When Grand Admiral von Tirpitz says that "for real security we (Germans) should have, besides Flanders and Ant-werp, Calais and Boulogne," he defines Prussian theory of freedom of the seas.
He does not mean "real security" for trade in place times. We had that, and in that security Germany forged ahead faster than any other nation. He means security for the German Navy to issue out of the English Channel in time of war and reduce the world to Germany's demands.
That monstrous doctrine would destroy Belgium and cripple France. It involves internationalization of the Suez Canal, as frankly avowed by the Naval League champions, so that German submarines might make use of it also in war. It means that the military control of the Panama Canal would be given over to Germany.
To a sane world, "freedom of the sea" means what it did to Grotius: Beyond the shallows of the shore no nation claims control. To an obstinate old man, obsessed with that German war mania that has cost the world so much blood and so many tears, it means that in time of war no nation must have a sea power superior to Germany's or capable of coping with German aggression. Yet when Germans solemnly protest that they are fighting for the freedom of the seas, it is the Tirpitz kind of freedom that they have in mind. New York World.