{"title":"Conclusion: Dealing with Complexity, Defeat and Beliefs","authors":"Marinko Bobić","doi":"10.1332/policypress/9781529205206.003.0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The concluding chapter develops four main findings of the book, based on the evidence obtained in all the empirical chapters. First, there is more than one way for a conflict to brew. All five conditions that were studied have causal relevance but in different ways. Second, major powers are not the main threat in these asymmetric disputes, but rather it is the domestic crisis because it can threaten regime stability, and thus the very survival of the regime. Third, minor powers seem to have reachable war objectives, such as regime survival or denying domestic opponents a victory. Fourth, the case of Iraq shows a failure of the regime to comprehend an opponent’s intentions and capabilities. Such anomalous beliefs are particularly a consequence of closed, personalistic regimes where there are no competitive ideas that can dislodge subjective views. The concluding chapter wraps up with some insights on how these findings can be used to assess the current Syrian conflict and policy implications.","PeriodicalId":317648,"journal":{"name":"Why Minor Powers Risk Wars with Major Powers","volume":"65 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Why Minor Powers Risk Wars with Major Powers","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781529205206.003.0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The concluding chapter develops four main findings of the book, based on the evidence obtained in all the empirical chapters. First, there is more than one way for a conflict to brew. All five conditions that were studied have causal relevance but in different ways. Second, major powers are not the main threat in these asymmetric disputes, but rather it is the domestic crisis because it can threaten regime stability, and thus the very survival of the regime. Third, minor powers seem to have reachable war objectives, such as regime survival or denying domestic opponents a victory. Fourth, the case of Iraq shows a failure of the regime to comprehend an opponent’s intentions and capabilities. Such anomalous beliefs are particularly a consequence of closed, personalistic regimes where there are no competitive ideas that can dislodge subjective views. The concluding chapter wraps up with some insights on how these findings can be used to assess the current Syrian conflict and policy implications.