greenwich. Quoted by kind permission of the Trustees.

    Google Scholar 

  10. File ADM 1163679 in Public Record Office, Kew.

    Google Scholar 

  11. H. Thomas, The Spanish Civil War (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1964) pp. 456–7, and 475–6.

    Google Scholar 

  12. C.E. Hernandez Gonzalez, ‘The CALDAS Incident’, United States Naval Institute Proceedings, March 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  13. L. Freedman and V. Gamba-Stonehouse, Signals of War (London: Faber & Faber, 1990) pp. 117–20.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Le Monde, 18 and 22 April 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Admiral Cabanier, ‘Evolution de la Marine Française’, Revue de Défense Nationale, July 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  16. See F.C. Gregory, ‘The Beira Patrol’, RUSI Journal, December 1969, for an interesting analysis.

    Google Scholar 

  17. E.J. Grove, Vanguard to Trident: British Naval Policy since World War II (London: Bodley Head, 1987) p. 301.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hansard, vol. 789, col. 299.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Minister of State, Foreign Office, in the House of Commons, 19 June 1967. Hansard, cols 1256–7.

    Google Scholar 

  20. This was the objective assigned by Sir Winston Churchill to HMS PRINCE OF WALES and REPULSE on their brief incursion into Far Eastern waters in 1941, but the disastrous outcome of that venture in the face of superior Japanese forces about to launch their planned offensive need seldom be feared in the ordinary crises of peacetime. See W.S. Churchill, The GrandAlliance (London: Cassell, 1950) chapter 32.

    Google Scholar 

  21. IISS, op. cit.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Article 9: ‘… the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes…. land, sea and air forces, as well as other war potential will never be maintained’.

    Google Scholar 

  23. But see Lt Col. T.M.P. Stevens, ‘A Joint Operation in Tanganyika’, RUSI Journal, February 1965, for an interesting analysis of the military problems that might have arisen.

    Google Scholar 

  24. A.N. Shulsky, ‘Coercive Diplomacy’, in B. Dismukes and J. McConnell (eds), Soviet Naval Diplomacy (New York: Pergamon Press, 1979) pp. 130–3.

    Google Scholar 

  25. See P. Gilchrist, Sea Power: The Coalition and Iraqui Navies (London: Osprey Publishing, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  26. M. Middlebrook, Task Force: The Falklands War 1982, (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1987) pp. 182–3.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Grove, op. cit., pp. 330–3.

    Google Scholar 

  28. IISS, op. cit.

    Google Scholar 

  29. In retaliation for the bombing by Spanish Republican aircraft of the German pocket battleship DEUTSCHLAND (Thomas, op. cit., pp. 440–1).

    Google Scholar 

  30. ‘Operation Attila’, Armies and Weapons, no. 14, November/December 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  31. M.S. Samuels, Contest for the South China Sea (London: Methuen, 1982) and The Times, 4 June 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  32. J. Cable, Navies in Violent Peace (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1989) p. 52.

    Google Scholar 

  33. IISS, op. cit. Repeated reports of the sale of the uncompleted ex-Soviet aircraft-carrier VARYAG to China were contradicted in Jane’s Defence Weekly, vol. 18, no. 2, of 21 November 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  34. G.W. Hunt, British music hall song, 1878.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Quoted in Lt Corn. Bruce Harlow USN, The Legal Use of Force-Short of War’, United States Naval Institute Proceedings, November 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  36. ‘La Defense: la Politique Militaire Francaise et Ses Réalisations’, Notes et Etudes Documentaires, no. 3343 of 6 December 1966 (Paris: Secrétariat Général du Gouvernement).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Copyright information

© 1994 James Cable

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cable, J. (1994). Operations and Capacities. In: Gunboat Diplomacy 1919–1991. Studies in International Security. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-23415-8_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics