Mahan on naval warfare : $b Selections from the writing of Rear Admiral Alfred T. MahanMahan, A. T. (Alfred Thayer)
History
Mahan on naval warfare : $b Selections from the writing of Rear Admiral Alfred T. Mahan
Mahan, A. T. (Alfred Thayer)
Naval art and science; Naval strategy; Sea-power
As an illustration of what I am here saying, the two expressions,
“Fortress Fleet” and “Fleet in Being,” themselves give proof in their
ultimate effect upon Russian practice and principle. Fortress Fleet
was a dominant conception in Russian military and naval thought. I
quote with some reserve, because from a daily newspaper,[102] but as
probably accurate, and certainly characteristic of Russian theory, the
following: “Before his departure from Bizerta for the Suez Canal,
Admiral Wirenius, in command of the Russian squadron, remarked that
the Russian plan was to make Port Arthur and Vladivostok the two most
important arsenals in the empire, each having a fleet of corresponding
strength,”—corresponding, that is, to the fortress,—“depending upon it
as upon a base.” The distribution would be a division in the face of
the probable enemy, Japan, centrally situated, because the design has
reference primarily to the fortress, not to naval efficiency. The
conception is not wholly erroneous; if it were, the error would have
been detected. It has an element of truth, and therein lies its
greatest danger; the danger of half or quarter truths. A fleet _can_
contribute to the welfare of coast fortresses; especially when the
fortress is in a foreign possession of the nation. On the other hand,
the Fleet in Being theory has also an element of truth, a very
considerable element; and it has been before the naval public,
explicitly, for so long a time that it is impossible it was not known
in Russia. It was known and was appreciated. It had a strong
following. The Russian Naval General Staff clamored for command of the
sea; but in influence upon the government, the responsible director
and formulator of national policy, it did not possess due weight. Not
having been adequately grasped,—whether from neglect, or because the
opposite factor of Fortress Fleet was already in possession of men’s
minds,—it was never able to secure expression in the national plans.
There was compromise, possibly; both things, Fleet in Being and
Fortress Fleet, were attempted; but there was not adjustment. The
fortress throughout reduced the fleet, as fleet, to insignificance in
the national conceptions. What resulted was that at Port Arthur the
country got neither a fortress fleet, for, except the guns mounted
from it, the fleet contributed nothing to the defense of the place;
nor yet a Fleet in Being, for it was never used as such.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account