7/27/2019 PAX AT SEA
1/3
Paxat Sea
-- Vijai S. Chaudhari1
Every political regime offers its followers the vision of a stable
environment where they can exercise their rights and freedoms. This
quest for peace and stability may be as old as human civilization but is
it a realistic expectation at sea?
The ancient Romans had a remarkable record of inventions,
innovations and achievements. They invented concrete and used it to
build exceptionally well-engineered roads, arches and aqueducts.
Their imprint on European languages, law, politics, art, theatre, public
administration, medicine, clothing, customs and religion continues tothis day. ThePax Romana or the Roman Peace was one of their less
recognised achievements. It was only towards the end of the 18th
Century that Edward Gibbon, author ofThe History of the Decline and
Fall of the Roman Empire, first popularized the term.
The Roman Peace was a period of relative peace and stability
within the empire. It lasted two centuries, from 27 BC until the death
of Marcus Aurelius in 180 AD. However, the Roman Peace did not
imply a complete absence of conflict or even a particularly benigngovernment. The period had its share of tyrannical and extravagant
rulers (notably Nero). Many of them came to violent ends. Some
fighting continued at the borders of the Empire, including the conquest
of Britain. Many writers even describe thePax Romana as a balance
of terror. But it was nevertheless a peace of sorts. The common
citizens were largely free to go about their daily lives with some
assurance of stability and protection of the law. The Roman policy of
conquest and expansion gave way to stabilization and creation of
conditions for prosperity. However, like much in history, the idea
may be more important than the reality. Besides, it is an idea that haspersisted.
A thousand years after thePax Romana, Genghis Khan laid the
foundations of the largest contiguous empire in human history,
extending 9700 km across the Eurasian land mass. The Mongol
1 Vijai S. Chaudhari is Additional Director of the Centre for Joint
Warfare Studies, New Delhi. He is a former Rear Admiral of the
Indian Navy. The opinions expressed here are his personal views.
7/27/2019 PAX AT SEA
2/3
Empire ensured safety and good governance which made the Silk
Road a lucrative trade route. A network of well-maintained roads
connected China to the Mediterranean and even Marco Polo used it to
make his epic journey in relative safety. Well before the current wave
of globalization, the government considered it important to protectmerchants and traders. Trade thrived and safe travel was open to all
law-abiding users. The prevailing conditions came to be known as the
Pax Mongolica.
The modern Colonial Era started some time after the Mongol
Empire faded into obscurity. Unlike previous empires, seaborne
commerce was the lifeblood of the colonial system and its
administration stretched across large stretches of ocean. A strong navy
was needed to sustain a Pax across the oceans so that profitablecommerce could flow unhindered. Every sizeable European maritime
power entered the fray but it wasPax Britannica that prevailed. At the
height of its power, the British navy was more powerful than any two
other navies combined. Despite this large investment, many critics
have described it as aPax on the cheap. Rebecca Matzke offers a
more balanced explanation: The Royal Navys main role in the
nineteenth century was to be a deterrent force . . . . . . Britains navy
was visible and credible. British naval power posed a genuine threat,
but British governments exercised discretion in using it. On some
occasions they chose not to act but inaction did not necessarily mean
that the British battle fleet was too weak to assert British
influence. . . . . British statesmen were prepared to use its force to
guard Britains interestsand maintenance of peace was, generally
speaking, one of those interestsbut they rarely needed to do so.
A worldwide naval presence was needed to underwrite
Britains colonial empire. Good order at sea was perhaps an
unintended benefit that had to wait another century for Geoffrey Till to
propose a supporting theoretical framework. The dawn of the 20thCentury found British resources, appetite and need for shouldering the
burden of good order at sea in steady decline. Pax Britannica soon
gave way to thePax Americana. The United States was motivated by
Cold War requirements and empowered by a navy more powerful than
the combined fleets of all its competitors.
Today, the Cold War has receded into history and multilateral
arrangements have overtaken unilateralism. Meanwhile, the United
Nations Law of the Sea Convention has given coastal states
jurisdiction over large sea areas. These states differ widely in their
ability, inclination or even willingness to cooperate in maintaining
7/27/2019 PAX AT SEA
3/3
good order within their areas of jurisdiction. Criminals and terrorists
therefore use the gaps to undermine good order at sea. Exploitation of
natural resources is already the subject of much conjecture and
environmental issues could well create the next crisis. The United
States has the naval forces to sustain aPax Americanabut finding thepolitical support, financial resources and international acceptability
seems difficult.
Given the forces of globalization and the large number of
diverse stakeholders, multilateral or UN sponsored solutions hold the
most promise. Overwhelming naval superiority would help but it is
numbers, presence, persistence, national resolve, legal structures and
cooperation on a global scale that would really count. The future of the
oceans as a global commons may depend on whether the world canforge a consensus on good order at sea before it is too late.
Top Related