Chapter 1099: Chapter 108: France as the Baseline

The detailed negotiations with the British government should naturally be handed over to a professional team. Ernst cannot, based on personal likes and dislikes, reach some sort of deal with the British; moreover, since it concerns East Africa’s economy, reshaping the diplomatic circle must also be approached cautiously.

Of course, British Ambassador Russell shares this sentiment. Although Russell had made some general promises to Ernst, the final decisions rest with the London government, and he must prepare for the subsequent negotiations.

The two, harboring ulterior motives, thus quickly ended this meeting. Ernst convened government officials for a conference, while Russell had to return to report to London.

...

In the conference room.

Ernst shared the details of his conversation with Russell with the government officials.

"The British government indeed wants to engage in some exchange of interests with us. What are your thoughts on the British government’s proposal?" Ernst asked.

Sivert spoke first: "The British demands are nothing more than restricting our navy’s expansion. From this point, it can be seen that Britain is currently under immense pressure in naval terms. However, we definitely cannot restrict our own navy’s development. After all, when other countries around the world are engaging in naval races, if we go against the tide, the ultimate result would inevitably leave us at a disadvantage in international competition."

Military power is the foundation of East Africa’s independence, and the East African Navy has already endured prolonged suppression, resulting in a significant gap in scale compared to other great powers. Currently, it lags behind the UK, US, Germany, and France, and even Japan, an East Asian country viewed as minor by the East African government, has an upper hand over East Africa in naval power, which is certainly unacceptable to East Africa.

Though the Austria-Hungary Navy even ranks below East Africa, with a mere tonnage over twenty thousand, only half that of East Africa, placing it seventh worldwide, the Austria-Hungary Navy is positioned as a regional navy that can’t even venture beyond the Adriatic Sea.

East Africa, unlike Austria-Hungary, a natural maritime minor nation, boasts a long coastline, expansive territorial waters requiring naval defense, and relies on seaborne external trade, which is starkly different from Austria-Hungary. Although maritime trade is important to Austria-Hungary, it is not overly reliant on it, being situated in Europe’s landlocked center, with Central and Eastern European Market as the primary trade, followed by the Italian Peninsula and the Ottoman Empire, accessible by land.

Though East Africa borders numerous countries and colonies, these countries and colonies have economic conditions difficult to describe; the only ones worth East Africa’s attention are the Abyssinia Empire and Egypt.

Egypt, although substantial, falls within the British sphere of influence and primarily trades with East Africa via Red Sea and Mediterranean routes due to the Sahara Desert barrier affecting land passages.

In essence, grouping all surrounding colonies and countries around East Africa together, their market size barely reaches twenty million, not to mention those colonies are economically controlled by their sovereign countries.

Thus, East Africa’s major external trade concerns lie beyond the African Continent, inevitably requiring strong naval power to safeguard East Africa’s interests.

Ernst explained, "Building a strong navy has always been an important goal for our country. Moreover, this naval power must be able to deter other countries. Of course, we have no plans to achieve this overnight. Under the current circumstance, the scale of our navy is flexible, and this flexibility is the leverage in our negotiations with the British."

The flexibility of East Africa’s naval scale is indeed significant. Although Ernst previously told Russell there was no intention to compete for the world’s top position with the British Royal Navy, supposing the Royal Navy’s total tonnage were two million tons and East Africa’s were one million nine hundred ninety-nine thousand tons, the Royal Navy would remain the world’s number one, but is this what the British want!

Of course, such a notion is exaggerated, and certainly, no country, including East Africa, believes East Africa would construct its navy in this manner. But ambition and capability are separate matters.

From the economic perspective, both the United States and Germany definitely have the capability. The United States, as the world’s top economic power, theoretically could construct a navy larger than the Royal Navy. Although Germany might not match the United States economically, its industrial might suffices to support such undertakings.

Merk stated, "I believe our navy, to guarantee our economic interests, should at least reach the level of France. The French Navy’s total tonnage exceeds eighty thousand tons, while the US and Germany are roughly the same, making eighty thousand tons our baseline."

The current Navy Commander, Bruce, countered: "By far inadequate; eighty thousand tons is merely the standard for current major naval powers. Anything below eighty thousand tons lacks face for claiming naval great power status, and eighty thousand tons is far from the upper limits of the US, Germany, and French navies. These countries are actively expanding, and in coming years, naval tonnage exceeding a million tons won’t be unique globally. Thus, conservatively estimating, our navy’s target should be to surpass a million tons."

In the context of naval armament races, contemporary naval powers haven’t reached their upper bounds, thus East Africa cannot measure other countries’ naval development by current standards.

Bruce continued, "Moreover, as a two-ocean country, East Africa’s influence is not limited to this. Besides the Indian and Atlantic Oceans, East Africa has substantial interests in the Pacific as well. Hence, from a realistic viewpoint, our navy should rank above Germany and France’s navies, so the current tonnage is insufficient, even at the level of France and Germany."

Realistically, Bruce somewhat underestimates France. Discussing global naval power, France unequivocally plays a vital role. In some respects, the French Navy is currently second only to the British Navy in operational force.

As the world’s second largest colonial power, second only to the UK, areas the French Navy oversees are second only to those managed by the British, including the Atlantic, Caribbean Sea Region, South American seas, West African seas, Mediterranean, Red Sea, Far Eastern waters, east of Madagascar waters, South Ocean waters, even India’s territories have French colonies.

Therefore, based on France’s practical needs, France should theoretically be equipped with the world’s second strongest navy, but such a cost is beyond France’s economic capability to bear.

Take Germany, despite acquiring some overseas colonies in recent years, most are negligible, even if their total area is considerable yet are typically isolated. For instance, Germany’s colonies in the Pacific, candidly speaking, could be easily managed by Australia, a former penal colony.

Regarding the High Seas Fleet, Germany’s operational range has always been compressed by the British within the Baltic Sea. But if Germany merely wanted influence in the Baltic, naturally, they wouldn’t need the High Seas Fleet – a cumbersome tool for a mere small job.

Yet Germany, leveraging its robust industrial prowess, succeeded in building a navy stronger than France, posing a significant threat to Britain, indicating that naval power shouldn’t solely be assessed by domestic naval needs.

Considering East Africa’s current economy, it ranks fourth globally behind the United States, Germany, and the UK. Examining industrial strength, East Africa is third, following the US and Germany. Comprehensive evaluation of East Africa’s naval needs, economic situation, and industrial capability, indicates the East African Navy should rank between second and fourth positions globally.

Sivert stated, "Thus, economically and need-wise, our navy theoretically should not be weaker than France’s and should use the French Navy as a reference point to establish a basic strategy for the development of our navy."

The choice of France as a reference point essentially reflects the view of the French Navy as the current limit-line of strong naval powers globally.