The United States versus Great Britain Naval Innovation - Essay Example

US vs Great Britain Naval Innovation US vs Great Britain Naval Innovation Introduction A. The present day differences in naval innovations between United Sates and Great Britain have roots in the history of war and the treaties. B. Thesis: United States naval innovations have been dependent on logistic and reasoning while those of Great Britain are based on misguided sense of false security and elimination of imminent threat. The treaties (Five Power Treaty and Treaty of Versailles) had different responses from the Powers. A. America, Japan and Germany failed to abide by the restrictive resolutions and continue with innovations. B. Great Britain did not notice and abode by the resolutions, counting on the benefit of eliminated threat from Germany. US and Unrestricted Warfare A. America’s failure to abide was evident in the WWII and its continued presence in Pacific Ocean. B. The response to Japanese attack indicated presence of continued innovation by the two countries. Great Britain sense of security A. Britain has a history of dependence on alliances and its air power not on naval power. B. Britain did not notice the failure to abide by the treaties by other powers. Their presence in the treaty and elimination of Germany as a threat provided a false sense of security that impeded innovation. The contrast A. Britain depended on alliances and false sense of security while America depended on strategies and logistics to continue its innovations. Conclusion The historic failure still prevents the Great Britain from standing on its own and depending on its own military. Introduction The naval innovation in the late 19th and in the early 20th century resulted from a series of conflicts and treaties to resolve these conflicts. The responses that the strongest navies of the time namely United States, Great Britain, Germany and Japan had on the issue and how they undertook the agreements from the treaties and the prevailing conditions resulted to great differences in their naval innovations. From a close look at the navies of the treaties, both the United States and Great Britain navies were subjected to similar agreements that were restrictive of the innovations that they could pursue1. The United States response to the treaties and the agreements is however different from that of Great Britain and this was the result of all the differences observable to date. This paper is aimed at providing a comparison and the contrast between the US naval innovation and that of Great Britain. The paper will be guided by the thesis that United States naval innovations were dependent on logistic and reasoning while those of Great Britain was based on misguided sense of false security and elimination of imminent threat. The Treaties and their Effects From the Five Power Treaty that brought together five main powers into a naval agreement. The resolutions made U.S. Navy and the Great Britain navy to take different directions. For the Great Britain and Japan, the fortification clause had a major impact on the naval strategy and designs. For Great Britain, the influence on their innovation was shown by their arms limitations throughout the governments’ successions and policies formulation in relation to the treaties resolutions. Britain, therefore, appeared to focus directly on the benefits of the restrictions on the peaceful existence of the powers. However, United States was more concerned with logistics, their innovations after this treaty stayed relatively the same in the interwar periods. The Treaties of Versailles on its part enhanced further the restrictive force on naval innovation by prohibiting Germany from continued production of the U-Boats which were feared to have been used extensively in World War I2. The restriction on Germany provided a false sense of security to Great Britain making it believe that the treaties were important in eliminating threats. The treaties however failed to notice that if Germany had been producing the boats even after the Five Power Treaty, then others powers could still be producing their own naval innovations contrary to the agreement. The treaty influenced greatly the balance of power between US, Japan and Great Britain. The Americans refused to ratify the deal in this treaty. Britain in realization of the imminent security danger sought to form alliance with Japan in effort tom ensure own security. United States and Unrestricted Warfare United States throughout the history of the war treaties was identified as opposed to restricted warfare but only until it was involved. This is evident from the US Navy response to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor that resulted to the WWII. Although this was described as a means to reduce Japan’s offensive power, the use of the submarine in the war demonstrated that US had not adopted the proposed restrictions3. It is in fact recorded that the presence of US navy in the Pacific between the wars pushed for the need by America to produce a submarine that could match that of Japan and this was produced by 1930, over ten years before the Second World War. Further innovations were aimed at blocking the sea between the Japan and Great Britain with the aim of reducing the power of the alliance. Great Britain False sense of security In the history of the wars. Great Britain was wrongly dependent on alliances to ensure their own security. Their failure to notice that other powers did not abide by the naval innovations restrictions limited their own innovations. They felt safe when Germany development of the U-boats was restricted in the Treaty of Versailles and failed to realize that Japan and America did not abide by the restrictions4. Britain depended on its perceived air power and continental allies to defend itself affected its interwar innovation. The presence of Japan and America in the treaties also provided a false sense of security that inhibited the need for innovations and caused underestimation of the other powers. The Contrast between US and Great Britain Naval Innovation The US Naval innovations have been dependent on the realization that there are always imminent dangers of attack. As a super power, the country has always depended on its navy for security and responses to attacks. Their innovations is, therefore, advanced and progressive. Further, the innovations are dependent on logistics and serious concerns for security. On the other hand, the Great Britain has been dependent on its air power. This is because the treaties provided a false sense of security that impeded naval innovation due to the theoretical restrictions that were agreed upon. In addition, low level of naval innovation in Great Britain is a result of its historical dependence on alliances in war. Conclusion United States naval innovations are dependent on logistic and reasoning while those of Great Britain have been based on misguided sense of false security and elimination of imminent threat. The United States identified threats and prepared for them, defying the treaties. The Great Britain on its part used allies to defend itself and believed that the presence of other powers in treaties was an indication of their respect to the resolutions. Britain, therefore, obtained a false sense of security that made it depend on its air power and impeded naval innovation. References Kuehn. J. (2007). The influence of Naval Arms Limitations on US Naval Innovation during the Interwar Period, 1921-1937. Kansas State University. Kansas. Talbott. J. Weapons Development, War Planning and Policy: The US Navy and the Submarine, 1917–1941 Read More