Gunboat diplomacy

[
SMS "Panther", a famous example of the use of gunboat diplomacy from the Agadir Crisis.] In international politics, gunboat diplomacy refers to the pursuit of foreign policy objectives with the aid of conspicuous displays of military power—implying or constituting a direct threat of warfare, should terms not be agreeable to the superior force.

Origin of the term

The term comes from the age of warring European empires, where such displays typically involved demonstrations of naval might—gunboats were a prominent type of warship and symbolized an advanced military. A country negotiating with a European power—usually over issues of trade—would notice that a warship or fleet of ships had appeared off its coast. The mere sight of such power almost always had a considerable effect, and it was rarely necessary for such boats to use other measures, such as demonstrations of cannon fire.

A notable and controversial example of gunboat diplomacy was the Don Pacifico Incident in 1850, in which the British Foreign Secretary Lord Palmerston dispatched a squadron of the Royal Navy to blockade the Greek port of Piraeus in retaliation for the harming of a British subject, David Pacifico, in Athens, and the subsequent failure of the government of King Otto to compensate the Gibraltar-born (and therefore British) Pacifico.

The effectiveness of such simple demonstrations of a nation's projection of force capabilities meant that those nations with naval power, especially Britain, could establish military bases (for example, Diego Garcia) and arrange economically advantageous relationships around the world. Aside from military conquest, gunboat diplomacy was the dominant way to establish new trade partners, colonial outposts and expansion of empire.

Those lacking the resources and technological advancements of European empires found that their own peaceable relationships were readily dismantled in the face of such pressures, and they therefore came to depend on the imperial nations for access to raw materials and overseas markets.

The British diplomat and naval thinker James Cable spelled out the nature of gunboat diplomacy in a series of works published between 1971 and 1994. In these, he defined the phenomenon as "the use or threat of limited naval force, otherwise ["sic"] than as an act of war, in order to secure advantage or to avert loss, either in the furtherance of an international dispute or else against foreign nationals within the territory or the jurisdiction of their own state." [J. Cable, Gunboat diplomacy, 1919-1991: political applications of limited naval force (third edition), Basingstoke: Macmillan/IISS, 1994, p.14.] He further broke down the concept into four key areas:

*Definitive Force: the use of gunboat diplomacy to create or remove a fait accompli.

*Purposeful Force: application of naval force to change the policy or character of the target government or group

*Catalytic Force: a mechanism designed to buy a breathing space or present policy makers with an increased range of options

*Expressive Force: use of navies to send a political message - interestingly this aspect of gunboat diplomacy is undervalued and almost dismissed by Cable.

Gunboat diplomacy comes in contrast to the views held prior to the 18th century influenced by Hugo Grotius, "De Jure Belli ac Pacis", in which he circumscribed the right to resort to force with what he described as 'temperamenta'.

Modern contexts

Gunboat diplomacy is considered a form of hegemony. As the United States became a military power in the first decade of the 20th century, the Rooseveltian version of gunboat diplomacy, big stick diplomacy, was partially superseded by dollar diplomacy: replacing the big stick with the "juicy carrot" of American private investment. However, during Woodrow Wilson's presidency, conventional gunboat diplomacy did occur, most notably in the case of the U.S. Army's occupation of Veracruz in 1914, during the Mexican Revolution.

Gunboat diplomacy in the post-Cold War world was still based mostly on naval forces, owing to the United States Navy's overwhelming seapower. U.S. administrations have frequently changed the disposition of their major naval fleets to influence opinion in foreign capitals.More urgent diplomatic points were made by the Clinton administration in the Yugoslav wars of the 1990s (in alliance with the United Kingdom's Blair government) and elsewhere, using sea-launched Tomahawk missiles, [ [http://edition.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/1998/10/12/clinton.kosovo.html Tomahawk Diplomacy - October 19, 1998 ] ] and E-3 AWACS airborne surveillance aircraft in a more passive display of military presence [Smith, Perry M., "Assignment Pentagon: Pentagon: A Guide to the Potomac Puzzle Palace", Brassey's Publishing, 2001, p. 50.] [ [http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj97/win97/dippold.html Air Occupation: Asking the Right Questions ] ] [ [http://www.mackenzieinstitute.com/1999/newsletter040199.htm Colombia, Gun Boat Diplomacy, The floating world ] ] . The term "gunboat diplomacy" has been superseded in many circles by "power projection".

Notable examples

18th century

*War of Jenkins' Ear (1739–48)

19th century

*Second Barbary War (1815)
*Opium War
*Nguyen-France war
*Don Pacifico Incident (1850)
*Black Ships (1853–54)
*Anglo-Zanzibar War

20th century

*Panama separation from Colombia
*Great White Fleet (1907)
*Agadir Crisis (1911)
*First Taiwan Strait Crisis (1954-55)
*Second Taiwan Strait Crisis (1958)
*Third Taiwan Strait Crisis (1995-96)

References

Literature:
* Cable, J.: Gunboat diplomacy. Political Applications of Limited Naval Forces, London 1971 (re-edited 1981 and 1994)
* Wiechmann, G.: Die preußisch-deutsche Marine in Lateinamerika 1866-1914. Eine Studie deutscher Kanonenbootpolitik (The Prussian-German Navy in Latin America 1866-1914. A study of german Gunboat diplomacy), Bremen 2002
* Eberspächer, C.: Die deutsche Yangtse-Patrouille. Deutsche Kanonenbootpolitik in China im Zeitalter des Imperialismus (The German Yangtse patrol. German Gunboat diplomacy in China in the age of imperialism), Bochum 2004
* Healy, D.: Gunboat Diplomacy in the Wilson Era. The U.S. Navy in Haiti 1915-1916, Madison WIS 1976
* Hagan, K. J.: American Gunboat Diplomacy and the Old Navy 1877-1889, Westport/London 1973
* Preston, A./Major, J.: Send a Gunboat! A study of the Gunboat and its role in British policy, 1854-1904, London 1967

Articles:
* Long, D. F.: "Martial Thunder": The First Official American Armed Intervention in Asia, in: Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 42, 1973, p. 143-162
* Willock, R.: Gunboat Diplomacy: Operations of the (British) North America and West Indies Squadron, 1875-1915, Part 2, in: American Neptune, Vol. XXVIII, 1968, p. 85-112
* Bauer, K. J.: The "Sancala" Affair: Captain Voorhees Seizes an Argentine Squadron, in: American Neptune, Vol. XXIV, 1969, p. 174-186

Movies:
* OUR FIGHTING NAVY (GB 1937, director Norman Walker)
* THE SAND PEBBLES ("Kanonenboot am Yangtse-kiang", german title, USA 1966, director Robert Wise)
* YANGTSE INCIDENT (BATTLE HELL, american title, "Helden zur See", austrian title, "Yangtse Zwischenfall", german title, GB 1957, director Michael Anderson)

External links

* [http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1991/GTD.htm 1991 article examining potential role of U. S. Navy in 1990s diplomacy]
* [http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0401-11.htm Article from a U. S./liberal perspective considering America's global military 'footprint']
* [http://www.the-old-sea-dog.net/d21.html A U. K. sailor's-eye-view of two modern gunboat diplomacy missions]
* [http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2002/Feb_2002/caspian_status_27202.htm Storm in a teacup? Gunboats on the Caspian Sea]
* [http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2000/484/in1.htm Anti-war analyst Noam Chomsky applies the term to NATO's action against Serbia]
* [http://edition.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/1998/10/12/clinton.kosovo.html TIME magazine on Clinton's Tomahawk Diplomacy]
* [http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/idocket/iyuk/iyukframe.htm Ongoing legal dispute at the International Court of Justice over the legality of NATO actions against Serbia]