Conclusion: An Agenda for Research, a Menu for Choice

Ultimately, the purpose of identifying the effects of globalization on maritime forces is to help determine the best ways to deal with a globalized future—how to shape it, defend against its threats, and maximize its benefits.

Maritime forces, as all other aspects of national security—including economic security as well as military defense—are but a portion of the capabilities that American society has at its disposal in dealing with globalization. They also represent only one area of society in which globalization has considerable effects. Yet, hopefully, the contributors to this volume have collectively presented an effective case as to the great importance of maritime forces for our future and the unique relationship that they have with globalization. One does not have to buy a “Globalization Begins at Sea” bumper sticker to accept the fact that without open seas there would be limited open trade—and without open trade it is hard to see how globalization could begin at all.

Globalization and Maritime Power aims to provide policy recommendations that derive from contributor research. Each chapter holds recommendations for policy, some of which may conflict with other chapters. We make no apology for this; all policymaking consists of tying together potentially conflicting objectives within a confusing, cluttered framework of facts. Our objective has been to cut away the clutter on a topic-by-topic basis. When viewed from a distance, the mosaic argues for the increasing relevance of global naval power. But on an individual issue basis, it seems appropriate to paraphrase the words of Lord Horatio Nelson: no naval analyst or policymaker can do very wrong if he places current preconceptions alongside the thoughts of the relevant chapter. Our aim has been to give a full intellectual broadside.

The contributors to this volume argue passionately that having effective, globally capable naval forces is critical to maintaining free and open seas and trade. This would indeed appear the verdict of history, and history, by its very nature, consists of the forces that shape the present and future. It is obvious that this age of globalization—the global century—is not starting off as the unprecedented era of peace and global prosperity for which we might have hoped. Interconnectedness does not in itself bring peaceful relations. We have been shocked by global terrorism, much of it facilitated by the tools that allow for a global economy. Furthermore, at the time this book goes to print, two peoples with the most intertwined economics in the world—the Israelis and Palestinians—are in a bloody standoff. One does not have to pick sides in order to recognize the dangers that lurk in the international system, dangers against which prudent nations defend themselves, dangers which are inherent in human freedom and allow some to make evil choices. Naval forces are intended to defend against the consequences of such choices.

Blessed by its maritime geography and a fortuitous history, the United States has developed into a great maritime power. Such power is the least threatening and the most reassuring to other nations that desire peace. It also has the potential to support the most beneficial aspects of globalization and to thwart some of the most harmful. Oceans no longer seem like impenetrable lines of defense perhaps once envisioned, but they do remain the great common and physical “Internet” on which the things of the world must flow, and above which people and ideas may pass. Homeland security blends with forward security, which blends with global security. Global navies are the prime means of projecting sustained yet unobtrusive power across the great common and into regions of potential crisis. Under such circumstances, is there any force more globalized than an oceangoing navy?

All of this points to the need for a continuing research agenda in the relationship between maritime power and globalization. This volume is only the beginning, and if it convinces others to do their own research in this area—if only to challenge our present conclusions—it will have fulfilled part of its purpose.