What did Alfred Mahan argue about sea power and state strategy?

• A. He argued that land power is more important than sea power.
• B. He argued that diplomacy alone determines state power.
• C. He argued that economic sanctions are sufficient to secure power.
• D. He argued that naval dominance and control of maritime trade routes are critical for global power and security.

Answer: (D)

Sea power and the ability to control sea lanes are the engine of a nation's strength. Alfred Mahan argued that a powerful navy and control of maritime trade routes allow a country to project power globally, protect its commerce, and deter rivals, which in turn translates into greater political influence and security. This makes naval dominance and the securing of sea lines of communication central to national strategy and overall power.

That’s why the best choice says naval dominance and control of maritime trade routes are critical for global power and security. The other ideas don’t fit his view: land power alone is not what he highlighted, diplomacy alone cannot secure power without a strong navy, and economic sanctions miss the central role he saw for naval force and maritime control.