Democratic victory and war duration: Why are democracies less likely to win long wars?

The probability of democracies winning wars appears negatively associated with the duration of wars. This relationship might be explained by two contrasting mechanisms besides the selection effect. According to one mechanism, democracies require a long time to reach a surrender decision, because they face audience costs if they break a prewar commitment hastily. The other mechanism suggests that democracies are less likely to win prolonged wars, because their battlefield effectiveness declines over time. To explore these ideas, we develop game-theoretic models of war incorporating democratic citizens and soldiers. Although the two mechanisms diametrically differ in their logic, the models based on them yield similar predictions about military-strategy choices. These predictions are consistent with empirical findings indicating that while democracies increase their likelihood of victory through maneuver strategies, autocracies display mixed incentives between maneuver and attrition strategies. These results suggest that both mechanisms may influence how democracies conduct wars.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Conflict Management and Peace Science
Published
2025-06-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/07388942251345435
Primary Topic
International Relations and Foreign Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Democratic victory and war duration: Why are democracies less likely to win long wars?

Keisuke Nakao
Conflict Management and Peace Science
International Relations and Foreign Policy
article

Democratic victory and war duration: Why are democracies less likely to win long wars?

Keisuke Nakao
article en

Abstract

The probability of democracies winning wars appears negatively associated with the duration of wars. This relationship might be explained by two contrasting mechanisms besides the selection effect. According to one mechanism, democracies require a long time to reach a surrender decision, because they face audience costs if they break a prewar commitment hastily. The other mechanism suggests that democracies are less likely to win prolonged wars, because their battlefield effectiveness declines over time. To explore these ideas, we develop game-theoretic models of war incorporating democratic citizens and soldiers. Although the two mechanisms diametrically differ in their logic, the models based on them yield similar predictions about military-strategy choices. These predictions are consistent with empirical findings indicating that while democracies increase their likelihood of victory through maneuver strategies, autocracies display mixed incentives between maneuver and attrition strategies. These results suggest that both mechanisms may influence how democracies conduct wars.

Conflict Management and Peace Science
University of Hawaii at Hilo (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 85%
International Relations and Foreign Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.