African Entrepreneurship Record

Chapter 1111: Chapter 120: The Impact of the Shipbuilding Industry

April 14, 1911.

Rhein City.

The agreement with the United Kingdom has greatly affected the industrial development plans originally set by the East African Government, especially impacting the shipbuilding industry and related sectors the most.

The proportion of naval vessels in the total national fleet is not small in any country. Take the United Kingdom, for example, where its civilian fleet totals nearly twenty million tons, while the naval fleet totals a staggering two million tons, making the naval vessels about one-tenth of the civilian fleet.

This is even more pronounced in other countries. Germany’s civilian fleet totals only a few million tons, while the German Navy totals close to a million tons, a higher ratio than the United Kingdom. Other major powers such as the United States, France, East Africa, and Japan are similar.

The United Kingdom monopolizes the majority of the global shipping market; British civilian fleet tonnage alone exceeds that of all other nations combined, accounting for more than fifty percent of world shipping.

This substantial civilian fleet capacity allows the United Kingdom to maintain such a high proportion of naval tonnage, and this trend is true for other major military powers.

Take East Africa, for instance: in 1910, East Africa’s civilian fleet totaled nearly four million tons, actually around three million and eight hundred thousand tons, while the naval fleet was forty-two thousand tons, a ratio close to the United Kingdom, achieving approximately nine-to-one.

The main cause for this is not the strength of East Africa’s civilian shipbuilding, but rather the relative weakness of the East African Navy compared to other military powers.

Ernst said, ”Our navy’s original development plan is now restricted by the Anglo-African Agreement; military orders have drastically decreased, and due to the treaty’s recent signing, some naval shipyards have temporarily ceased operations. Our shipbuilding industry has also suffered greatly. To counteract the negative impact on shipbuilding, we must promptly adjust policies and construction plans to promote the healthy development of our shipbuilding industry.”

With the recent signing of the Anglo-African Agreement, East Africa must appear to act appropriately, as the British government is not naïve. East Africa surely benefits from the treaty, and if the East African Navy does not cease the arms race as required by the United Kingdom, that would be exploiting good-natured people! Though the United Kingdom isn’t exactly ”good-natured.”

Kerishawn, head of East Africa’s Shipbuilding Industry Bureau, said, ”The treaty impacts our shipbuilding industry significantly. Based on original order demands, our military shipbuilding industry should account for at least eighteen percent of all annual ship orders, but given the current construction speed and orders, it’s only nearing ten percent, leaving a gap of about seven to eight percent appearing out of nowhere. According to our navy’s original long-term construction plans, the total construction was directly reduced by a dozen or so thousand tons.”

Initially, East Africa’s preliminary long-term naval planning aimed directly at the United States, Germany, and France, with a total naval tonnage reaching at least eighty thousand tons, now directly reduced to sixty-five thousand tons, nearly fifteen thousand tons less.

Moreover, that eighty thousand tons was just a floating target; considering the rapidly increasing total of the United States, Germany, and French navies, according to East African naval expectations, the Navy after the Three-Five Plan should reach at least one hundred thousand tons.

Therefore, the Anglo-African Agreement’s impact on the East African Navy’s construction plans is not only immediate but also long-term.

Naval orders hold significant importance in East Africa’s shipbuilding industry, and it can be said that the entire East African shipbuilding industry is heavily affected by the treaty’s content.

Ernst said, ”The situation is settled; the contents of the Anglo-African Agreement must certainly be adhered to, although the impact on the shipbuilding industry may not be as considerable as we imagine. Our original naval development plan wasn’t overly ambitious, and we can avoid this through extending construction periods, reallocating build schedules, and similar strategies.”

”With naval development plans restricted, freeing much capital and personnel, we should allocate these idle resources to civilian shipbuilding sectors or special vessel research.”

Although East Africa set a substantial naval development plan during the Two-Five Plan phase, whether this plan was aggressive depends on comparison targets.

Compared to Austria-Hungary and Spain or Russia, East Africa’s naval development plan would certainly be considered excessive, but compared to the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, France, and Japan, East Africa’s original naval development plan wasn’t aggressive.

After all, Ernst never intended to partake fully in the naval race; he didn’t plan to fully participate, as Ernst viewed East Africa as lacking the conditions to challenge superpowers like the United Kingdom and the United States, impossible to win a naval race even at full steam.

Therefore, Ernst’s objective in the East African naval development plan was to build a fleet capable of regional deterrence, an objective East Africa had already achieved, never falling from the world’s top ten naval powers list since the 1880s.

Thus, the negotiations with the United Kingdom claiming to build a world-class navy were baseless; for a naval power like East Africa, such aspirations have no real significance.

For instance, whether East Africa qualifies as a world-class naval power, it surely does, ranking sixth globally, possessing military capabilities in the Indian Ocean, Pacific Ocean, and South Atlantic.

Therefore, claims in negotiations of being a ”world-class naval power” were essentially a form of ”extortion” towards the United Kingdom, given the premise that the United Kingdom believed East Africa had such development goals.

In truth, the United Kingdom wouldn’t risk anything, considering from the Two-Five Plan onwards, East Africa launched a dreadnought every year, alongside numerous auxiliary vessels, initiating construction simultaneously, making any nation encountering such a naval posture inclined to believe.

The United Kingdom’s reconciliation with East Africa was entirely an unexpected delight for the East African Government, or rather a surprise to Ernst himself.

East Africa, from the start, mapped out a non-existent naval plan to peacefully extract desired conditions from the United Kingdom, something the British government never anticipated.

Now, conforming with the Anglo-African Agreement, East Africa can just free up the resources intended for military competition and apply them towards economic and technological development.

This includes Ernst’s long-desired future main naval vessel, the development of carriers.

Currently, East Africa alone is mature enough to develop aircraft carriers, having achieved great advances in aircraft manufacturing, becoming the world’s leading aircraft manufacturer, and possessing sufficient accumulation of relevant vessel technology.

The earliest aircraft carriers emerged during World War I in history. Indeed, before this, countries like the United Kingdom and France already proposed related concepts; in 1912, historically, the Royal Navy obtained vessels capable of carrying planes through modifying cruisers and steamships, labeled as ”seaplane carriers,” the prototype of aircraft carriers.

So Ernst said, ”Building on our foundations in aircraft manufacturing and shipbuilding, our original carrier development project should seize this opportunity to accelerate, ideally, constructing our first carrier before the conclusion of the Three-Five Plan, reallocating resources previously for naval race participation towards naval technology enhancement and shipbuilding industry quality.”

”Apart from certain special national projects, our shipbuilding industry faces numerous issues, particularly in system construction which greatly trails behind top-tier shipbuilding nations like the United Kingdom, keeping our shipbuilding costs excessively high. Using the period where nations are frantically engaged in naval races, it is precisely the time for us to vigorously develop our shipbuilding industry system.”

The fundamental reason why the United Kingdom maintains its position as the world’s leading shipbuilding nation lies in its immense expertise and technology accumulation, making British shipbuilding costs far lower than other countries; now, as the United Kingdom’s resources are tied with Germany and others, Ernst sees this as a favorable opportunity for East Africa’s shipbuilding industry, especially civilian shipbuilding, to flourish.