Does China have a stronger navy than the entire EU combined?

RogerRanger

Contributor
Messages
602
Reactions
444
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
United Kingdom
I think the answer is yes. Only the Italians and French have a navy of note, the Spanish/Germans/Dutch have professional navies but aren't very capable. Apart from that the Swedish have subs and stealth corvettes which can't operates outside the Baltic. I can't think of anyone else with more than a token navy or one that is old like the Portuguese and Greek navies. How much has Europe fallen to stop a 3rd great war in Europe and constrict the Germans. This shows the shift in the world to East Asia and away from Westernized Europe.
 

Jackdaws

Experienced member
Messages
2,759
Reactions
1 1,582
Nation of residence
India
Nation of origin
India
I think the answer is yes. Only the Italians and French have a navy of note, the Spanish/Germans/Dutch have professional navies but aren't very capable. Apart from that the Swedish have subs and stealth corvettes which can't operates outside the Baltic. I can't think of anyone else with more than a token navy or one that is old like the Portuguese and Greek navies. How much has Europe fallen to stop a 3rd great war in Europe and constrict the Germans. This shows the shift in the world to East Asia and away from Westernized Europe.
I would have assumed that the French would have a bona-fide blue water navy matching the British one, if not exceeding it.
 

RogerRanger

Contributor
Messages
602
Reactions
444
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
United Kingdom
I would have assumed that the French would have a bona-fide blue water navy matching the British one, if not exceeding it.
Its about half as capable as the British navy in terms of blue water stuff. But more capable in terms of brown water stuff. So its about even overall. However compared to the Chinese navy, the French one is nothing. Only the British have a decent navy in western Europe. And its shrinking.
 

xizhimen

Experienced member
Messages
7,391
Reactions
384
Nation of residence
China
Nation of origin
China
EU should worry more about Russia and don't fall for US anti China trap. Europe is not the place where our interests lie.
 

RogerRanger

Contributor
Messages
602
Reactions
444
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
United Kingdom
EU should worry more about Russia and don't fall for US anti China trap. Europe is not the place where our interests lie.
I was just making a point about how much European power has fallen. When the entire EU has a less powerful navy than the second naval power, it enforces that point. Even with Britain and Norway its still very close.

As for the Russians, their navy is the weakest part of the Russian armed forces. Doesn't have any ability to project power and the money to build that capability. China and Russia aren't a threat to anyone in Europe. Our own political class is.
 

Ryder

Experienced member
Messages
10,475
Reactions
5 18,089
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
Turkey
I was just making a point about how much European power has fallen. When the entire EU has a less powerful navy than the second naval power, it enforces that point. Even with Britain and Norway its still very close.

As for the Russians, their navy is the weakest part of the Russian armed forces. Doesn't have any ability to project power and the money to build that capability. China and Russia aren't a threat to anyone in Europe. Our own political class is.

Russians Navy is pretty recent if you look at history compared to the British, French, Spanish, Portuguese and Dutch who already had well established navies.

German's never had a proper navy until Imperial Germany. Austrians and their navy was pretty much regional. Poland had a navy but not really a strong one. Danes and Swedes had a navy they are usually overlooked. Who the hell remembers the Polish navy lol. Italy has a naval tradition spanning Ancient Rome and continued well into the medieval and renassiance times with Venice and Genoa. Italy after unification had a not bad navy in Ww2 their navy was actually one their strongest points in the armed forces compared their army and air force.

When it comes to the navies of Europe. I think the Royal navy takes the crown for being the top dog they have been for centuries until the US Navy came along.

Honestly as a Turk if I have to say the Greeks strongest points is there navy. The Greeks were born into the sea. Hence why I dont find it wise to underestimate them. They have been pretty strong naval wise for centuries with Ancient Greece and the Eastern Roman Empire.

Does not translate into modern times as the world changes but the Greeks should not be underestimated when it comes to naval warfare.
 
Last edited:

RogerRanger

Contributor
Messages
602
Reactions
444
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
United Kingdom
Russians Navy is pretty recent if you look at history compared to the British, French, Spanish, Portuguese and Dutch who already had well established navies.

German's never had a proper navy until Imperial Germany. Austrians and their navy was pretty much regional. Poland had a navy but not really a strong one. Danes and Swedes had a navy they are usually overlooked. Who the hell remembers the Polish navy lol. Italy has a naval tradition spanning Ancient Rome and continued well into the medieval and renassiance times with Venice and Genoa. Italy after unification had a not bad navy in Ww2 their navy was actually one their strongest points in the armed forces compared their army and air force.

When it comes to the navies of Europe. I think the Royal navy takes the crown for being the top dog they have been for centuries until the US Navy came along.

Honestly as a Turk if I have to say the Greeks strongest points is there navy. The Greeks were born into the sea. Hence why I dont find it wise to underestimate them. They have been pretty strong naval wise for centuries with Ancient Greece and the Eastern Roman Empire.

Does not translate into modern times as the world changes but the Greeks should not be underestimated when it comes to naval warfare.

Historically, going back to Medieval times a three major naval powers with Spain/Venice/Ottoman Empire. Then you had England/Portugal/Holland. Then there was Britain/France/Spain. Then it was Britain/Italy/Germany. Now its Britain/France/Italy in Europe. Russia has never really been a naval power.

Greece has a great naval history and a good navy for what they need, but it is old. Portugal has the same issue. The Dutch/Danish/Swedish navies are modern but small. So that leaves France/Italy/Spain/Germany which are sizable and modern, with ship building capacity. Of that only the French can build nuclear powers submarines and large fleet carrier/heavy escort ships. None of them of the technical capabilities to build AAW/ASW/Land-Attack capable ships like the British/Americans/Chinese. None of their fleets are build for blue water operations, rather European waters.

Whereas throughout history there were always at least 3 European powers competing on that level.
 

Ryder

Experienced member
Messages
10,475
Reactions
5 18,089
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
Turkey
Historically, going back to Medieval times a three major naval powers with Spain/Venice/Ottoman Empire. Then you had England/Portugal/Holland. Then there was Britain/France/Spain. Then it was Britain/Italy/Germany. Now its Britain/France/Italy in Europe. Russia has never really been a naval power.

Greece has a great naval history and a good navy for what they need, but it is old. Portugal has the same issue. The Dutch/Danish/Swedish navies are modern but small. So that leaves France/Italy/Spain/Germany which are sizable and modern, with ship building capacity. Of that only the French can build nuclear powers submarines and large fleet carrier/heavy escort ships. None of them of the technical capabilities to build AAW/ASW/Land-Attack capable ships like the British/Americans/Chinese. None of their fleets are build for blue water operations, rather European waters.

Whereas throughout history there were always at least 3 European powers competing on that level.

Russia lacked proper ports their whole foreign policy was based on grabbing as much warm water ports as it can.

Russian navy was born in the 1696 when Tsar Peter I travelled to England and the Netherlands where he learnt shipbuilding and naval affairs and took that back to Russia.

Biggest problem with Russia when setting up a navy they lacked warm water ports.

Pacific was too far. St petersburg easily gets frozen. Most of Russia in the artic is frozen which makes having a navy impossible. All that was left was the black sea. Black sea was Russia's gateway to the Med. Hence why their constant clashes with the Ottoman Empire which for centuries controlled the black sea.

Ottomans actually blocked Russian attempts many times until the late 1700s when the Ottomans lost wars against Russia. Due to losing their wars against Russia the Russians now had a foothold in the black sea which made a proper navy for Russia. Not only was it regional it could now be used to project power if not access the med sea.

Eventhough Russia had a formidable navy it was never strong against the heavy weights like Britain, France, USA and Imperial Germany. Russian navy lost to the Japanese Navy in the 1900s.

The defeat really demoralised them. You could say it was one of their worst defeats.

Royal navy usually had the upper hand against the Russian navy during the great game. Russians usually were fustrated due to British naval dominance. Eventhough Russia had a big and formidable army it never translated to naval superiority.
 

RogerRanger

Contributor
Messages
602
Reactions
444
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
United Kingdom
Russia lacked proper ports their whole foreign policy was based on grabbing as much warm water ports as it can.

Russian navy was born in the 1696 when Tsar Peter I travelled to England and the Netherlands where he learnt shipbuilding and naval affairs and took that back to Russia.

Biggest problem with Russia when setting up a navy they lacked warm water ports.

Pacific was too far. St petersburg easily gets frozen. Most of Russia in the artic is frozen which makes having a navy impossible. All that was left was the black sea. Black sea was Russia's gateway to the Med. Hence why their constant clashes with the Ottoman Empire which for centuries controlled the black sea.

Ottomans actually blocked Russian attempts many times until the late 1700s when the Ottomans lost wars against Russia. Due to losing their wars against Russia the Russians now had a foothold in the black sea which made a proper navy for Russia. Not only was it regional it could now be used to project power if not access the med sea.

Eventhough Russia had a formidable navy it was never strong against the heavy weights like Britain, France, USA and Imperial Germany. Russian navy lost to the Japanese Navy in the 1900s.

The defeat really demoralised them. You could say it was one of their worst defeats.

Royal navy usually had the upper hand against the Russian navy during the great game. Russians usually were fustrated due to British naval dominance. Eventhough Russia had a big and formidable army it never translated to naval superiority.
I see. Nice summation of the history.

However I disagree with Russians main issue being warm water ports. The Russians issues is lack of in-land inter-connected waterways. So it could cheaply transport its goods within Russia, allowing it to generation more capital within its internal market. Basically you can't be the major world naval power if you can't combine your fleet and join it together freely. France could never join its Atlantic and Mediterranean fleets together, because of Spain and Gibraltar. As soon as the Germans could combine their north sea fleet and Baltic fleet with the Kiel canal, they become a major power at sea. Same with the US and the Panama canal. The main reason China wants Taiwan and doesn't want a United Korea because of this aspect, right now it can combine its fleets, if there is an independent Korea it can't, along with an independent Taiwan.

If I was Russia I would give up the Northern territories, I would give up all the territories east of the Urals. I would anchor myself on the Urals down to the Caspian sea, I would build a wall and fortifications right across. I would anchor on the South Caucasus, the Carpathian's, and north to East Prussia. I would control all the population, resources and capital generation between these 5 point. Then I would spend all my resources in integrating all those Slavic nation, populations, resources and capital into an internal market. With the goal of dominating the Baltic/Black Sea/Caspian sea. So now Russia has control of its internal market, it has domination of the waters around its internal market, it has the capital generation to then start projecting power from a strong place. The goal isn't to break out of the waters around Russia, but dominate the waters around Russia. With this the Russians can move forces and equipment around by sea or within its integrated internal market.

For me this is why the Soviet Union failed because it was Russia and the Warsaw pact, its was never economically integrated. America isn't actually economically integrated and certainly isn't demographically integrated. China right now is spending all its political and economic capital, trying to integrate all its regions. This is why Germany became a major power because it was successful in integrating all its regions economically. This is something the Russians have never tried to do, they have never become the world's dominate power because of this in my view, their strategy has been wrong.

If the Russians are basing their entire geo-political strategy on bypassing the Black sea or the Baltic, its a mistake. They couldn't integrate that territory with Russia anyway. Rather give up the Northern territories, give up the Pacific, put all your naval resources into the Black sea and Baltic sea, within 5 years the Russians would dominate those sea's, nothing Turkey or Germany or Poland or Sweden could do about it. At this point you can start manipulating trade within the Black sea, Caspian sea and Baltic sea, you can change fishing rights, you can change resources rights within those waters. What once belonged to Azerbaijan, now the Russians get a 20% cut of it and if not the Russians would just use their navy and marine forces to take it from them. Britain and the US did this all the time since the Seven Years war, people think the British/American Empires are different, but they are just the continuation of the English hegemony over the world, they are one Empire. So its the Pax-Anglo, rather than the Pax-Britannia or Pax-America. In the end that's the goal or Zenith of every nations to enforce your peace or domination over the world. That's Russia's goal, that's China's goal, that's my goal as an English person to maintain the English hegemony or re-enforce it.

England became the major world power because we took over the lands around England. Scotland/Wales/Ireland, we then dominated the waters around Britain. From where we had a strong point to project power anywhere we wanted. We also were able to build an integrated economy because of this. Britain losing its domination over the waters around Britain was its undoing and because of this we lost Ireland. Since then Britain has been in military, political, economic decline. Same goes for Spain when it had the Iberian Union and dominated the Mediterranean, the US removing any threat to its south with Mexico and North with Canada, then dominating the Southern waters around the US in the Gulf and Caribbean sea. This enabled the Americans to have a strong point to project power and build the Panama canal. The same with China now gaining control of its western territories where it was usually invaded from, then allowing it to build up a navy to dominate the waters around China and project power out of a strong point. If the Russians want to be a major world power, this is what they need to create.
 
Top Bottom