The naval defence act of 1889 was the act that gave a formal creation to the two power standard. That is the idea that the Royal Navy should have as many battleships as the next two largest navies.
At the time that was France and Russia (who were conveniently in an alliance together). The two power standard continued to be aimed at France and Russia until the Russo Japanese war in 1904/1905 saw 10 Russian battleships sunk or captured by the Japanese.
In 1909 the two power standard softened. The First Lord of the Admiralty at the time stated that Britain was to build a preponderance of 10 per cent over the combined strengths in capital ships of the two next strongest Powers as long as you didn't include France, USA or Japan. France and Japan being excluded because of the Entente Cordiale and the Anglo Japanese alliance while there was no circumstances that the first lord could see in which USA and Britain would come to fight.
At the time France had 22 predreadnoughts in commission or construction. Japan had 14 predreadnoughts and 2 dreadnoughts in commission or construction. USA had 25 predreadnoughts and 6 dreadnoughts in commission or construction. They would have been the second or third, fourth and fifth largest fleets in the world at the time. There is a question Germany would count as second or third depending on what you count as a capital ship.
The question of what is a capital ship was often discussed in relation to the standard and whether it was a dreadnought, a dreadnought armored cruiser or if predreadnoughts counted as a capital ship for the two power standard was debated. Some felt that certain predreadnoughts should be counted and others not. One author who held that predreadnoughts did not count fired off a lot of inspiration towards "We want eight and we will not wait."
In 1912 the Liberal Party redefined the two power standard as referring to two European powers likely to combine. So if France or Russia was the 3rd biggest navy they would not count for the two power standard which was being defined by German + the largest navy likely to to combine with Germany in a war. The argument was used that the Japanese or American fleets would not be able to sail across the oceans.
Later in 1912 the two power standard was eroded yet further when Churchill defined the new standard as Germany + 60%.
So in the decade before WW2 the standards used to guide British naval building decision making was
Two Power Standard: More capital ships than the next two biggest powers.
Two Power Standard: More capital ships than the next two biggest powers (exclude Japan, USA and France)
Two Power Standard: More capital ships than the next two biggest European powers likely to ally together (so basically the larger of France + Russia or Germany + one of Austria/Italy)
Germany +60%
Thats a lot of revisionism over a decade. Basically Britain feared that they could not afford (without borrowing which was a political no no at the time) to keep the initial two power standard going.
When Britain chose a Germany +60% standard it was informally accepted by the Germans as a new ratio. Churchill as First Lord of the Admiralty attempted to circumvent it by not counting HMS Malaya as part of the Royal Navy as it was paid for by the Malay state rather than by the Treasury. Likewise he would have argued that any Canadian Queen Elizabeth class vessels would not have counted.
In a world where Britain is doing better economically but still cannot keep up with a two power standard are we likely to see the same evolution of the two power standard or are there other options.
Perhaps Britain could decide on an Alliance standard where they out build the navy of the largest alliance. Or Britain could define the two power standard as the two largest European navies without consideration for if they are likely to ally together.
Are there any other standards that you feel Britain could choose to adopt after a two power standard becomes non viable.
At the time that was France and Russia (who were conveniently in an alliance together). The two power standard continued to be aimed at France and Russia until the Russo Japanese war in 1904/1905 saw 10 Russian battleships sunk or captured by the Japanese.
In 1909 the two power standard softened. The First Lord of the Admiralty at the time stated that Britain was to build a preponderance of 10 per cent over the combined strengths in capital ships of the two next strongest Powers as long as you didn't include France, USA or Japan. France and Japan being excluded because of the Entente Cordiale and the Anglo Japanese alliance while there was no circumstances that the first lord could see in which USA and Britain would come to fight.
At the time France had 22 predreadnoughts in commission or construction. Japan had 14 predreadnoughts and 2 dreadnoughts in commission or construction. USA had 25 predreadnoughts and 6 dreadnoughts in commission or construction. They would have been the second or third, fourth and fifth largest fleets in the world at the time. There is a question Germany would count as second or third depending on what you count as a capital ship.
The question of what is a capital ship was often discussed in relation to the standard and whether it was a dreadnought, a dreadnought armored cruiser or if predreadnoughts counted as a capital ship for the two power standard was debated. Some felt that certain predreadnoughts should be counted and others not. One author who held that predreadnoughts did not count fired off a lot of inspiration towards "We want eight and we will not wait."
In 1912 the Liberal Party redefined the two power standard as referring to two European powers likely to combine. So if France or Russia was the 3rd biggest navy they would not count for the two power standard which was being defined by German + the largest navy likely to to combine with Germany in a war. The argument was used that the Japanese or American fleets would not be able to sail across the oceans.
Later in 1912 the two power standard was eroded yet further when Churchill defined the new standard as Germany + 60%.
So in the decade before WW2 the standards used to guide British naval building decision making was
Two Power Standard: More capital ships than the next two biggest powers.
Two Power Standard: More capital ships than the next two biggest powers (exclude Japan, USA and France)
Two Power Standard: More capital ships than the next two biggest European powers likely to ally together (so basically the larger of France + Russia or Germany + one of Austria/Italy)
Germany +60%
Thats a lot of revisionism over a decade. Basically Britain feared that they could not afford (without borrowing which was a political no no at the time) to keep the initial two power standard going.
When Britain chose a Germany +60% standard it was informally accepted by the Germans as a new ratio. Churchill as First Lord of the Admiralty attempted to circumvent it by not counting HMS Malaya as part of the Royal Navy as it was paid for by the Malay state rather than by the Treasury. Likewise he would have argued that any Canadian Queen Elizabeth class vessels would not have counted.
In a world where Britain is doing better economically but still cannot keep up with a two power standard are we likely to see the same evolution of the two power standard or are there other options.
Perhaps Britain could decide on an Alliance standard where they out build the navy of the largest alliance. Or Britain could define the two power standard as the two largest European navies without consideration for if they are likely to ally together.
Are there any other standards that you feel Britain could choose to adopt after a two power standard becomes non viable.
Last edited: