Conclusion: Dealing with Complexity, Defeat and Beliefs

Marinko Bobić
{"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.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
结论:处理复杂性、失败和信念
最后一章根据所有实证章节中获得的证据,发展了本书的四个主要发现。首先,产生冲突的方式不止一种。所有被研究的五种情况都有因果关系,但方式不同。其次,大国不是这些不对称争端的主要威胁,而是国内危机,因为它可能威胁到政权的稳定,从而威胁到政权的生存。第三,小国似乎有可以实现的战争目标,比如维持政权或阻止国内反对派取得胜利。第四,伊拉克的例子表明,该政权未能理解对手的意图和能力。这种反常的信念尤其是封闭的、个人主义的政权的结果,在那里没有可以取代主观观点的竞争性思想。最后一章总结了一些关于如何利用这些发现来评估当前叙利亚冲突及其政策影响的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Pathways to Conflict Using Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) Conclusion: Dealing with Complexity, Defeat and Beliefs In Search of a Theory of Minor Powers in Interstate Asymmetric Conflict Index Conclusion:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1