U.S. Carriers and American Foreign Policy

The United States has a storied history in land wars: it has met success in World Wars One and Two on land in Europe, fought to stalemate against the Chinese in Korea, and was defeated by irregular forces (and domestic unrest) in Vietnam. This history of U.S. involvement in land wars could confuse exactly what kind of power the United States actually is.

Before we get to that, a quick point: There are two kinds of great powers: land powers and sea powers. This is determined by geography more than politics, technology and choice. For instance, with a huge territory that borders multiple states, Russia is a land power because it must upkeep a large army to defend its borders. The United Kingdom, when it was a great power, was a sea power. This is determined by the simple fact that it is surrounded by sea and, because it did not have to fund a standing army, had to invest in a navy for its defense.

Though the United States has a large landmass and borders, it does not have any military power on its borders. Weak border states (thank you Canada and Mexico) allow great powers to focus military funding to other areas. Without threats on its borders, the United States does not need to maintain a standing army to defend the homeland and focuses on power projection through its navy. Hence, the United States has 11 aircraft carriers (the UK and France are the only other countries with real carriers, they are half the size of U.S. carriers and they only have 2 and 1 respectively).

Now, back on topic…carriers are essential to American power projection. As a naval power and with geographic isolation, the aircraft carriers provide platforms for assault on foreign land, disruption of enemy naval operations, and, most importantly, defense of carrier groups and troop transports en route to military engagement.

With the economy going sour and no true naval competitor in the running, politicians may be willing to cut back on military spending and the number of aircraft carriers the navy operates. Defense Secretary Gates “asked whether the United States could afford ‘a Navy that relies on 3- to 6-billion-dollar destroyers, along with 7-billion-dollar submarines and 11-billion-dollar carriers.’”

While the United States may not be actively engaging in military operations against an enemy with its own aircraft carriers, they remain essential tools in American foreign policy. First, they are a demonstration of American power projection: with a global presence that packs a true punch, the aircraft carrier is the face of the United States abroad. Among other reasons, aircraft carriers are also tools for demonstrating US credibility. For example, sailing a carrier down the Taiwan Strait in response to Chinese aggression says “Back off, Beijing.” As a naval power, it would be an utter mistake to cut back on the number American aircraft carriers.

For more see: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6460AN20100507?type=politicsNews

Leave a comment

Name (required)

E-mail (required)

URI

Your Message

Security Code: