China had no concept of sea power in ancient times, which lasted until the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895. Some people think that people in ancient China also had the concept of sea power. Both the navy and navy in Ming and Qing dynasties were the products of the development of sea power consciousness, which played an important role in safeguarding the country's sea power. Miao, a late historian, also thought that there was sea power thought in Ming and Qing Dynasties in his article On Three Generations of Sea Power.
I think these views are debatable. To judge whether the ancient people in China had the concept of sea power, we must make clear what "sea power" is. Mahan believes: "Sea power has a broad meaning, including not only the control of all or part of the ocean through maritime military forces, but also the control of peaceful commerce and maritime shipping." In the modern sense, "sea power" is a force against the enemy's maritime forces, which enables our maritime forces to freely use the ocean when necessary and deprive the enemy's maritime forces. Before Mahan's sea power theory was introduced to China, China people's understanding of the ocean was that the ocean can promote the benefits of fishing and salt, and facilitate boat trips. As for the idea that the ocean can be used as the main road to the world, an important way for national economy and trade, an important strategic base for military affairs, and control the coast of enemy countries to ensure the smooth progress of domestic maritime trade, neither does China nor Wei Yuan. In my opinion, the fundamental criterion for judging the existence of sea power thought is whether it has the ability to control all or part of the ocean through maritime military forces or through peaceful means to ensure the smooth flow of domestic maritime commerce and shipping industry. In ancient China, there was no national maritime trade until the end of Qing Dynasty. How can we protect the concept of domestic maritime commercial channels? Therefore, the author believes that it is a fact that China began to have the concept of "sea power" in the modern sense after Mahan's "sea power theory" came out in 1900.
During the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895, China's navy was defeated for many reasons, one of which was that China's navy lacked the concept of sea control. 1890, American navy colonel alfred thayer mahan published the book "the influence of sea power on history, 1660 ~ 1783", which was regarded as a classic work of sea power theory, and its publication marked the establishment of modern sea power theory. After the establishment of sea power theory, western countries spread it one after another, regarded it as a treasure, and built their own navy on this basis.
The navy is an important means to expand the country's sea power. In view of the disastrous lessons of some countries in history, some comrades suggested that it was unnecessary for China to develop its navy, while others emphasized the importance of developing China's navy from the perspective of competition with big countries. However, in my opinion, these are inaccurate. In fact, the expansion of China's sea power has its specific principle, that is, it must not exceed and serve the content and scope of China's sea power.
So, what is the content and scope of China's sea power?
In the near and medium term, China is faced with the severe task of reunifying the motherland and recovering sovereign islands, which is not only an important historical mission that the China government must shoulder, but also an important part of China's defense of national sea power. Therefore, on the issue of unifying China's sovereign Taiwan Province Province and its surrounding islands, the significance of China's naval expansion cannot be overestimated. In the future, China's naval military action to unify the whole country will be exactly the same as Bismarck's action to unify Germany and Lincoln's action to unify the southern United States. Whether it is peaceful or non-peaceful, as long as the goal is achieved, the significance is great. In this sense, only within the scope of sovereignty can the expansion of China's sea power be unlimited. At the same time, in terms of safeguarding overseas political and economic rights, the expansion of China's sea power and its realization force, namely China's navy, is limited. This is because many problems in these areas need to be solved through multilateral consultations within the framework of the international law of the sea, and the goal of the China Navy is only to ensure the legal implementation of the results of these multilateral consultations. From this perspective, the construction of China's navy is limited to the scope of self-defense and deterrence. The goal of China's naval construction will always serve the requirements of China's equal independence from the world. "China will never seek hegemony" [18] is not only a slogan, but also a mature experience summarized by China politicians from the history of the rise and fall of world powers. Yin Jian is not far away. It is precisely because of the unlimited military expansion of Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union that their countries declined, and it is precisely because Yugoslavia, Iraq and other countries failed to keep up with the wave of world military technological changes and were dismembered or defeated. In view of these historical experiences, whether China's naval expansion is unrestricted or China's naval modernization is basically abandoned, it is a disastrous opinion for China's future. We should treat China's sea power with a dialectical attitude, so as to make China's naval construction stable and far-reaching, and gain great development in favor of China's rise in dialectical thinking.
China's sea power issue is not only an indicator to test whether we are really strong, but also an indicator to test our self-confidence and the backbone of the country. This is also the best time to show our wisdom in solving these complex factors, including economic and military diplomacy. To solve these problems, we should guard against people deliberately using these problems to transfer domestic contradictions. We shouldn't cooperate with their performance, but we must never cross the red line. We should not be afraid of the international and even military troubles brought by these problems, nor should we be superstitious about our future military strength. We are developing, others are developing, and whenever we solve it, we have to face the same troubles and challenges. If you can't cope with provocation, you will not only take no measures to solve the problem, but will also be positioned as a real weak person by history.