Why Great Britain Failed

In spite of Great Britain's naval strength at the time of the American War for Independence, there were some lapses in strategy and a misunderstanding of colonial resolve that led to Britains loss of its American colonies. Specifically, Great Britain did not reckon on the colonies securing international alliances, and did not do enough to win hearts and minds.

Mahans Perspective

Mahan (2007) emphasized the importance of naval power in achieving strategic dominance and argued that control of the sea could determine the outcome of wars through the projection of power, the disruption of trade, and (ultimately) with the support of ground operations. However, several factors limited Great Britain's ability to use its naval superiority to achieve a favorable outcome in the American War of Independence. Great Britains projection of power was challenged by American allies; it did not succeed in disrupting trade to the extent that American revolutionaries were forced to capitulate; and its navy was not supported by effective ground operations.

First, the vast gulf between Great Britain and the American colonies just in terms of distance (but as well as culture) posed serious logistical challenges, which made it difficult to maintain a consistent and effective presence. The American colonists were able to use revolutionary ideals and rhetoric to impose their views on the populace, which in turn rallied with an organic swelling of ground support against Great Britain and its soldiers. Great Britain, for her part, had to deal with logistical issues like supplies for supporting ground operations across the Atlantic. Meanwhile, the American forces, which were aware of their own naval disadvantage, could rely on guerrilla tactics against the British to stymie any advances Britain could make.

The British Navy could certainly project power along the coast, in accordance with Mahans principle, but much of the conflict took place inland, where naval power had limited direct influence, outside of blockades. Still, the ability of the American forces and their allies to operate effectively inland reduced the strategic effectiveness of British naval strength, and the length of the coast also added to this.

Additionally, the entry of France (and later Spain and the Netherlands) into the war on the side of the American colonies complicated the situation and further reduced the impact of Britains naval power. The need to defend against French naval forces, protect its own trade routes, and conduct operations in other theaters diluted the British Navy's efforts in America, where naval force could no longer stand to be concentrated. Plus, the British blockades were not completely effective in stifling American trade or completely cutting off supplies, because of the vastness of the American coastline and the new support from European allies.

Sun Tzu's Perspective

Sun Tzu (2021) argues that principles such as the importance of knowing one's enemy, being flexible in strategy, and moral factors that allow you to win hearts and minds make the difference in any war. From Sun Tzu's perspective, several strategic misjudgments can be identified in the British conduct of the war:

First off, the British likely...

…them more resolute and determined. Plus, European allies, in particular France, provided important supplies that reduced the blockades effects. This turn showed the limitations of economic pressure in achieving strategic objectives for Britain.

Overextension of the navy was also a problem. The need to engage French naval forces and protect global interests simply undermined Britains naval efforts in American waters. This overextension, a situation that is cautioned against by both Mahan and Sun Tzu, was a strategic blunder that prevented the British Navy from achieving overwhelming local superiority that could have isolated the colonies.

It must also be noted that Britain did little to sap the morale of the Americans. The psychological impact intended by the British Navy's presence was counterbalanced by the resentment it fostered among colonists. This situation supports what Sun Tzu says about the importance of the moral dimension of war. When one side believes in the morality of its cause so vehemently it refuses to back down, there is no way to coerce it barring total obliteration. The lack of local support stymied British efforts and thus the limitations of relying on naval strength alone to maintain control over unwilling populations was put on display.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the British naval power had some effect during the American War of Independence, but its impact was constrained by various challenges. The perspectives of Mahan and Sun Tzu show the limitations of military power and the need for an approach that integrates naval strength with effective ground operations, focused strategy, and the moral dimension of…