China’s Mahan Problem
Are Beijing’s Maritime Ambitions Feasible?
Mahan theorized that nations require several key factors to realize their naval ambitions. Sarah M Paine distilled these down to the following five (check her out on YouTube, she is an incredible thinker).
Moat: Mahan believed that a maritime nation must have significant waters separating its territory from that of potential land invaders.
The US has the ultimate moat. Girded by the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, an invasion force would have to be projected from Europe or Asia to reach the shores of the lower 48.
Beijing has the opposite of a moat. It is bordered by fourteen countries (North Korea, Russia, Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Nepal, Bhutan, Myanmar, Laos, and Vietnam), all of which it has complicated histories with, and most of which have invaded China at some point.
It also shares near seas with nine additional neighbors (Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines, Indonesia, Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore, Cambodia, Thailand).
The CCP has done a decent job of creating a diplomatic moat with its land-based neighbors. Close relationships with Burma/Myanmar, Pakistan, North Korea, and Laos are currently insulating the CCP from ground-based external threats. Still, India and Vietnam remain weak points.
At the same time, Beijing has gone to great lengths to antagonize some of its sea-based neighbors, particularly Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines.
America: A+
CCP: D
Internal Transportation: Again, the US takes top place. The US has the most extensive and most efficient freight rail system in the world. Additionally, the Mississippi River network is one of the most comprehensive internal waterways in the world, facilitating the movement of goods at a fraction of the cost of even the cheapest rail transport.
Mahan also included things like the Panama Canal in the concept of internal transportation. The Trump administration’s deals with Panama continue to cement US primacy over the canal zone.
The CCP fares better when evaluating internal transportation. The Yangzi/Yangtze River is highly navigable and highly trafficked, connecting many PRC provinces. The CCP has built the world's most extensive high-speed rail system, with nascent freight use that could be repurposed in wartime.
Still, internal transportation is poor in the western half of the country. Additionally, Beijing cannot leverage any potential Panama Canal-type feature to ameliorate its maritime problems.
America: A+
CCP: B
Reliable Egress by Sea - Maritime powers must have access to the maritime commons. This seems obvious, but nations like Germany and China historically have ignored this vital requirement.
The US dominates in this aspect again. With major access to the Arctic Ocean, Pacific Ocean, Gulf of America (Mexico?), Atlantic Ocean, and Great Lakes, Washington has multiple egress points and wide access to the high seas.
The US also has major ports and population centers like Seattle, San Francisco, San Diego, Corpus Christi, Houston, New Orleans, Tampa, New York & New Jersey, Savannah, Charleston, Hampton Roads, and many others. These are all geographically significant port regions, distributed and independent, with populations dense enough to support substantial economic activity.
While the mainland Chinese seaboard is densely populated with major cities, the CCP is actually extremely hemmed in. It has no direct access to the high seas of the Pacific Ocean.
Beijing is attempting to build corridors across Pakistan and Cambodia, but these will never rival a critical passage like the Panama Canal.
If Beijing could convince Thailand to construct the Kra Canal and lease the territory, it is possible that the CCP could improve its maritime position. Yet this is a far-flung proposition, and the effectiveness of the Kra is again not the same as Panama or the Suez.
America: A+
CCP: C-
Commerce Driven Economy: Fleets are EXPENSIVE. To support naval fleets, nations must be prosperous, possessing large and dynamic economies. A large volume of trade, deep financial markets, technical expertise, and a mastery of logistics are just a few of the required conditions and skills.
The US and the US Navy have been doing these things for over a century. Still, as the Carthaginians and the British learned, that’s no reason for complacency.
Beijing has taken the lead in commercial shipyard activity, but this industry is highly dependent on government subsidies. The primary reason the US no longer builds commercial ships is the end of government subsidies under the Reagan administration in the 1980s.
Beijing has also taken the lead in the volume of international trade. These are significant achievements, but expect the US and the CCP to begin battling on these fronts.
In terms of a commerce-driven economy, both the US and the CCP get high marks.
America: A+
CCP: A
Stable Government Institutions: Mahan believed that nations require stable political leadership to fund, execute, and plan naval power over the long term. Warships and fleets take decades to build. Massive numbers of people are necessary in the process.
Farsighted strategy development is required to create and deploy effective fleets.
The US maintains the oldest extant constitutional republic in the world and has a robust political process. Despite this, US Navy fleet construction and management has been totally mismanaged. With recently renewed bipartisan attention from Washington, this should turn around, but it dings the US scorecard.
In contrast, the CCP’s critical vulnerabilities lie in political durability and the power transition process. In totalitarian systems, power transitions are systemically threatening. It will be the same when Xi Jinping passes the baton or dies in office.
However, the CCP can plan in mechanistic 5-year blocks. This has aided Beijing’s ambitions to deploy a large fleet.
America: A-
CCP: C-
Total Report Card
As discussed in our previous article, it will be expensive and risky for the CCP to sustain an effective maritime strategy. Bold move, Cotton.
America: A+
CCP: C+