This paper examines why militarily advanced states often fail to achieve their objectives through foreign policy efforts despite possessing superior forces relative to an adversary. Based on a political-strategic model, this research argues that the political legitimacy of a state with respect to its decision-making and level of strategic coherence will determine whether or not the state realises its intended objectives in conflict, whereas military capabilities are found to be less relevant than previously assumed. The research employs theoretical and conceptual arguments to provide empirical support for the claim that military defeat may result from weak political legitimacy, ambiguous objectives, dysfunctional relationships between civilian and military authorities, and a lack of flexibility in strategy formulation by a state's leaders.
Chick Edmond (Fri,) studied this question.