Against weaker states and nonstate actors, powerful air forces working with competent proxy ground forces have been militarily effective in almost all cases, but their political effectiveness has varied by ambition and target. Air power was most likely to be politically effective in denial strategies against weak states but least effective when attempting to coerce nonstate actors by punishment. Air power was far more effective in breaking armies and toppling regimes than restoring political order in the aftermath of regime change. Some but not all of the strategies of the age of primacy will survive the transition to an age of great power rivalry. The persistence of small wars against nonstate actors will leave space for refinement of advisory models, close air support, and counter-network targeting. But missions that were feasible in an era of unchallenged air supremacy – CAS and persistent ISR – may become extinct against enemies possessing resilient IADS and long-range strike capabilities of their own.