Revisiting Naval Conceptualism with reference to Corbett and Mahan

This article revisits age-old tested naval conceptualism provided by Corbett and Mahan, and critiques as offered by Booth, Gray, Grove, Jones, Rubel, Sestak, Till and Turner. Examples are presented with reference to Israel as a small to medium state and the larger maritime powers of Britain, China, Russia, and the United States. The need arises because naval warfare is linked to and dependent upon technological innovations. Nuclear propulsion, missiles, drones and cyber have changed the nature of warfare and coastguard capability. The roles of naval fleets have also changed in both defense, deterrence, and the offense due to new situations exampled by the Cold War, and asymmetric battles against violent and extremist organizations post 9/11. This has value for cadet training in the heritage of the profession, and the development of abstract considerations for a broad philosophical appreciation of naval and maritime affairs applicable when they become junior and inexperienced offices in planning, deployment, and operation. And beyond to ensure decisions and actions are a combination of experience and knowledge.