From the editors

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

¹ The potential role of emerging producers in new technologies is discussed in Yoram Evron, ‘4IR technologies in the Israel Defence Forces: blurring traditional boundaries’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 44/4 (2021), 572–93; Paul Kallender & Christopher W. Hughes, ‘Japan’s Emerging Trajectory as a “Cyber Power”: From Securitisation to Militarisation of Cyberspace’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 40/1-2 (2017), 118–45; and Richard A. Bitzinger, ‘Military-technological innovation in small states: The cases of Israel and Singapore’, The Journal of Strategic Studies (forthcoming). On the problems of extended deterrence, see Se Young Jang, ‘The Evolution of US Extended Deterrence and South Korea’s Nuclear Ambitions’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 39/4 (2016), 502–20; and Joseph F. Pilat, ‘A Reversal of Fortunes? Extended Deterrence and Assurance in Europe and East Asia’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 39/4 (2016), 580–91. New alliance structures, formed in response to changing technology and international conditions, are discussed in Timothy Andrews Sayle, ‘A nuclear education: the origins of NATO’s Nuclear Planning Group’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 43/6-7 (2020), 920–56; and Luiz Simon, Alexander Lanoszka & Hugo Meijer, ‘Nodal defence: The changing structure of U.S. alliance systems in Europe and Asia’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 44/3 (2021), 360–88.

² Recent publications on the destabilising effect of new technologies include Jacquelyn Schneider, ‘The capability/vulnerability paradox and military revolutions: Implications for computing, cyber, and the onset of war’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 42/6 (2019), 841–63; Todd S. Sechser, Neil Narang & Caitlin Talmadge. ‘Emerging technologies and strategic stability in peacetime, crisis, and war’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 42/6 (2019), 727–35; and Caitlin Talmadge, ‘Emerging technology and intra-war escalation risks: Evidence from the Cold War, implications for today’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 42/6 (2019), 864–87. A discussion of the impact of unmanned systems on U.S. grand strategy can be found in Jacqueline L. Hazelton, ‘Drone Strikes and Grand Strategy: Toward a Political Understanding of the Uses of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Attacks in US Security Policy’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 40/1-2 (2017), 68–91. On autonomous systems, see Magnus Petersson, ‘Small States and Autonomous Systems – the Scandinavian Case’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 44/4 (2021), 594–612; and Michael C. Horowitz ‘When Speed Kills: Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, Deterrence and Stability’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 42/6 (2019), 764–88.

³ On the issue of controlling emerging technologies, see Tristan A. Volpe, ‘Dual-Use Distinguishability: How 3D-Printing Shapes The Security Dilemma for Nuclear Programs’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 42/6 (2019), 814–40; and Heather Williams, ‘Asymmetric Arms Control and Strategic Stability: Scenarios for Limiting Hypersonic Glide Vehicles’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 42/6 (2019), 789–813. On counterproliferation, see Or Rabinowitz, ‘The dilemma of a “trigger happy” protégé – Israel, France and President Carter’s Iraq policy’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 44/3 (2021), 389–417; and Steven E. Lobell, ‘Why Israel Launched a Preventive Military Strike on Iraq’s Nuclear Weapons Program (1981): The Fungibility of Power Resources’, The Journal of Strategic Studies (forthcoming).

⁴ A more recent examination of the US-ROK relationship is Se Young Jang, ‘The Evolution of US Extended Deterrence and South Korea’s Nuclear Ambitions’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 39/4 (2016), 502–52. Recent publications on asymmetric alliance relationships include Jason J. Castillo & Alexander B. Downes, ‘Loyalty, Hedging, or Exit: How Weaker Alliance Partners Respond to the Rise of New Threats’, The Journal of Strategic Studies (forthcoming); Mats Berdal & Astri Suhrke. ‘A Good Ally – Norway and International Statebuilding in Afghanistan, 2001–2014’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 41/1-2 (2018), 61–88; and Stephen Tankel, ‘Beyond the Double Game: Lessons from Pakistan’s Approach to Islamist Militancy’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 41/4 (2018), 545–75. Other examinations of the formation of Cold War alliances include Jeffrey H. Michaels, ‘Visions of the Next War or Reliving the Last One? Early Alliance Views of War with the Soviet Bloc’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 43/6-7 (2020), 990–1013; Simon J. Moody, ‘Enhancing Political Cohesion in NATO during the 1950s or: How it Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the (Tactical) Bomb,’ The Journal of Strategic Studies 40/6 (2017), 817–38; and Hassan Elbahtimy, ‘Allies at Arm’s Length: Redefining Egyptian–Soviet Relations in the 1967 Arab–Israeli war’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 42/1 (2019), 91–113.

⁵ On emerging submarine threats, see Adam Lajeunesse & Timothy Choi ‘Here There Be Dragons? Chinese Submarine Options in the Arctic’, The Journal of Strategic Studies (forthcoming); Ian Bowers & Sarah Kirchberger, ‘Not So Disruptive After All: The 4IR, navies and the search for sea control’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 44/4 (2021), 613–36; and Luiz Simón, ‘The “Third” US Offset Strategy and Europe’s “Anti-access” Challenge’, The Journal of Strategic Studies 39/3 (2016), 417–45.