THE AMERICAN LEGION MAGAZINE 2.1.19
ALAN W. DOWD
President Theodore Roosevelt was fond of quoting the African proverb, “Speak softly and carry a big stick.”
For Roosevelt, the big stick was the U.S. Navy, which he
deployed frequently to underscore that America’s words were not empty –
and that its interests would be defended.
Neither he nor the United States invented what’s known as
“gunboat diplomacy.” Egyptian ruler Ramses III likely employed it before
and after he engaged in the first recorded naval battle in 1186 B.C.
Many seafaring powers followed suit in the intervening centuries –
especially the United States. Throughout America’s history, presidents
have used this unique form of statecraft to promote the national
interest and preserve some semblance of international order – all
without going to war or actually using the big stick.
MESSAGES A good
definition of gunboat diplomacy is any deployment of military assets or
implied use of them – gunboat diplomacy is not solely the province of
the Navy – intended to coerce or persuade an adversary to alter its
behavior. The operative words are “deployment” and “implied.” Once
military assets are used in anger, once bombs start flying, gunboat
diplomacy has passed from the threat of war into actual war – and has
failed.
A Congressional Research Service tally of U.S. military
deployments since the nation’s founding includes dozens of maneuvers and
shows of force aimed at securing U.S. interests without going to war.
The first of these dates to 1815, when Commodore Stephen Decatur’s naval
squadron conducted maneuvers off Tunis and Tripoli, securing
indemnities for offenses during the War of 1812. Other examples include
naval maneuvers off the Ivory Coast to discourage piracy (1843), near
Turkey “to remind the authorities of the power of the United States”
(1850s), around Japan to enforce treaties (1850s and 1860s) and in Haiti
to gain the release of a captured ship (1888).
Roosevelt elevated gunboat diplomacy into an art form.
While there are many examples of him brandishing the big stick, two
stand out.
The first came in 1902-1903. After Venezuela’s failure to
make good on its debt payments, German and British warships began
prowling the Caribbean – and threatening America’s special role in this
hemisphere. Historian Edmund Morris captures Roosevelt’s sentiment: “If
Germany and Britain wanted to splash in the same water, they must play
by American rules.”
The rules would be enforced by the Navy. Roosevelt
dispatched 53 warships to the region. Knowing that Britain and Germany
had just 29 ships in the region – and that Britain had no desire for war
with America – he gave Germany 10 days to pull back. As far as the rest
of the world was concerned, Roosevelt privately explained to a German
emissary, the U.S. armada was there on routine, preplanned maneuvers.
But he warned, “If Germany took any action that looked like the
acquisition of territory in Venezuela or elsewhere in the Caribbean ... I
should be obliged to interfere, by force if necessary.” The kaiser got
the message and backed down.
Morris also recounts the strange story of Ion Perdicaris,
an on-again-off-again American citizen who had been kidnapped by
Moroccan warlord Mulai Ahmed er Raisuli. After Roosevelt dispatched
seven warships to the Moroccan coast, his secretary of state issued a
blunt telegram: “Perdicaris alive or Raisuli dead.” The Moroccan
government, pressured by the gunboats, found a way to free Perdicaris.
As he approached the coastal city of Tangier, Perdicaris
caught a glimpse of the source of his regained freedom: “the mastheads
of Adm. (F.E.) Chadwick’s ships.” Overcome with emotion, he whispered a
quiet prayer of thanks for “that flag ... that people ... that president
... those frigates.”
After the world wars, when gunboats were used for combat
rather than diplomacy, President Harry Truman returned to Roosevelt’s
playbook – albeit with a new kind of “gunboat.” During Stalin’s blockade
of West Berlin, Truman deployed nuclear-capable B-29 bombers to Europe
to bolster the Berlin Airlift – and send a signal to Moscow.
In 1950, Truman dispatched the 7th Fleet to the Taiwan Strait to prevent the two Chinas from attacking each other.
Likewise, President Dwight Eisenhower ordered warships to
the waters around Taiwan, this time to protect Taiwan after mainland
forces began shelling Taiwanese territory. He also updated gunboat
diplomacy for the nuclear age, with what came to be called “atomic
diplomacy.”
In 1953, Eisenhower effectively ended the Korean War by
warning the Chinese he was prepared “to expand the war outside of Korea”
and “use the atomic bomb.” In 1955, he suggested he was willing to use
atomic weapons to defend Taiwan. He underlined the strategic-deterrence
concept known as “massive retaliation” by deploying 36 percent of
America’s hydrogen bombs and 42 percent of its atomic bombs overseas –
and expanding the U.S. nuclear arsenal 18-fold during his presidency.
Eisenhower’s steely response to Khrushchev’s boast about the Red Army’s
overwhelming conventional edge in Germany captured the essence of his
updated version of gunboat diplomacy: “If you attack us in Germany,”
Eisenhower explained, “there will be nothing conventional about our
response.” Khrushchev got the message.
When Soviet nuclear-missile bases were discovered in Cuba,
President John F. Kennedy used gunboat diplomacy to avert war and
denuclearize the island. More than 60 warships were dispatched to the
waters around Cuba. Ninety nuclear-armed B-52s began round-the-clock
orbits over the Atlantic. As historian Paul Johnson details, “800 B-47s,
550 B-52s and 70 B-58s were prepared with bomb-bays closed for
immediate takeoff.” Moscow blinked.
During the 1973 Yom Kippur War, after Brezhnev threatened
unilateral Soviet intervention, the United States “responded by putting
its nuclear forces on worldwide alert,” a State Department report
explains. The Soviets were “utterly shocked,” as a Nixon Foundation
analysis recounts. That, of course, was the Nixon administration’s
intent. Moscow got the message and, again, backed down.
Four months before he unleashed Operation Desert Storm,
President George H.W. Bush hoped a massive deployment of U.S. military
assets to the Gulf would persuade Saddam Hussein to withdraw from
Kuwait. “Perhaps your leaders do not appreciate the strength of the
forces united against them,” he explained to the Iraqi people and
military. “Let me say clearly: There is no way Iraq can win ... Iraq
must withdraw from Kuwait.”
As if to underline the point, a Time magazine
article featuring photos of the president and America’s gathering naval
firepower was headlined “Read My Ships.” Alas, death-wish dictators are
seldom persuaded by the mere threat of force.
To show its displeasure with Taiwan’s first direct
democratic presidential elections and with Washington’s willingness to
allow Taiwan’s president to visit the United States, China launched a
flurry of missile drills in the Taiwan Strait in 1995-1996. In response,
President Bill Clinton sent the carriers Independence and Nimitz to the region. The latter even transited the Taiwan Strait – the first
time a U.S. aircraft carrier had done so since 1979. The missile drills
ended, Taiwan held its elections and war was averted.
Most Americans know about the 1993 gun battle in
Mogadishu, which claimed 18 U.S. servicemembers. What’s less well-known
is how the Clinton administration secured the release of captured U.S.
helicopter pilot Michael Durant.
As Mark Bowden details in “Black Hawk Down,” Somali
warlord Farrah Aidid demanded the United States free 70 of his men in
exchange for Durant. In response, Washington sent veteran diplomat
Robert Oakley to Mogadishu to paint a picture for Aidid’s interlocutors:
“Just look at the stuff coming in here now,” Oakley observed. “An
aircraft carrier, tanks, gunships .... The minute the guns start again,
all restraint on the U.S. side goes. Once the fighting starts, all this
pent-up anger is going to be released. This whole part of the city will
be destroyed – men, women, children, camels, cats, dogs, goats, donkeys,
everything,” he matter-of-factly explained. “That would really be
tragic.”
Aidid agreed to release Durant “immediately.”
DETERRENCE Gunboat diplomacy remains a tool of U.S. statecraft in the 21st century. In
2004, the Pentagon simultaneously surged seven carrier strike groups
into five theaters of operation. When asked if the global exercise was
designed to send any signals, an admiral coyly responded,
“I think that’s advantageous.” The Navy reprised the feat
in late 2017, sending seven supercarriers to sea, with three carriers – Ronald Reagan, Theodore Roosevelt and Nimitz – exercising together in the Western Pacific.
In 2015, two days after Beijing flew bomber aircraft near
Taiwan’s airspace, a pair of Marine Corps F-18s landed in Taiwan – the
first such landing in 30 years. In 2018, after People’s Republic of
China warships conducted drills near Taiwan, a U.S. Navy vessel made a
surprising stop to refuel in Taiwan. The Pentagon said the unexpected
visit by American F-18s was due to “a mechanical issue.” Taiwan’s
military insisted the Navy drop-in was “unrelated to military activity.”
But given the timing, it seems Washington was sending a message: Taiwan
is not alone.
In response to China’s construction of illegal islands in
international waters, the Obama and Trump administrations ordered U.S.
warships to conduct freedom-of-navigation operations around the islands.
Not coincidentally, 2018 saw U.S. aircraft carriers make
eyebrow-raising stops in Vietnam (the first since 1975) and the
Philippines (the first since 2014).
The Air Force also brandishes the big stick. As part of
its “continuous bomber presence,” the Air Force has been flying B-52s
above the South China Sea since 2004 to maintain open skies and prevent
Beijing’s de facto annexation of international airspace and seaspace.
In 2009, B-52s flew from Guam to Australia, F-22s deployed
from Alaska to Guam and Japan, and B-2s were dispatched to Alaska in
high-profile shows of force. In 2013, when China declared an air-defense
identification zone over a vast swath of the East China Sea, Washington
sent a flight of B-52s through the area to enforce freedom of the
skies. Likewise, in 2015, B-52s flew within two miles of the “Made in
China” islands to reject Beijing’s illegal claims.
Much of the Air Force equivalent of gunboat diplomacy in the Pacific is directed at North Korea:
• When North
Korea began threatening war in early 2013, Washington deployed F-22s to
South Korea and sent B-2s on unusually – and purposely – high-profile
maneuvers over the peninsula.
• The Obama administration deployed B-2s to Guam in 2015, and flew B-52s over South Korea in 2016.
• In 2016, Air
Force officials made a point of noting that a B-1B’s “low-level flight
near the DMZ” was “the closest a Lancer has ever flown to the border of
the Republic of Korea (ROK) and North Korea.” It also marked the first
time in 20 years B-1Bs had landed in South Korea.
• Only twice in history – in August 2016 and January 2018 – have B-52s, B-2s and B-1Bs deployed to Guam at the same time.
• In 2017, B-1Bs
flew from Guam to South Korea, where they conducted bombing drills
alongside U.S. F-35s and South Korean F-15s “two to three times a
month,” according to ROK defense officials.
• In December
2017, a week after North Korea tested an intercontinental ballistic
missile, the United States and ROK conducted joint drills involving 230
warplanes, including long-range bombers and stealth fighter-bombers.
• Ahead of the 2018 Olympic Games in South Korea, the Air Force deployed three B-2s to Guam in a deterrent signal to North Korea.
In response to Russia’s 2014 invasion of Ukraine,
Washington rushed F-15s and F-16s to the Baltics and Poland. B-52s and
B-2s deployed to Britain. F-22s were dispatched to Britain, Poland,
Lithuania and Romania. A strike force of 16 B-52s and B-2s conducted
strategic exercises. And Exercise Polar Roar sent B-2s and B-52s on
nonstop flights over the Northern Pacific, Arctic and Baltic Sea.
Again in 2017, B-2s, B-1Bs and B-52s deployed to Britain
“to demonstrate ... flexible global-strike capability,” the Air Force
explained.
Jim Lewis of the U.S. Naval Institute and Robby Harris of the Naval War College note that a mid-2018 deployment of the USS Harry Truman carrier strike group “sent a message to Iran and our partners .... Then, in a very unexpected move, Truman left the Mediterranean to operate in the North Atlantic ... to send a signal to the Russians.”
Land-based units also conduct a kind of gunboat diplomacy.
The Pentagon returned heavy armor to Europe in 2014 as a message to
Moscow: crossing this line means you are going to war against the United
States – no ambiguity or doubts about the consequences. That certainty
of response – the promise that the costs of aggression will be greater
than any potential benefits – is the essence of deterrence, and it
works.
WHITTLED Gunboat
diplomacy is the power of persuasion on an international scale. Like
their predecessors, Presidents Obama and Trump have employed it to
defend U.S. interests, promote a liberal international order, reassure
allies and deter foes. The Trump administration credits “our campaign of
maximum pressure” – all that saber-rattling around North Korea – with
“creating the appropriate atmosphere for dialogue with North Korea.”
To be effective, gunboat diplomacy requires guns and boats
– and planes, tanks and personnel. Regrettably, sequestration hacked
away at these precious resources. A Center for Strategic and Budgetary
Assessments study notes that in constant dollars, defense spending fell
by nearly one-fourth between 2010 and 2015.
As a result, the Army’s active-duty end strength by 2016 was smaller than it was on the eve of 9/11. The
Air Force is “the smallest and oldest it has ever been,” the branch
reports. In 2016, after five years of sequestration, Marine aviation
units were forced to salvage parts from museums.
By the end of 2016, the Navy had only 275 ships, down from
316 on 9/11. The fleet’s current size isn’t close to America’s maritime
needs. “For us to meet what combatant commanders request,” former Chief
of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert observes, “we need a Navy of
450 ships.”
Recent defense budgets have ended sequestration’s maiming
of the military. However, a couple of budget cycles are not enough to
repair the damage. “It took us years to get into this situation,”
Defense Secretary James Mattis concludes. “It will require years of
stable budgets and increased funding to get out of it.”
In the interim, presidents will have to make do with a whittled-down big stick.
*Cover Story