Sea denial: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 19:09, 24 November 2024

Sea denial is a military term for preventing an enemy from using the sea. It is a naval warfare subset of anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) strategies,^[1]^[2] and does not necessarily mean that the denier itself will use the sea. It is a parallel concept to sea control, which implies that that controlling force cannot be successfully attacked.

Vego describes sea denial as "preventing partially or completely the enemy’s use of the sea for military and commercial purposes".^[3]

Corbett states that the object of sea denial is defensive. It is a less ambitious strategy than sea control and is often carried out by a weaker power.^[4] It is possible to pursue sea denial in one area of operation while pursuing sea control in another.

Sea denial can act as a direct complement to sea control. A nation may achieve sea control in its littorals, while enforcing sea denial outside the littorals, as was seen with the Soviet Union during periods of the Cold War.

Methods

Sea denial is achieved in many different ways. The method depends on factors such as geography, ambition, and capabilities. Geographically it is easier to conduct sea denial operations in choke points such as narrow waters, straights, or congested waters.

Example techniques include naval mines, anti-ship missiles, drones, and submarines.

Barrier operations seek to hinder access to certain areas. Commerce raiding requires the enemy to put resources into escorting merchant ships. Asymmetrical warfare can involve attacking expensive ships with low cost uncrewed vessels. A fleet in being can threaten offensive operations without actually conducting them.^[2]

History

During World War I and World War II, Germany pursued sea denial using U-boats. Owing to the substantial superiority of the Royal Navy's surface forces, Germany's Imperial Navy (in World War I) and Kriegsmarine (in World War II) had little hope of sea control, but with submarines, the Germans hoped to choke off their access to seaborne commerce. In both wars, the United Kingdom successfully resisted the German strategy with a combination of strict rationing and anti-submarine weapons and techniques.

During the Cold War, the Soviet Union invested heavily in submarines and would likely have pursued a similar strategy of sea denial had tensions with NATO escalated to open warfare.

Since World War II, the most notable example of a sea denial involved the so-called 'Tanker War,' wherein Iran and Iraq sought to close the Persian Gulf.

Today the term A2/AD has gained traction, and refers to a sort of sea denial strategy where a state aspires to challenge access to certain areas while hindering freedom of movement in an adjacent area. It can include a combined effort of navy, air force, and army. The army deploys missiles and sensors. The air force deploys assets to gather intelligence, conduct surveillance and reconnaissance and target ships with airborne weaponry. The navy deploys sea mines, surface ships, and submarines in a layered defence and distributed lethality.^[1]

Modern sea denial addresses area denial weapons, for example in the context of a land power using land-based missiles to strike sea targets. Such missiles can follow cruise missile (terrain-skimming) or ballistic missile trajectories.

References

^ ^a ^b Till, Geoffrey (2018). Seapower. A Guide for the Twenty-First Century (4th ed.). Routledge. pp. 193–197. ISBN 9781315621210.
^ ^a ^b Speller, Ian (2018). Understanding Naval Warfare (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 118–132. ISBN 9781315227818.
^ Vego, Milan (2019). Maritime strategy and sea denial, theory and practice (1st ed.). Routledge. p. 18. ISBN 978-1-351-04772-2.
^ Corbett, Julian Stafford (1911). Some Principles of Maritime Strategy. Adansonia Press. p. 144. ISBN 9780080366937.

Bibliography

Corbett, Julian S. 2018. Some Principles of Maritime Strategy. Bd. 1911. Adansonia Press.
Speller, Ian. 2019. Understanding Naval Warfare. 2. edition. Routledge.
Till, Geoffrey. 2018. Seapower. A Guide for the Twenty-First Century. 4th edition. Cass Series: Naval Policy and History. 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abdingdon Oxon, OX14 4RN: Routledge.
This naval article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
- v
- t
- e

[:0-1] Till, Geoffrey (2018). Seapower. A Guide for the Twenty-First Century (4th ed.). Routledge. pp. 193–197. ISBN 9781315621210.

[:1-2] Speller, Ian (2018). Understanding Naval Warfare (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 118–132. ISBN 9781315227818.

[3] Vego, Milan (2019). Maritime strategy and sea denial, theory and practice (1st ed.). Routledge. p. 18. ISBN 978-1-351-04772-2.

[4] Corbett, Julian Stafford (1911). Some Principles of Maritime Strategy. Adansonia Press. p. 144. ISBN 9780080366937.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{Short description|Military term}}
 {{war}}
+'''Sea denial''' is a military term for preventing an enemy from  using the sea. It is a [[naval warfare]] subset of [[anti-access/area denial]] (A2/AD) strategies,<ref name=":0">{{Cite book |last=Till |first=Geoffrey |title=Seapower. A Guide for the Twenty-First Century |publisher=[[Routledge]] |year=2018 |isbn=9781315621210 |edition=4th |pages=193–197}}</ref><ref name=":1">{{Cite book |last=Speller |first=Ian |title=Understanding Naval Warfare |publisher=[[Routledge]] |year=2018 |isbn=9781315227818 |edition=2nd |pages=118–132}}</ref> and does not necessarily mean that the denier itself will use the sea. It is a parallel concept to [[sea control]], which implies that that controlling force cannot be successfully attacked.
-{{copy edit |date=November 2023}}
-'''Sea denial''' is a military term describing attempts to deny an enemy's ability to use the sea without necessarily attempting to [[Sea control|control the sea]] for its own use. It is a parallel concept to [[sea control]].
-Naval war professor Milan Vego describes sea denial as "''preventing partially or completely the enemy’s use of the sea for military and commercial purposes''".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Vego |first=Milan |title=Maritime strategy and sea denial, theory and practice |publisher=[[Routledge]] |year=2019 |isbn=978-1-351-04772-2 |edition=1st |location= |pages=18}}</ref> The concepts of sea control and sea denial are not mutually opposing, but whereas the object of sea control is to use the sea for oneself, the object of sea denial seeks to deny the enemy effective use of the sea.
+Vego describes sea denial as "preventing partially or completely the enemy’s use of the sea for military and commercial purposes".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Vego |first=Milan |title=Maritime strategy and sea denial, theory and practice |publisher=[[Routledge]] |year=2019 |isbn=978-1-351-04772-2 |edition=1st |location= |pages=18}}</ref>
-According to English naval historian and strategist [[Julian Corbett|Sir Julian S. Corbett]], the object of sea denial, therefore, is negative and defensive in nature. It is a less ambitious strategy than sea control and is often carried out by the weaker power.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Corbett |first=Julian Stafford |title=Some Principles of Maritime Strategy |publisher=[[Adansonia Press]] |year=1911 |isbn=9780080366937 |pages=144}}</ref> Sea denial can be an alternative to sea control, or can work in concert with it. As a navy is bound to have different objectives across different theatres of operations, it is possible to pursue sea denial in one area of operation while at the same time pursuing sea control in another.
+[[Julian Corbett|Corbett]] states that the object of sea denial is defensive. It is a less ambitious strategy than sea control and is often carried out by a weaker power.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Corbett |first=Julian Stafford |title=Some Principles of Maritime Strategy |publisher=[[Adansonia Press]] |year=1911 |isbn=9780080366937 |pages=144}}</ref> It is possible to pursue sea denial in one area of operation while pursuing sea control in another.
-Sea denial can even act as a direct complement to sea control. It is possible for a nation to aspire to a high degree of sea control in their littorals, whilst at the same time pursuing sea denial outside the littorals, as was seen with the Soviet Union during periods of the Cold War. This kind of zone defence strategy is popularly called [[Anti-Access/Area Denial]] (A2/AD) in modern terms.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book |last=Till |first=Geoffrey |title=Seapower. A Guide for the Twenty-First Century |publisher=[[Routledge]] |year=2018 |isbn=9781315621210 |edition=4th |pages=193-197}}</ref><ref name=":1">{{Cite book |last=Speller |first=Ian |title=Understanding Naval Warfare |publisher=[[Routledge]] |year=2018 |isbn=9781315227818 |edition=2nd |pages=118-132}}</ref>
+Sea denial can act as a direct complement to sea control. A nation may achieve sea control in its littorals, while enforcing sea denial outside the littorals, as was seen with the [[Soviet Union]] during periods of the [[Cold War]].
 == Methods ==
+Sea denial is achieved in many different ways. The method depends on factors such as geography, ambition, and capabilities. Geographically it is easier to conduct sea denial operations in [[Choke point|choke points]] such as narrow waters, straights, or congested waters.
-Sea denial is achieved in many different ways. The method chosen might depend on various different factors such as geography, ambition and capabilities being some of the key factors. Geographically it is easier to conduct sea denial operations in [[Choke point|choke points]] (narrow waters, straights or congested waters for instance) or one’s own littorals. In relation to ambition it is important to be mindful of the objective, both one’s own and the opposition's. The greater an opposition's dependency on the sea the greater the effect of successful sea denial operations. In order to succeed with sea denial operations, the right capabilities are needed, some examples are naval mines, anti-ship missiles and submarines. The greater the capabilities the greater the chance of success. All this translates to different activities with sea denial as its object. These range from barrier operations that seek to hinder access to certain areas, commerce raiding that require the enemy to put resources into escorting and thus disputing sea control, [[asymmetrical warfare]] and skirmishes on military vessels that disputes sea control or by maintaining a [[fleet in being]] that threatens offensive operations without actually conducting them.<ref name=":1" />
+Example techniques include [[naval mines]], [[anti-ship missiles]], [[Unmanned combat aerial vehicle|drones]], and [[submarines]].
+Barrier operations seek to hinder access to certain areas. Commerce raiding requires the enemy to put resources into escorting merchant ships. [[Asymmetrical warfare]] can involve attacking expensive ships with low cost uncrewed vessels. A [[fleet in being]] can threaten offensive operations without actually conducting them.<ref name=":1" />
 == History ==
-During [[World War I]] and [[World War II]], Germany pursued sea denial using [[U-boat|U-boats]]. Owing to the substantial superiority of the [[Royal Navy]]'s surface forces, Germany's [[Imperial German Navy|Imperial Navy]] (in World War I) and ''[[Kriegsmarine]]'' (in World War II) had little hope of seizing control of the high seas, but with [[Submarine|submarines]] the Germans could hope to defeat the British by choking off their crucial access to seaborne commerce. In both wars, the United Kingdom successfully resisted the German strategy with a combination of [[Rationing in the United Kingdom|strict rationing]] and the development of anti-submarine weapons and techniques. During the [[Cold War]], the [[Soviet Union]] invested heavily in submarines and would likely have pursued a similar strategy of sea denial had tensions with the [[NATO]] powers escalated to open warfare.
+During [[World War I]] and [[World War II]], Germany pursued sea denial using [[U-boat|U-boats]]. Owing to the substantial superiority of the [[Royal Navy]]'s surface forces, Germany's [[Imperial German Navy|Imperial Navy]] (in World War I) and ''[[Kriegsmarine]]'' (in World War II) had little hope of sea control, but with [[Submarine|submarines]], the Germans hoped to  choke off their access to seaborne commerce. In both wars, the United Kingdom successfully resisted the German strategy with a combination of [[Rationing in the United Kingdom|strict rationing]] and anti-submarine weapons and techniques.
+During the [[Cold War]], the [[Soviet Union]] invested heavily in submarines and would likely have pursued a similar strategy of sea denial had tensions with [[NATO]] escalated to open warfare.
-Since World War II, the most notable example of a sea denial strategy involved the so-called '[[Iran–Iraq War#Attacks%20on%20shipping|Tanker War]],' wherein Iran and Iraq sought to close the Persian Gulf.
+Since World War II, the most notable example of a sea denial involved the so-called '[[Iran–Iraq War#Attacks on shipping|Tanker War]],' wherein [[Iran]] and [[Iraq]] sought to close the [[Persian Gulf]].
-Today the term A2/AD has gained traction, and refers to a sort of sea denial strategy where a state aspires to challenge access to certain areas and at the same time hinder the freedom of movement in an adjacent area. It can include a combined effort of the navy, air force and army. The army deploys missiles and sensors in an effort to produce effective coastal defensive moats. The air force deploys assets that can support intelligence gathering, surveillance and reconnaissance and even targets ships with airborne weaponry. The navy deploys everything from sea mines, surface combatants to submarines in a system of layered defence and distributed lethality.<ref name=":0" />
+Today the term A2/AD has gained traction, and refers to a sort of sea denial strategy where a state aspires to challenge access to certain areas while hindering freedom of movement in an adjacent area. It can include a combined effort of navy, air force, and army. The army deploys missiles and sensors. The air force deploys assets to gather intelligence, conduct surveillance and reconnaissance and target ships with airborne weaponry. The navy deploys sea mines, surface ships, and submarines in a layered defence and distributed lethality.<ref name=":0" />
-Modern sea denial relates to the [[area denial weapon]], for example in the context of a land power using land-based missiles to strike sea targets. Such missiles can follow [[cruise missile]] (terrain-skimming) or [[ballistic missile]] trajectories. In response to these threats, the U.S. Navy has developed the [[Littoral Combat Ship]].{{portal|Oceans}}
+Modern sea denial addresses [[area denial weapon|area denial weapons]], for example in the context of a land power using land-based missiles to strike sea targets. Such missiles can follow [[cruise missile]] (terrain-skimming) or [[ballistic missile]] trajectories.{{portal|Oceans}}
 == See also ==

v t e Naval ships and warships in 19th and 20th centuries
Naval ship classes in service submarine auxiliary Operational zones Brown-water navy Green-water navy Blue-water navy Gun placement Broadside Central battery Casemate Turrets
Aircraft carriers	Amphibious assault ship Anti-submarine warfare carrier Balloon carrier Battlecarrier CAM ship Escort carrier Fighter catapult ship Fleet carrier Flight deck cruiser Helicopter carrier Interdiction Assault Ship Light aircraft carrier Merchant aircraft carrier Seaplane tender Supercarrier
Battleships	Coastal defence ship Dreadnought Fast battleship Pre-dreadnought battleship Super-dreadnought (Standard-type battleship) Treaty battleship
Cruisers	Aircraft cruiser Armored cruiser Battlecruiser Guided missile cruiser Heavy cruiser Pocket battleship Light cruiser Merchant raider Protected cruiser Scout cruiser Strike cruiser Torpedo cruiser Unprotected cruiser
Escort	Aviso Convoy rescue ship Destroyer Destroyer escort Destroyer leader Escort destroyer Escorteur Frigate Guided-missile destroyer Kaibōkan Radar picket Sloop
Transport	Amphibious transport dock Amphibious warfare ship Attack transport Dock landing ship Landing craft Landing craft carrier Landing Craft Support Landing Ship Heavy Landing ship, infantry Landing Ship Logistics Landing Ship Medium Landing Ship, Tank Landing Ship Vehicle Troopship
Patrol craft	Armed boarding steamer Armed yacht Coastal motor boat Corvette Gunboat Harbour defence motor launch Motor launch Naval drifter Naval trawler Ocean boarding vessel Patrol boat Q-ship Steam gun boat Submarine chaser Torpedo boat
Fast attack craft	E-boat MAS MGB Missile boat MTB MTM MTSM PT boat Shin'yō
Mine warfare	Danlayer Destroyer minesweeper Mine countermeasures vessel Mine planter Minehunter Minelayer Minesweeper
Command and support	Amenities ship Ammunition ship Auxiliary repair dock Auxiliary ship Collier Combat stores ship Command ship Crane vessel Depot ship Destroyer tender Dispatch boat Fast combat support ship General stores issue ship Hospital ship Joint support ship Naval tugboat Net laying ship Repair ship Replenishment oiler Submarine tender
Submarines	Attack submarine Ballistic missile submarine Coastal submarine Cruise missile submarine Cruiser submarine Deep-submergence vehicle DSRV Fleet submarine Human torpedo Midget submarine Submarine aircraft carrier U-boat Wet sub
Miscellaneous	Armed merchantman Arsenal ship Barracks ship Breastwork monitor Capital ship Drone carrier Flagship Floating battery Guard ship Littoral combat ship Monitor Mother ship River monitor Training ship
Related	Ship types Sailing vessels