Why Lord Nelson matters in 2025
Lord Nelson has much insight to offer to this day, ranging from the role of navies, the future of war––from seabed to space––and leadership in defence organisation.
If Lord Nelson were here today he would be much encouraged by the inquisitive and educated minds of the modern military. Equally, for matters concerning seapower and the Royal Navy, he would have some concerns. Nelson would have encouraged others to think and question, for he too questioned values of the past and subsequently made up his own mind. His victory at the Battle of Trafalgar in 1805, saw him abandon proven battle tactics, breaking with tradition to do something evolutionary and new, yet guided by experience. He believed there was always ways for the military to improve, that although questioning accepted values, he sought better and fairer solutions, particularly for his sailors and marines. In short, people matter, and so that if any man––or women–– wants to ‘stand tall on the quarter deck’ in pursuit of the same cause, then he would see them looked after, and equally protected from whims of the public and the variances of the political body. All of his life, he sought to improve his men and their conditions.
But Nelson was no fool, he was able to distinguish between the good and bad, right and wrong, justice and injustice. While he clung to some traditions like honour, patriotism and duty, he did so by instilling the same into his men so that when they went to battle they did so with pride and reserved stoic confidence, not arrogance. He taught his men, his friends, his colleagues that one could defend their country, but not surrender their ideals. That one can add to a vision of peace and have no better satisfaction in doing something about it, with honour, through the profession of arms. It was Nelson’s character, evidenced and proven over time, that resulted in those around him holding him in the highest esteem.
Today, yes, much has changed and also some other things have not. The lifeblood of civilization flows still along the sealanes and trade sets the commons for wider interactions between peoples. As Nelson reminds, and something that sets navies aside from the other services, the enemy is the asset-–the ship, submarine, aircraft etc––and the sea: once victory objectives iare achieved, the humanity of sailors and marines to help save souls from the seas becomes paramount, rather then pursuing things in a bloodthirsty, pure ‘war fighting’ manner. Nelson gave his life, so that his country might be safe and the seas remain free because he believed there can be no higher service or calling than to watch over those who go about their business in peace and even more so on the great waters that make planet ocean.
May the great God, whom I worship, grant to my country and for the benefit of Europe in general, a great and glorious Victory:
and may no misconduct, in any one, tarnish it:
and may humanity after victory be the predominant feature in the British Fleet.
For myself individually, I commit my life to Him who made me and may His blessing light upon my endeavours for serving my Country faithfully.
To him I resign myself and the just cause which is entrusted to me to defend.
AMEN AMEN AMEN
(Lord Nelson writing in his diary, the morning of the Battle of Trafalgar, on board His Majesty's ship VICTORY)
There was lesson in this, it offered insight to militaries far beyond Britain, including some civilian leadership and politicians who chose to learn more about Nelson and what happens on the oceans. For in most nations, it is a choice to go to the sea and learn about it for geography remains central to the shape of politics, culture and relationships between nations One such individual was America’s First Secretary of Defense James Forrestal, who had a long standing affection for Nelson. As a former US Secretary of the Navy during the final years of World War Two, his task postwar was to enable unity of effort between the military services, hashing out questions like roles, functions, missions and how they can work better together. This was a task that no politician, no leader had faced in the United States. In the end, it claimed Forrestal’s life. But Forrestal took inspiration from the best great British and American naval individuals. he did so because he understood that the role of Defense Secretary was to throw away previous biases and instead to be an arbiter, a decision maker and the guardian of the forum to enable the advancement of the military and protect those who are engaged in the profession of arms. In his personal, now declassified correspondence, he pointed out, and in not so many words to the US Congress and the US President, that a Defense Secretary must never become involved in the minutia of the military, they respect them to pursue their daily business and ultimately never over centralize power. The temptation, a word of warning to future defence leaders from Forrestal, was that a Defense Secretary or Defence Minister must never become a tyrannical leader or King maker. If this happened, then the ability to maintain a workable military in a democracy or republic was quickly placed in jeopardy, for the culture of organization can be the dividing line between victory and defeat. Forrestal took from the fact that Lord Nelson respected their Lordship’s in the Admiralty, whose primary task was to educate and advise the government to national strategy and the role of seapower, while letting naval personnel get on with their jobs at sea. Forrestal’s view was Defense Secretaries have other tasks to be getting on with than backseat driving professional personnel of arms, whether they be sailor, marine, solider or other wise. But Forrestal was a generation who knew the suffering of total war, while faced with new weapons of mass destruction they sought to maintain the peace best they could, navigating defence policy and strategy through choppy waters the best they could.
Today, there is a lot of talk of soldiering and ‘warfighers’ [not a word in the Oxford dictionary], while military history is often twisted, as its always been, to suit the individual who is spinning a tale. But today’s language is all ‘land talk’, reflective of a world that sees the military purely through the eyes of platoons, regiments and land battles. We know this is not the case today, from seabed to space, to cyber, warfare has changed, as it has always been doing so. An ‘this way or the high way’ or arrogance of ‘shut up and get out we know better today’ approach is misguided when history offers us insight from all domains. This should not be so easily discarded just to suit matters of the moment. Nelson would have relished this defence environment today for provided more choice, more ability, more capability to think about how to defeat his enemy because ultimately defence is about thinking wisely and acting boldly. Equally, although I will not explore here, in the final frontier, to hostile environments like the seabed, there is something to take from Nelson and the age of sail, for the ideal of thinking more wisely about strategy, tactics and the warfare echo into our contemporary debates.
Some claim true or total war is dead, others claim war is inevitable, let us hope the former is still what many aspire for in an era where the pain of the generation fighting in Nelson’s time or over the 20th century has become disconnected from the mindset of today’s leaders and young people. To use an analogy, we must be all mindful of the those who think they are going to get into fight, so walk into the bar, and start that fight: a self-fulfilling prophecy. But if we can take anything from Nelson’s navy, it is to push back against warmongering. Instead approach it from the ethos that the task of our navies today is to keep war dead. They must do so from a position of strategic strength and advantage but only if necessary, ready and able defend their nation and global lifelines against aggression, for that is human nature in all generations.