Bound to lose? The usage of smallness in the strategic narratives of smaller states during armed conflict

This paper examines how smaller states use their smallness in their strategic narratives during armed conflicts fought with a bigger power. The analysis mainly focuses on two questions: whether these jurisdictions project themselves as small states on the international level, and whether they offer an interpretation of the conflict in which size difference is identified as a major factor. Comparing the speeches delivered in the United Nations by Kuwait during the Iraqi invasion (1990-1991), Armenia during the second Nagorno-Karabakh conflict (2020-2021), and Ukraine after the Russian attack (2022-2023), the research concludes that smaller countries can use their smallness with three specific objectives – gathering support, gaining sympathy, and deflecting responsibility – although the strategy is not automatic. While the representatives of Kuwait and Ukraine referred to their small size often, the diplomats of Armenia avoided such narratives. The variation between the three cases suggests that instead of absolute or relative size, the size difference between the belligerents, the selected target audience, and the timing of the conflicts have a stronger explanatory value.