Sea Power And World Unity

The master of the sea must inevitably be master of the Empire.
—Cicero in Ad Atticus.

WORLD unity or the breakdown of civilization!—such is the problem. Because the sea routes both unite and separate the inhabitable areas, control of the sea—sea power—becomes the necessary bond of unity. From the time when the first city states of the Euphrates Valley expanded outward along their river communications to the then limits of unity, down through the centuries sea power has determined world unity.

Three times this goal has been approached: first, at the commencement of the Christian era under the Roman Empire; second, in the medieval period for western Europe; now—with the expansion of communication—for the entire world. The British Empire, the League of Nations, the World Court, the Kellogg Peace Treaties, are steps to this end—with sea power the determining factor.
In the following pages the main outlines of this problem are presented: first, the fundamental principles; second, the influence of these principles on successive world states; and, finally, their application to existing conditions. At the close is a short bibliography of the more important references.

I.     Fundamentals of World Unity

The dependence of world unity upon sea power rests upon the geographical fact that the waterways separate the inhabitable areas, while penetrating them. Therefore, control of these waterways permits division of the land areas, successive concentration upon each, and penetration inward. The Roman and British empires are examples.

The second factor is that those races dependent upon the sea for expansion are forced to develop leadership. Use of the sea is an acquired characteristic and it acts as a natural selection to eliminate the weak and develop the strong. Therefore, such races as the Greeks, Romans, Norse, Normans, and English—in surmounting their sea barriers—developed the vigor necessary for world leadership.

Through control of the seas come trade, wealth, and culture. From these comes civilization—the science as well as the art of war, of government, of trade, of industry, of thought—supplementing natural vigor with the accumulated experience of mankind. Because the sea routes are universal, the civilization developed therefrom is universal. Therefore, Greek, Roman, medieval, and British civilization has been universal: that of Persia, Asia, and Germany local.

Such is the story of civilization once it passed the limits of Asia Minor: a vigorous race forced to expand over the sea; mastery of the sea and then of other sea powers; expansion outward along the waterways, with acquisition of wealth and culture; utilization of these resources to dominate the areas tributary to the water communications: finally, development of a universal civilization—continuing with sea supremacy and falling with its loss.1

In this advance towards world unity three fundamental elements determine the character of each successive civilization:

(1) A Central Nucleus, or state, with the strength to establish unity. Unity implies a central principle. This is the difference between order and anarchy. Thus each successive world civilization has developed around the nucleus of a single state centering in a single strategic capital: Thebes, Memphis, and Alexandria in Egypt; Babylon, Nineveh, Susa, and Bagdad in Mesopotamia; Athens in Greece; Rome in Italy; Paris in France; Berlin in Germany; London in England. The first essential, therefore, for world unity is a nucleus centering authority at a single point, with the strength to unite diverse elements into a homogeneous society.

(2) Effective Sea Power: i.e., mastery and utilization of the sea. Sea power is simply national power expressing itself via the sea, in distinction from the land or air. Its basis is mastery of the sea, or seamanship; then mastery of rivals, or naval superiority; finally, the ability to utilize the sea routes for expansion of trade, communications, and civilization. Because sea power is the sole means—unless supplanted by air power—of establishing a universal civilization, it must eventually draw to itself every element of national power—the naval and mercantile fleets, the army, diplomacy, etc.— potentially, if not actually. Because control and penetration by sea are fundamental, essential sea routes must be controlled at all cost; otherwise, the pressure of land power brings it to destruction. Sea power, as an acquired characteristic, must be maintained by continued supremacy over the land—the natural element of man. Sea power—in its broad ultimate extension—must be distinguished from mere naval power, which is only a step to a greater end. Sea power, therefore, rests upon three successive foundations:

Mastery of the sea: i.e., seamanship.

Mastery on the sea: i.e., naval supremacy.

Mastery from the sea: control of adjacent land areas.2

(3) Control of the Mediterranean Axis: This is specific, because nature has made this sea the strategic geographical center of the globe: therefore, it has been the historical center of civilization. The reason is that it lies as a landlocked, protected, and self-sufficient basin at the heart of the land mass of Eurasia-Africa, with gateways leading to the interior of this land mass, to the Orient and to the Occident. It is the natural center from which civilization can expand outward; while external influences working inward must control it or surrender essential sea communications. Historically, the rise of every world state has been determined by its control of this axis.

Strategically, the Mediterranean is divided into three parts:

(a) The Sicilian Pivot: The central point of the Mediterranean; uniting or separating Europe and Africa; dividing the sea in two parts; and forming the center for outward expansion.

(b) The Gateways—Gibraltar, Dardanelles, Suez: 3 Controlling entrance or exit to and from this basin, and dividing it into three parts:

(1) North Africa: (Suez and Gibraltar).

(2) Asia Minor: (Suez and Dardanelles).

(3) Europe: (Dardanelles and Gibraltar).

(c) The Anchor Posts—England, Constantinople, Egypt:3 Controlling the flanking sea areas of the North Sea and Baltic; Black Sea; Red Sea and Persian Gulf; and constituting advanced bases for outward expansion.

Upon these anchor posts depend, strategically, the river, mountain, desert, and ocean barriers which protect the inner basin from the outer land masses:

(1.) North Sea-Black Sea: Rhine-Danube barrier. (Baltic-Black Sea: German and Russian rivers.)

(2) Gulf of Persia-Black Sea: Tigris- Euphrates.

(3) Sahara Desert:

Note: This division should be studied carefully in connection with a topographical atlas: e.g., Putnam’s Historical Atlas.

The Mediterranean basin is like a fortified and provisioned castle at the heart of civilization—with sea power the key. The center is Sicily; the inner fortress the Mediterranean basin proper with its mountain and desert barriers; the outer fortress the historic area of civilization cut off from the land mass of Eurasia-Africa by the Sahara and the river-mountain-sea barriers from the Gulf of Persia through the Black Sea to the North Sea and the Baltic. Sea power, centering at the Sicilian pivot, is able to permeate and unite this area, directly or through short land routes, maintain the encircling barriers with their supporting anchor posts, and exert pressure outward on the ocean routes. Unlike the secondary axis at Panama, the Mediterranean basin is self-sufficient, capable of a high degree of civilization, surrounded by successive belts of closely connected territory, and a natural, not an artificial, gateway between the East and West. (The Suez canals—ancient and modem— are easily dredged sea-level routes). Above all, it is the traditional center of civilization.

The strategic importance of the Mediterranean lies in the ability of a vigorous, united nation developing sea power to control the Sicilian pivot and then concentrate successively against the segments of the encircling areas. History is the ebb and flow of civilization, inward and outward, through this strategic area: inward, under the Persians, Greeks, Phoenicians, Saracens, Germans, Spanish, French, English, and Americans: outward, under the Roman Empire, medieval Europe, and seemingly in the present revival of Mediterranean influence.

Conclusion: The Three Essentials of World Unity

(1) A central nucleus able to establish unity.

(2) Effective sea power.

(3) Control of the strategic Mediterranean axis.

Note: Cf. the strategy of the advance of Rome to the unification of the Mediterranean.

II.     THE ADVANCE TOWARDS WORLD UNIT

If the Sicilian pivot be taken as the strategic center, the advance toward world unity is seen to consist in a succession of westward-moving world states, with an ebb and flow inward and outward around this point. Three times this has been repeated: first, in the Ancient World, with the inward flow of culture from the east and the outward expansion of Roman authority, culminating in the universal Roman Empire; second, in the inward flow of the invaders of that empire and the outward extension of neo-Roman influence centering in the papacy, culminating in medieval Christendom; third, in the inward flow of Teutonic, Slavic, and British influence following the break-up of the medieval system, culminating in the British Empire—with the World War seeming to indicate the beginning of another period of outward expansion. In each series the circle has widened, and now, with the union of Orient and Occident, the present unification includes the entire world.

The Ancient World: Unification Under The Roman Empire 4

Civilization originated in the Euphrates valley. From there it spread eastward to the Orient and westward along the Mediterranean. Following the pioneer settlements came a succession of westward-moving dominant states—Chaldea, Egypt, Assyria, Babylon—culminating in Persia, which, gaining control of the maritime states of Egypt, Phoenicia, and the mainland Greeks, advanced into Europe across the Dardanelles gateway; to be checked by Greece in the Aegean; confined to the mainland; and then conquered and Hellenized under Alexander the Great. This was followed by the outward expansion of Greek sea power, which was checked at the Sicilian pivot in the defeats of Athens at Syracuse and Pyrrhus in southern Italy, confining Greek dominance to the eastern Mediterranean. A third advance, that of Carthage, was checked by the Romans at Sicily and Spain in the First and Second Punic Wars.

Following this inward pressure came the outward expansion of Rome. Gaining control of the Italian peninsula, it developed superior sea power in the First Punic War and occupied the Sicilian pivot. Expanding westward, through this sea supremacy, it secured the western gateway of Spain and Gibraltar in the Second Punic War, and North Africa in the Third. Turning eastward, in a combination of land and sea moves, it gained control of Greece, the Dardanelles gateway, Asia Minor, Syria, the north African coast and Egypt—completing control of the Mediterranean. Consolidating this area under the Empire (Actium, 31 B.C.), Rome expanded outward during the first century A.D. to control the anchor posts of England, Constantinople, and Egypt; maintained fleet supremacy in the North, Black, and Red Seas; developed the barriers of the Rhine-Danube, Tigris-Euphrates, and Sahara; and consolidated the inclosed territory in the Roman Empire.5

The Roman Empire rested upon the coordination of the central nucleus of Rome, effective sea power (commercial and military), and complete control of the strategic points of the Mediterranean basin. Within the protection of the outer barriers the combination of sea and land routes encouraged unification, and consolidated the various races and cultures into a common Greco-Roman and eventual Christian civilization. Beyond the Rhine-Danube barrier there also developed an outer belt of semi-Latinized and Christianized Teutonic tribes extending from the North to the Black Sea. Within this area was included substantially all civilization that has influenced subsequent history, forming the first complete world union—“the culmination of ancient and the foundation of modern civilization.”

Commencing with the fourth century, the internal strength, particularly the sea power, of the Empire began to decay; the transfer of the capital to Constantinople in 330 a.d. divided it in two, with the temporal capital in the east and the spiritual capital at Rome; and the semi-Latinized Teutonic nations of the Rhine-Danube began to occupy the western part in various nominally dependent Latin-Teutonic kingdoms. In the fifth century growing weakness forced the withdrawal of the fleet and garrison from England, and with this surrender of the western anchor post penetration by semi-Latinized border tribes was changed into invasion by the pagan tribes of the north, particularly the Saxon and Scandinavian sea pirates—occupying England; cutting essential trade routes; establishing Vandal sea power at the old site of Carthage opposite the Sicilian pivot; and, eventually, overrunning the entire Western Empire.6

In the sixth century, a temporary revival of the Eastern Roman Empire under Justinian effected the reconquest of the Sicilian pivot, reestablished sea power and communication in the eastern Mediterranean, limited the Teutonic advance, and maintained a nucleus of Roman civilization.7 However, in the seventh century the Mohammedan Arabs broke through the eastern barriers; occupied Syria and then Egypt; pushed westward along the African littoral to the western gateway, into Spain and even France; attacked the Sicilian pivot; moved northward through Asia Minor to the Dardanelles gateway at Constantinople; and by the eighth century threatened to establish a universal Saracen empire. This attack was checked by the land and sea power of the Eastern Roman Empire at Constantinople in a.d. 717; by the Western Empire at Tours in 732; and by the Normans at Sicily in the eleventh century.8 With this defeat the area of civilization was divided into three parts, based on the three anchor posts: the Latin-Teutonic nations extending southwest from England; the semi-Romanized Saracens east and north from Egypt; and the Greco-Roman Eastern Empire centering at Constantinople.9

The Medieval Period: Unification Under Medieval Christendom

With the break-up of the Western Roman Empire the papacy at Rome became the nucleus for the civilization and unification, as well as Christianization, of the Teutonic nations. In the ninth century, the first unification developed under the Holy Roman Empire, including the areas occupied by the semi-Latinized Teutonic nations, in Italy, Germany, and France. Without sea power and the support of the English anchor post this unity disintegrated under the attacks of the Scandinavian sea pirates, threatening destruction of the rising western civilization. However, one branch of these invaders, the Normans of the Seine Valley, accepted Latin civilization and developed outstanding military and administrative ability, with potential sea power. These were utilized by the papacy to develop a second unification of the west in a virtual Norman-papal alliance. Commencing with the eleventh century Naples and the Sicilian pivot were occupied, checking the German Holy Roman Empire and protecting the central nucleus at Rome; England was conquered, and later expanded into the Angevin empire, checking French influence; and a succession of outward attacks, known as the Crusades, were instituted to secure control of Constantinople, Palestine, Spain, the Gibraltar gateway, Tunis, Egypt, and the Baltic. While the eastern and southern efforts were only partially successful, the advance of the Saracens and Slavs was checked; strong sea power was developed in the Mediterranean and the Baltic; and the cultural and theocratic unity of western Europe—known as Christendom—established under the temporal and spiritual supremacy of the papacy, with an outer belt extending on the east to the Norse-Slavic states of Russia, and on the west to Iceland and Greenland. In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries losses to the east were compensated by the extension of European influence to the New World, and parts of Africa and the Orient.10

In the fifteenth century, commencing with the Renaissance and ending with the Counter Reformation, came a third expansion of medieval Christendom, with Italy the cultural and Spain the political nucleus. Controlling Sicily, Naples, the Iberian peninsula, the Gibraltar gateway, the New World and the rising Oriental trade, the Holy Roman Empire, and (temporarily) England—Spain established a dynastic unity in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries which embraced most of western Europe and the Americas. Sea power, based on the Gibraltar gateway, operated eastward to check Turkey and support the Empire; westward to the ocean trade routes; and northward to the English Channel and Holland. The naval battle at Lepanto (1571) established Christian supremacy in the Mediterranean; but the decisive defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588 checked unification in the north; while Spanish sea power gradually declined before the rising power of England—ending in the eventual disintegration of the vast Spanish world empire.11

In the late seventeenth century supremacy passed to France, with successive efforts to reestablish the unity of Europe, reaching their culmination at the time of the Seven Years’ War in an alliance of all the states (except England) which had developed from the Roman Empire—France, Spain, Austria, and Russia—and most of the New World; and later under Napoleon. With his defeat in 1815 ended the last continuation of the unity of medieval Christendom.12

Following the fall of Constantinople in 1453 Russia continued the tradition of the Eastern Roman Empire, developing a Byzantine-Slavic culture in direct continuation of the unity of the Christian Greco-Roman Empire, that lasted to the World War.

Modern Times: Unification Under the British Empire

Paralleling the Renaissance and the Spanish Empire there began the third period of inward pressure upon the Mediterranean—comparable to the invasion of the Roman Empire—disintegrating the unity of medieval Christendom. In 1453 the Turks captured Constantinople; crossed the Dardanelles gateway; commenced an invasion of Europe that was checked only at the Adriatic at Lepanto (1571) and by Austria and Poland in the seventeenth century; and drove a wedge between Russia and western Europe. In the sixteenth century came the separation of the Teutonic nations of the north in the movement known as the Protestant Reformation, which was checked in the Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648) roughly at the old Roman Rhine-Danube barrier. Finally, in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries England—the western anchor post of Mediterranean civilization—broke away from the unity of Christendom (Henry VIII; Elizabeth; Revolutions of 1648, 1688) and became the nucleus of modern or British-determined civilization. Again, as in the fifth century, defection of the western anchor post became the decisive factor in the eventual disintegration of the existing world unity.13

In the eighteenth century the center of influence shifted definitely to the north with the rise of the three northern states of Russia under Peter the Great, Prussia under the Great Elector, and England under the Dutch and Hanoverian dynasties. The eighteenth and nineteenth centuries marked the growing strength and final supremacy of Slavic, Teutonic, and Anglo-Saxon influence, with corresponding decline of Mediterranean—a result comparable to the rise of the German and Frankish states after the fall of the Roman Empire. The twentieth century marked the completion of this inward pressure upon the Mediterranean.14

Rise of the British Empire—The English Revolution of 1688 established the supremacy of the ruling commercial oligarchy. In the long series of French wars (1688-1815) the supremacy of British sea power was secured. It extended into the Baltic to check or support Russia, and subsidize Prussia; gained control of the Atlantic, isolating France and building up the British empire and foreign trade; reached into the Mediterranean to gain Gibraltar; controlled the Sicilian pivot by alliance with Naples and occupation of Malta; utilized the Dardanelles gateway through friendly relations with Turkey; supported Savoy and Austria; and maintained naval control of the sea.15 During the nineteenth century this sea supremacy was strengthened by the expansion of the British empire, industry, and commerce; checking of Russia in the Crimean War; virtual support of Prussian expansion in Europe to check France and Russia; support of Greece, Italy, and Turkey in the Mediterranean; occupation of the Suez Canal, Cyprus, and Egypt—bringing control of the Suez gateway and Egyptian anchor post; and the world-wide extension of British influence in government, commerce, literature, religion, science, and finance. In the twentieth century this position was consolidated by the Japanese alliance and the defeat of Russia in 1904-05; drawing of her two former enemies, France and Russia, into the British sphere of influence through the Entente; and virtual unification of world opinion under British leadership at the beginning of the World War. With the construction of the Suez Canal the Mediterranean had become the strategic center of the British Empire, with naval control of the strategic points. In the Entente and Allied nations England developed a world union centering on the Mediterranean axis comparable to the beginning of the Roman Empire under the Republic and of medieval Christendom in the eleventh century.16

The German Challenge.—This growing world unification was challenged by the Prussian-controlled German Empire, as was the similar unification of the Roman Empire and medieval Christendom by the Teutonic attacks of the fifth and sixteenth centuries. The World War may be regarded as the third revolt of the Teutonic nations against the unification of society under Mediterranean influence. With the weakening of France and Russia in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries Prussia was freed from dependence on England—as were the American colonies in 1763—and extended Teutonic influence to Austria-Hungary, Italy, the Balkan states, and Turkey—developing a German-dominated belt from the Baltic across the Constantinople gateway to the Suez gateway and the Egyptian anchor post, and the Gulf of Persia; cutting the Entente in two; isolating Russia; establishing contact with the great Mohammedan belt from the Gibraltar gateway to western China; and threatening Entente control of the land mass of Eurasia-Africa. In effect, it was the effort to replace traditional Mediterranean predominance by German Kultur.17

British Strategy.—The logical answer of England to this German threat, as to that of France previously, was the development of British sea power along the lines laid down by the younger and elder Pitt in the decisive struggles of the Seven Years’ and Napoleonic wars: i.e., maintenance of the sea routes eastward from the English anchor post through the Baltic and Black Sea to Russia; cutting off Turkey at Constantinople; isolating Germany; and then crushing resistance by a combination of blockade and land power. The means was effective control of the sea routes by fleet supremacy, and of the passageways of the Baltic and Black Sea; then utilization of this control to encircle and crush Germany—sea power over, on, and from the sea.18

The World War.—Upon the declaration of war the British fleet obtained complete control of the main sea routes, permitting blockade of Germany and utilization of French, British, and neutral resources. However, this was the limit attained by British sea power. In 1914 technical Dutch neutrality at the Scheldt prevented effective support of Antwerp, with loss of the strategic Belgian coast.19 In 1915 the attempt to force the Dardanelles was deficient in organization and vigor; the gateway was occupied by Germany, and Russia was isolated.20 In 1916, at Jutland, the British fleet failed to make effective use of its superiority, and the German fleet remained a “fleet in being” protecting the German coast, the Baltic, and the U-boat bases; while preventing a “close in” blockade and establishment of contact with Russia via the Baltic.21In 1917 the German U-boat campaign almost succeeded in cutting the vital Entente sea communications and was never really checked.22 In 1918 it was only by American intervention that the Entente was saved from defeat.23 As a result, England emerged from the war exhausted; with the nucleus of the ruling commercial oligarchy weakened and divided; effective sea power lost; and her hold on the strategic Mediterranean axis threatened. While the German revolt was crushed, the three northern powers of Russia, Prussia, and England came out of the struggle greatly weakened.24

Intervention of the United States.—In 1917 the United States intervened to prevent the collapse of civilization as did the Normans in the eleventh and France in the seventeenth centuries. The result was the collapse of Germany and American leadership in an exhausted world. At Versailles President Wilson largely dictated the peace; established a group of American-supported republics in central Europe; laid the foundations of world unity in the League of Nations ; and promulgated a program of universal democracy backed by the resources of the American Republic—like Julius Caesar two thousand years before, a democratic dictator of a victorious republic presenting a vision of world unity.25 Then, like Caesar, he was stricken at the moment of success; the American government withdrew from these ambitious plans; and the vision of world unity was left unrealized. However, under the Republican administrations American leadership has continued along more limited lines, with extension of influence in the New World, financial and moral support abroad, and encouragement of unity in such measures as the naval conferences of 1921 and 1930, the Kellogg Peace Treaties, and informal cooperation with the League of Nations. By 1930, the United States has assumed definite world leadership comparable to that of the Normans in the eleventh century in the unification of Christendom.

Threatened Collapse of Civilization.— Failure of England in 1915 to maintain contact with Russia resulted in the collapse of government there in 1917. In 1918 the defeat of Germany extended this collapse to the Central Powers. In 1919-20 withdrawal of American intervention undermined the resistance of the Entente, and, for a time, it seemed that organized government in the Old World might disintegrate, extending even to the New World. However, this was averted by economic and moral support from the United States, the stability of the British Empire, and the revival of the Catholic states in Europe. By 1930 Bolshevism has been limited to Russia.26

Stabilization of Civilization and the League of Nations.—At the present time the world has achieved temporary stabilization, with an approach to unification in the League of Nations and the various international agreements—resting largely on the supremacy of France, the British Empire, and the United States. The present problem is whether this unity can be consolidated, and, if so, under what predominant influence—or whether it will dissolve in a conflict of competing groups.

III.     Sea Power and World Unity Today

The world today is in the same position it was in after the death of Julius Caesar two thousand years ago—civilization brought to the vision of administrative unity by a great democratic leader of a victorious republic; checked at the point of realization by his removal; and continuing nominally united, but actually dividing into natural divisions. The problem is whether nominal unity will develop into administrative unification as with the Roman Empire and (partially) medieval Christendom; or will break up into warring groups as did the empire of Alexander the Great after his death.

Nominally, the division is between almost complete unity in the League of Nations, with Russia and the United States nominally outside. Practically, the question is whether control shall rest with the Old World centered strategically at the Sicilian pivot, or with the United States at the Panama pivot. Strategically, the problem is whether sea power—supporting air power—can control the strategic Mediterranean axis (as did the British Empire) in addition to the ocean routes; or whether land power, working outward from the Mediterranean basin, can unify the Eurasian-African land mass, develop effective sea power, check the expansion of the United States, and develop administrative world unity.

The heart of the problem—strategically— is the Sicilian pivot. History has shown that whatever nation—Rome, Vandals and E. Goths, Eastern Roman Empire, Saracens, Normans, France, Spain, England, the Entente—controlled (not merely possessed) this point controlled the course of civilization. The lesson of geography and history is that he who controls the Sicilian pivot controls civilization.

(1) The Nucleus of Unity.—The first essential of unity is a nucleus able to establish unity, i.e., coordinate diverse elements into a common society. This was the function of Rome in the Roman Empire, of the papacy in medieval Christendom, of England in modern times. With the weakening of British leadership following the breakdown of British sea power in the World War, a new and stronger nucleus is necessary to develop nominal into complete worldwide unity.

Out of the World War conflict four such nuclei have developed with sufficient strength and leadership to secure this end:

(a) The British Commonwealth of Nations: drawing on the Dominions for strength as Rome did on the Provinces.

(b) Russia: the vigorous and powerful center of world discontent, dominating the interior of Eurasian-African land mass.

(c) The United States: the strongest single nation, continuing the traditions of British-dominated civilization.

(d) The Traditional Mediterranean Civilization: centered in France and Italy, dominant in western Europe and the League of Nations.

The British Commonwealth of Nations may experience such a revival, as the Roman Empire under Justinian, but the opportunity for supremacy offered in the World War is now passing to stronger hands. Russia may break loose in another outburst, but Bolshevism is too destructive of existing civilization to secure universal support.27 Therefore, two nuclei remain strong enough to establish permanent unity: the major cycle of westward advance centering in the United States; the minor cycle of a temporary revival of the traditional Mediterranean civilization centering in France and/or Italy. Nature has established two natural strategic centers for world unity, each dominating its respective land mass—the Mediterranean centered at the Sicilian pivot—and the Panama Isthmus. Therefore, the Latin states controlling the Mediterranean and the United States controlling Panama constitute the two basic nuclei of world unity.

(2) Effective Sea Power.—World unity rests upon sea power uniting and penetrating the continental land masses. However, as world unity is entering upon a period of transition, so likewise is the technique of sea power—foreshadowed by German operations in the World War. This transition is summarized in three developments:

(a) The new technique of sea warfare: based on the internal-combustion engine and finding expression in the submarine, aircraft, and the Ersatz Preussen cruiser, combining the sea endurance of the sailing ship with the mobility of the galley.

(b) Growing supremacy of destructive sea warfare: resulting from the new technique of warfare and illustrated by the success of the German U-boats.

(c) Increased land control of adjacent areas: resting on technical developments in long-range gunfire, aircraft, mines, coastal submarines, motor boats, etc.

Practically, sea power is now being replaced by the still more effective instrument of air power, with the effectiveness of sea power depending on air control. Just as control of the sea gave superiority to inferior land forces (e.g., Athens, Rome, England) ; so now control of the air gives superiority to inferior sea forces and that to inferior land forces. The immediate result is to increase the effectiveness of land power within striking air distance of the land, while supremacy of sea power depends on the development of the fleet as a mobile base for air forces (e.g., through refueling). In addition, the secrecy, speed, and endurance of the submarine and new type cruiser expose communications and even naval units to dangerous attack. The present situation, therefore, is not unlike that at the fall of the Roman Empire with the rise of the new sea technique of the Vandal, Saxon, and Norse sea raiders; or in the sixteenth century with that of the English buccaneers under Drake and Hawkins. In other words, sea warfare is in a transitional period, weakening existing control of the sea, strengthening the land power of the land masses, and forcing a new conflict for sea supremacy.

(3) Control of the Strategic Mediterranean Axis.—In this critical period the Mediterranean basin assumes a strategic importance it has not had since the Roman Empire. It lies as a landlocked, protected, and self-sufficient fortress at the heart of the land mass of the Old World on the main route between the East and West, with gateways and outer bastions leading to all parts of the world. It is an ideal location for the outward expansion of a strong land-sea- air power controlling the strategic center at the Sicilian pivot. Its weakness lies in the ability of a strong naval power controlling one of the gateways and the Sicilian pivot— as the Vandals, Saracens, English—to break up this area into its natural divisions separated by the waterways.

The strength and the weakness of Panama is that it is simply a naval base. Its weakness lies in its highly artificial character, permitting strategic destruction by a single successful raid, its lack of land contacts, and its inability to serve as a political capital. It affords an ideal concentration point for a superior naval power, but even a temporary loss of sea supremacy may endanger sea power based upon it.

Of the two natural strategic centers for world unity the Mediterranean, therefore, is —strategically—the more important. It has that stability connected with the land which gave permanence to the unity of Rome and medieval Christendom as compared with the more brilliant but less permanent empires of Athens, Carthage, the Vandals, the Normans, and England based on sea power alone. Permanent world unity, therefore, must rest upon a firm control of the Mediterranean, either by an internal or external controlling nucleus. That control, in turn, depends upon the relative effectiveness of sea and land power.

Conclusions

This study may be summed up in the following conclusions:

(1) The Mediterranean basin, centering at the Sicilian pivot, is the strategic center of world unity, with a secondary center at Panama.

(2) An approach to nominal world unity exists in the League of Nations and other international agreements, with the United States the dominant factor.

(3) The advance towards world unity has been marked by the ebb and flow of world influences inward and outward from the Mediterranean basin, with the Sicilian pivot the center.

(a) Ancient World: the inward advance of eastern culture followed by the outward expansion of Rome, culminating in the universal Roman Empire.

(b) Medieval Period: the inward pressure of Teutonic, Arabic, and Greek influence followed by the outward expansion of neo-Roman civilization, culminating in the unity of medieval Christendom.

(c) Modern Times: the inward pressure of Teutonic, Slavic, British, and American influence, with the World War marking a distinct revival of Mediterranean civilization.

(4) The final advance towards world unity is being determined by two major nuclei, each resting on a strategic center :

(a) Mediterranean civilization—centering in France and/or Italy—tending to control of the Mediterranean axis and unification of the Old World through the League of Nations.

(b) The United States—controlling the Panama pivot—tending to unification of the New World through the Monroe Doctrine and Pan-American union, and exerting a strong influence on the Old World.

(5) Dominance by the respective nuclei is determined by the effectiveness of sea power in relation to air power as compared with that of land power.

(a) Extension of American influence rests on the supremacy of sea power centering at Panama.

(b) Extension of Mediterranean influence rests on the ability of the Latin nations to check superior sea power and use their superior land power to effect unification of the Mediterranean basin and the Eurasian- African land mass, with the establishment of ultimate sea superiority.

(6) The momentum of sea supremacy developed by the British Empire gives immediate superiority to the major naval powers—England, United States, Japan—continuing the influence of British-determined modern civilization.

(British American, Japanese sea power resting on battleship supremacy controls and penetrates the continental land masses.)28

(7) Continued developments in the new technique of warfare—submarines, aircraft, Ersatz Preussen type cruisers, long-range artillery, aircraft, mines, etc.—tend to increasing effectiveness of the Latin powers:

(a) Potential control of Mediterranean: Spain at the Gibraltar straits; Italy at the Sicilian pivot; Greece at the Aegean and Dardanelles; Italian land power at Egypt and Suez.

(b) Potential control of western Europe: French and Little Entente control; French air threat to England; Italian dominance in Mediterranean.

(c) Threat of destructive sea warfare: control of Mediterranean; French submarine and cruiser forces; cooperation with Latin America.

Conclusion.—The present situation in the new technique of warfare—sea, land, air— is such as gives a growing advantage to the Latin states, France and Italy, and permits them to use a combination of land-sea-air force to establish control of the strategic Mediterranean basin, of Western Europe, of the Eurasian-African land mass, and of communications with Latin-America. This strategic position coincides with the League of Nations and tends to administrative unification under Latin control of that organization. A single Latin nucleus, Italy and/or France, would be in a strong strategic position to develop nominal into actual world unity.

Looking at the problem from the American point of view the conclusion may be summed up as follows:

(1) Three essentials are necessary to world unity.

(a) A central nucleus able to establish unity.

(b) Effective sea power.

(c) Control of the Mediterranean axis.

(2) Unification of the Latin states, France and Italy, would develop, under existing technical conditions, a strong central nucleus having effective sea power and control of the Mediterranean axis.

(3) An effective Latin nucleus working outward from the Mediterranean through the League of Nations would be in a strong strategic position to dominate the Eurasian- African land mass, replace Bolshevism in Russia by a favorable conservative government, affiliate with Latin and perhaps British America, and isolate the United States.

Therefore, continuance of American supremacy and the extension of American institutions depend upon the following conditions :

(a) Development of effective sea power, i.e., such mastery of the new technique of sea warfare as permits effective control of the sea routes, e.g., combination of sea and air power through refueling operations.

(b) Control of the Mediterranean axis, actually or potentially, in one of the following ways: support of England to reenforce British naval control of the Mediterranean; or support of the Mediterranean powers— Spain or Italy—to permit effective intervention of American sea power in this strategic area.

Completion of world unity depends upon the effectiveness of American sea power.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Owing to the mass of material involved only a few of the outstanding references can be mentioned. Books quoted more than once are referred to by the name of the author only.
Maps: A critical study of topographical and historical maps is necessary to a proper understanding of world strategy.
Putnam: Historical Atlas.
World History: (used for continuity of history)
Webster: World History (see also maps).
Wells: Outline of History.
Ancient History: (historical continuity and sea power).
Breasted: The Conquest of Civilization.
Shepard: Sea Power in Ancient History.
Medieval History: (critical periods).
Haskins: The Normans in European History.
Belloc: Europe and the Faith.
Davis: The Beauty of the Purple (Historical novel by professor of medieval history, University of Minnesota, dealing with siege of Constantinople—a.d. 717.
Cambridge Medieval History (four vols.)
British Sea Power: (based on Mahan and standard histories)
Mahan: Influence of Sea Power upon History: 1660-1783.
Mahan: Influence of Sea Power upon History: 1793-1812.
Principles of Sea Power: developed from comments in naval writings, particularly Mahan, Gill, Frothingham.
World War: (based largely on Churchill with other references).
Belloc: The Elements of the Great War: pts. I and II.
Ferrero: Europe’s Fateful Hour.
Churchill: The World Crisis, (four vols.)
Churchill: Aftermath.
Frothingham: A Guide to the Military History of the World War.
Gill: Naval Power in the World War.
Gill: What Happened at Jutland.
Bellairs: The Battle of Jutland.
Jellicoe: The Grand Fleet; The Crisis of the Naval War.
Nevinson: The Dardanelles Campaign.
Naval Problems Today: (based largely on current articles).
Bywater: Navies and Nations.

The Ebb and Flow of Western Civilization Based on Sicilian Pivot

Empire

Base

Limit of Advance

Decisive Action

Withdrawal Date

Remarks

 

The Ancient World

Inward Advance from Asia Minor

Persia	Tigris	Aegean	Salamis	480 B.C.	Xerxes
Greece	Aegean	Sicily	Syracuse	413	Athens
Carthage	Tunis	So. Italy	Various	275	Pyrhus
		Sicily	Aegetian Is.	241	First Punic War
		Spain	Zama	202	Hannibal

 

Outward Expansion of Roman Empire

Rome	Italy	Elbe	Gradual Withdrawal	117 A.D.	Trajan
		Dneister
		Caucasus
		Persian Gulf

 

The Medieval World

Inward Invasion of Roman Empire

Vandals	Baltic	Sicily-Tunis		534	(Justinian)
E. Goths	Danube	Sicily		535	(Justinian)
Franks	Rhine	Rome		814	Charlemagne
Normans	Seine	Sicily		1268	Died out
E.R. Emp.	Constantinople	Sicily		827	(Saracens)
Saracens	Syria	So. France	Tours	737	W. Franks
		Sicily		1031	(Normans)
		Constantinople	Constantinople	717	Leo the III

 

Outward Expansion of Medieval Christendom

Medieval	Rome	Palestine	Jerusalem	1187	Crusades
Christendom		Constantinople		1261	Crusades
		Greenland		16th Cent.	(Norse)
		Dneister		17th Cent.	Poland
Spain	Spain	England	S. Armada	1588	Elizabeth
		Baltic	30 Years War	1648	H.R. Empire
		S. America		19th Cent.	Monroe Doct.

 

Modern Times

Inward Pressure on Mediterranean

Turkey	Constantinople	Adriatic	Lepanto	1571	(Spain)
France	France	Egypt	Nile	1798	Napoleon
Russia	Baltic	Balkans	T. Berlin	1878	(Bismarck)
Germany	Baltic	Suez	Various	1915	World War
England	England	Constantinople	Dardanelles	1915	World War
		Suez			Now held
Italy	Piedmont	Sicily	Various		(1860-1870)

 

Outward Expansion

Italy

Italy

Lybia-Rhodes

Turkish War

(1912)

 

Control of Sicilian Pivot in Relation to World Unity

Dominant Civilization	Controlling Sicily	From	To	Conquered By
Asiatic	Carthage1	750 B.C.	241 B.C.	Rome
Greek	Greeks1	750	241	Rome
Roman	Rome	241	493 A.D.	E. Goths
None	E. Goths2	493 A.D.	535	E. Roman Empire
E. Roman	E.R. Empr.	535	827	Saracens
Saracen	Saracens	827	1031	Normans
Norman-Papal	Normans	1031	1268	Anjou (France)
French	France	1268	1282	Revolt
French	Independent	1282	1409	Spain
Spanish	Spain	1409	1713	T. Utrech0Eng.
French-English	Savoy3	1713	1720	Treaty
French-English	Austria	1720	1738	Treaty
English	Naples	1738	1860	Treaty
English	Italy	1860		Garibaldi

¹Conflict between Greeks and Carthage

²Period of anarchy following Vandal invasion early fifth century with Vandal raids on Sicily.

³Period of British-French wars with British naval control of Mediterranean and control of Sicily by allies. After 1800, Sicily dominated by British control of Malta.