Continental vs. Maritime Power, the Fight for a New World Order by Sarah Paine
17 hours ago
- #geopolitics
- #great-power competition
- #maritime order
- Great-power competition defines international relations, with debates on its nature.
- Two antithetical global outlooks exist: continental (land-based power) and maritime (trade-based power).
- Continental hegemons like China and Russia prioritize military over civilian needs, leading to authoritarian rule and wealth-destroying wars.
- Maritime states focus on compounding wealth through commerce, viewing neighbors as trade partners rather than enemies.
- The maritime order, rooted in ancient Athens, treats oceans as commons for safe trade and has evolved into a rules-based system.
- The U.S. strategy post-WWII reflects maritime power, while China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea seek to undermine the rules-based order.
- Historical examples (UK vs. Napoleonic France, Japan's shift in the 1930s) show the success of maritime strategies over continental ones.
- Continental powers often overextend, leading to collapse (e.g., Soviet Union, Germany in WWI and WWII).
- The maritime order benefits global prosperity, with coastal areas generating two-thirds of global wealth and 90% of traded goods moving via oceans.
- Current threats include Russia's expansionist aims, China's continental outlook, and efforts to destabilize the maritime order through propaganda and cyberwarfare.
- The U.S. and allies should leverage maritime strengths (wealth generation) and contain continental powers through sanctions and alliances.
- Risks include nuclear escalation and U.S. isolation if it abandons maritime strategies for continental approaches like 'America First.'