Search

FRANCE VERSUS ENGLAND, SEVENTEENTH TO NINETEENTH CENTURY From the late seventeenth century until the final ending of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815, France and Britain were at war more than 50 percent of the time, in addition to their frequent and quite visible manifestations of commercial rivalry (see Table 2.1). Other European nations were involved in some of these wars; for example, in the War of the Spanish Succession (1701–1714) and the War of the Austrian Succession (1740–1748). In others, such as the Seven Years' War (1754–1763), the French and British were the sole or primary antagonists in North America, but with many nations involved in Europe. In the American Revolution (1775–1783), despite the possible importance of their contribution to the final outcome, the French role was probably relatively small. But, for the years between 1793 and 1815, with a small pause with the Peace of Amiens, from March 1802 until May 1803, the major fight for dominance in Europe was between France and England, with both nations seeking as many political and military allies as they could acquire, whether by military force (France) or by cash subsidy (Britain). During periods of warfare, as well as during the intervals of peace, restrictions on trade, including tariffs and blockades were deployed by these nations against each other, as well as in their involvement with other nations, belligerent or neutral. These constraints were designed to affect the European power balance and also to encourage domestic economic development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ECONOMIC WARFARE During a war there are a number of alternative military and naval strategies that a belligerent power can pursue in that country's efforts to defeat its enemies. Obviously, one such strategy is conquest by force of arms in direct combat. Such a strategy involves the siege or the invasion of an enemy's territory, and it is aimed at the destruction, capture, or surrender of the enemy's armed forces and, perhaps, the permanent occupation of its territory. Economic warfare, by weakening the enemy's ability to pursue military action, can substitute for or complement a strategy of direct combat. Such an economic strategy is designed to sever the trading links between the enemy and his allies or with neutral powers, and, in so doing, to reduce the level of military and civilian goods that are available to support his military ventures. Historically, the blockade, usually sea-based but occasionally land-based, has been the most common form of economic warfare; however, in the more recent past, other forms of economic warfare have been utilized. They include the imposition of higher tariffs, nontariff exclusions, restrictions on capital movements, and policies aimed at encouraging the production of substitutes by the targeting and neutral nations – all tactics designed to reduce enemy exports as well as their imports. In addition, the scope of direct economic warfare has been expanded to include the aerial bombardment of economic objectives, sanctions designed to restrict trade to neutral countries, sabotage of economic targets, preemptive purchases of strategic material, and, more generally, psychological warfare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION World War I saw blockades assume a major role in the strategy adopted by both coalitions of belligerent powers. In some ways, this role merely reflected a continuation of the strategies adopted by the naval forces in earlier European conflicts; but by this time there was one crucial change in technology – the German military's expanded use of the submarine as a weapon of war. Because the submarine had not been a subject included in the earlier formulations of international law, and, as it posed a new set of military and moral problems, over the course of the war, new rules for international behavior were brought to the table, but, even in 1919, there was no satisfactory resolution. The submarine was crucial to the German war effort; but, ultimately, it did not accomplish as much as did the Allies' more traditional blockade. The submarine, nevertheless, did lead to a number of important strategic changes in the organization of, and the responses to, blockades; and it was instrumental in shaping policies that would become critical during World War II. Because Germany and, even more so, Britain, depended on imports for a significant portion of their food supply, the threat of blockades was an important consideration in the design of domestic policies. Problems with maintaining or increasing domestic production, as well as those arising from attempts to keep imports flowing, confronted both powers, as did issues involving the restriction of unnecessary consumption, if that latter goal was possible to achieve at all. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]