Dipartimento di Scienze Politiche Cattedra di Storia delle Relazioni Internazionali Laurea Magistrale in Relazioni Internazionali NAVAL POWER AFTER THE COLD WAR. THE ROLE OF THE ROYAL NAVY IN TODAY’S GLOBAL CONTEXT Prof. Federico Niglia Prof. Domenico Maria Bruni RELATORE CORRELATORE Gianmarco Sechi matr. 639202 CANDIDATO Anno Accademico 2019/2020 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION p. 3 CHAPTER 1 Evolution of Naval warfare p. 6 From the Age of Sail to the end of Nineteenth Century p. 6 Alfred Thayer Mahan p. 9 The Jeune Ecole p. 13 Sir Julian Stanford Corbett p. 16 Admiral Sir Herbert Richmond p. 20 European Maritime strategy (1918 – 1939) p. 23 Naval strategy after the Second World War p. 26 The Naval Power during the Cold War: Superpower’s point of view p. 30 US Navy’s strategic struggles p. 30 USSR and the Revolution led by Admiral of the Fleet S. G. Gorshkov p. 37 The evolution of the strategic concept after the end of the Cold War p. 44 CHAPTER 2 Military Operations at sea p. 48 The Triadic Configuration of Maritime Operations p. 48 Command of the sea p. 51 1 The Exercise of Control p. 61 Economic Warfare at Sea p. 70 New Roles for New Navies p. 73 CHAPTER 3 Naval Operations in Peacetime Conditions p. 79 Anti-Piracy Operations p. 79 Case Study: NATO and the EU in Somalia p. 86 Terrorism and Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction p. 93 Trafficking of Drugs and Psychotropic substances p.104 Slavery, People Smuggling and trafficking p.108 Protection of the Marine and Coastal Environment p.113 CHAPTER 4 Today’s Doctrine of the Royal Navy p.116 Principles of war p.118 Maritime Operations p.122 Means of the Royal Navy p.129 Why is the Royal Navy so important for the United Kingdom? P.133 CONCLUSION p.137 BIBLIOGRAPHY p.139 2 INTRODUCTION This work focuses on maritime strategy and its evolution during the years, with specific concern to the period that extends from the end of the Cold War to the present day. At the end of the work, it is paid special attention to the Royal Navy and its conception of the role that the force plays in war and peace contexts. After the explosion, on the 6th and, then, the 8th of August 1945, of the two only historical examples of attacks with nuclear weapons on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki carried out by the United States, the world would be completely changed. The destructiveness shown by this new technology, which made a number of victims estimated between 100.000 and 200.000, shocked the world. All the previous conceptions of the relations between states were reviewed. In particular, a change happened to what concerned the former strategic vision deep-seated after World War II that was revolutionized, especially the balances between forces, including this new weapon. Among them, the most affected one was maybe the navy. Historically naval power affirmed thanks to struggles of the ship against ship infamous decisive battles that influenced past events like the battle of Trafalgar as well as the battle of Jutland. Both cases had a heavy effect also on what was happening on land. During the Second World War, there are instances of relevant collisions at sea, too. To illustrate, the Battle of the Coral Sea, historically important because it was the first action in which aircraft carriers engaged each other, or the Battle of Leyte Gulf, decisive to decide the fate of the Pacific campaign. These examples, that I have just mentioned, are all important battles that happened for the control of the sea, but navies affirmed, especially during the Second World War, their capacity to project their power ashore. One of the most remembered instances is the Invasion of Normandy of 1944, which was decisive to create a second front in Europe, formerly promised to Stalin, as well as to defeat German Nazi forces. Nevertheless, this role tailored for navies inside the national strategic vision was challenged after the rise of nuclear weapons. These latter captured more attention of the strategic debates during the Cold War, especially since 1949 when also the Soviet Union, the other superpower that opposed the dominance of the United States, fabricated its bombs. The Navy, instead, was increasingly confined in a subordinate position. This was confirmed from the rare examples of naval battles after 1945 and from the role played during the events of the Cold War as well. For instance, during the Korean and Vietnam War the US Navy, the most powerful naval force of the world, had only a contingent position upon the other forces, like air or land. The single example of naval battles happened during the Falkland War of 1982 which, however, involved the 3 Royal Navy. Even in recent episodes like wars fought at the beginning of the second millennium in Afghanistan and Iraq, navies did not play primary functions. Whilst, in the military intervention of 2011 in Libya, they played a relevant part in the blockade, bombardments from the sea and for the enforcement of the no-fly zone that was imposed against forces loyal to Gaddafi’s regime. This was, however, not enough to prove their value. The destructiveness of nuclear weapons implied the use of these weapons only as a deterrent, even though there was the consideration to use them in eventual approaches such as NATO’s first-strike doctrine. As a consequence, their offensive employment was excluded. In the meantime, countries around the world continued to strengthen their navies, spending and employing a lot of resources building new expensive vessels as immense aircraft carriers or evermore technological nuclear attack submarines. Furthermore, navies were considered to play a relevant role in nuclear conflicts too, thanks to the construction of new ballistic missile submarines that protected national deterrents. These motives, together with a personal interest in the position played from the Royal Navy today, convinced me to write a thesis on navies and the evolution of naval strategic thought during the years until today, to properly understand which role they played inside national defensive doctrine. I have been wondering which was the role of the navies today. Starting from this demand, that is the key point of this work, I investigated the issue. I produced four chapters in which I examined different aspects that, from my perspective, were fundamental to answer this question. Firstly, I dwelt on the historical evolution of naval strategic thought, from the Ancient Greek until today. This was essential to understand the tasks of the navy during history as well as the evolution of the issues concerning this force and the position handled during history. Research on past writers and their vision on the naval approach made me understand the impact that they played on contemporary conception. Reporting Till’s words: Those interested in contemporary maritime strategy would be unwise to ignore such previous thinkers as Mahan, Corbett and the rest, whose works may help us understand the present as well as the past. Their counsel is of abiding value not so much for the answers they supply, […] but because they help to identify the questions that need asking. Given the importance of the complexity of many of the issues involved, this is no mean contribution to make to our understanding of contemporary maritime strategy1. 1 G. Till. (1982). Maritime Strategy and the Nuclear Age. London. Macmillan Press LTD. p. 239. 4 As a result of all the research, I am able to understand completely the importance of this message. In the second chapter and the third chapter, I thoroughly analyzed the tasks of the navies. While in the second chapter I focused on the activities put into practice during war, which were the traditional actions of the navies during history, in the third I paid closer attention to what happens during peacetimes. After the Second World War, in fact, navies started to have an increased consideration of tasks that did not involve a wide use of force. These actions, called constabulary, are, for example, contrasting terrorist attacks, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) like nuclear, chemical and biological arms, or anti-piracy and anti-drug trafficking operations. These latter are becoming the primary concern for nations, especially after the growing involvement of the economy inside national strategic thought. Navies are, thus, involved in actions to protect in particular shipping lines that are the major source of the wealthiness of states. Therefore, I considered examining specific missions, persecuted from NATO and the EU, against piracy in Somali coasts. Finally, in the fourth chapter, I analyzed Fundamentals of British Maritime Doctrine (1995), fulfilling the function of a practical example. Through the exploration of the case, thus, I was able to understand the new aspects of the centrality of the navies. Moreover, through this instance I am capable of understanding the role of the Royal Navy for the United Kingdom, adapting it to the navies of the other nations in the world. In conclusion, I managed to answer the central question that I posed at the beginning of this research. 5 CHAPTER 1 EVOLUTION OF NAVAL WARFARE From the Age of Sail to the end of Nineteenth Century Naval warfare was an important reality in Ancient History. It was considered a relevant part of the military capacity of a state. Notwithstanding its importance during wartime activities, there was no development of strategic naval thought, in fact, no one tried to investigate the principles regarding the conduct of war. The nearest approach to this sphere was, in Till’s opinion, the one of Thucydides, an historian.