IMPLEMENTING MARITIME STRATEGY: A DILEMMA FOR SMALL POWERS

Rear Admiral J.R. Hill, in his book Maritime Strategy for Medium Powers, classified states into Super Powers, Medium Powers, and Small Powers. He described Small Powers as states whose vulnerabilities are so significant that their security cannot be guaranteed without external support. For most developing nations, particularly in the Gulf of Guinea, this definition fits almost perfectly. In this context, the terms "developing countries " and "small powers "can be used interchangeably.

The structural weakness of these states is evident: fragile economies, widespread poverty, and dependency on external development assistance. With national budgets often under scrutiny from donor partners, military expenditure is difficult to justify in the face of pressing social needs. Yet, the paradox is clear—without a secure state, long-term poverty alleviation becomes nearly impossible.

The Basic Interest: Survival

The most fundamental interest of any country is to safeguard its territorial integrity and political independence. Small powers, however, rarely possess the resources to maintain a credible force that can secure them as entities. Their vulnerability, especially from the sea, is acute. In practice, their survival often hinges on international law, multilateral organisations like the UN, and the support of allies—whether medium or superpowers.

The Strategy Gap

One of the biggest challenges facing small powers is the absence of a clearly defined maritime strategy. Strategy, as defined by Liotta and Lloyd (2004), is “a long-term focusing instrument that helps shape the future environment.” Yet, small powers are often trapped in the cycle of policy crises—reacting to immediate needs rather than anticipating future risks. Ghana’s own experience illustrates this dilemma. Some years ago, the Ministry of Defence claimed to have a Defence Policy, while the Parliamentary Select Committee on Defence and Interior argued otherwise. The dissonance revealed a lack of broad consultation and poor dissemination of policy. Without clear direction, agencies resort to ad hoc decision-making, undermining coherence and consistency.

The Dilemma of Expectation

Expecting small powers to design and implement robust maritime strategies may appear unrealistic. Their immediate struggles—budgetary pressures, governance bottlenecks, and socio-economic demands—leave little space for long-term planning. But without strategy, states are condemned to “knee-jerk reactions”: firefighting crises rather than shaping events.

Charting a Way Forward

For small powers, the challenge is not merely about writing strategy documents, but about building consensus, setting clear priorities, and aligning scarce resources to national interests. Strategy is, after all, the application of available means to secure desired ends. Even within their limitations, small powers must begin the difficult work of crafting maritime strategies that look beyond today’s crises, offering a roadmap for resilience and survival in an unpredictable future.