From the Editors:

Forty years ago, John Gooch and Amos Perlmutter founded The Journal of Strategic Studies. In the Journal’s first ‘From the Editors,’ they wrote

No student of contemporary history and international politics can now ignore the importance of strategic studies … We feel that there is a clear need for a journal of strategic studies, since there is none in English…We feel that strategy is an insufficiently explored field within the social and historical sciences, and that our journal should give strategic writing a new home. Thus we open our journal to all scholars, writers and students who consider their study and research to be directly or indirectly related to strategic studies.

Four decades on, although the range of topics of greatest interest to scholars and statesmen continues to evolve, the need for interdisciplinary scholarship on war and military affairs is greater than ever. Moreover, we are proud to report that the Journal is stronger than ever, due to the quantity and quality of submissions we receive as well as the impact of the articles that we publish.

It is with sadness that we report the passing of Thomas Schelling on 13 December 2016. Schelling, who won the 2005 Nobel Prize in Economics, was both one of the founders of the field of strategic studies and one of its giants. He also served with distinction on our Editorial Board since its founding.

As has become our custom, the first issue of a new volume is the occasion to welcome new members of our Editorial Board and to thank those leaving the board for their service. This year, it is our pleasure to welcome John Bew, Hal Brands, Risa Brooks, Tom Christensen, Isabelle Duyvesteyn, Francis Gavin, Matthew Jones, Steven Lobell, Leopoldi Nuti, Sten Rynning, David Stevenson, Caitlin Talmadge, and William Wohlforth to the Editorial Board. We also express our deepest gratitude to Michael Epkenhans, David French, Stig Förster, Emily Goldman, Brian Holden-Reid, and M.L.R Smith for their years of service to the Journal.

In celebration of the 40th anniversary of the journal, we are pleased to present a double-length issue, headlined by the winner of this year’s Amos Perlmutter Prize. The prize recognizes the most outstanding essay submitted for publication by junior faculty members. This year’s Perlmutter Prize goes to Anit Mukherjee of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University for his essay ‘Fighting Separately: Jointness and Civil–Military Relations in India.’ Mukherjee uses archival research and interviews to argue that India’s transition to joint operations has been partial at best due to India’s prevailing model of civil–military operations, which has prevented civilians from influencing operational military issues, to include matters pertaining to jointness.¹ We trust that this article, together with the other pieces in this issue that touch on jointness and civil–military relations, will spark discussion and debate among both scholars and policymakers.

The issue continues with two additional articles on South and Central Asia.² In ‘India’s Taliban Dilemma: To Contain or to Engage?’ Avinash Paliwal of the Defence Studies Department of King’s College, London, examines New Delhi’s approach to Afghanistan’s Taliban government during the 1990s.³ Paliwal uses fresh sources to show that India engaged with and accommodated pro-Pakistan factions within Afghanistan from the withdrawal of Soviet forces through the end of the decade.

In ‘Drone Strikes and Grand Strategy: Toward a Political Understanding of the Uses of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Attacks in US Security Policy,’ Jacqueline L. Hazelton of the US Naval War College argues that drone strikes buy the US relatively little in the way of political effects. She also argues that their contribution to counterterrorism efforts is likely to diminish as non-state actors themselves field armed drones.⁴

The issue next turns to the topic of deterrence. In ‘Cumulative Deterrence: A New Paradigm for Cyber Deterrence,’ Uri Tor of the Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya, Israel, argues that cyber deterrence theory is evolving slowly as a strategic tool in both theory and practice because it suffers from an ill-fitting theoretical framework and underlying assumptions drawn from nuclear deterrence theory. Instead, Tor offers a ‘cumulative deterrence’ paradigm for thinking through deterrence in cyberspace.⁵

In ‘Japan’s Emerging Trajectory as a “Cyber Power”: From Securitization to Militarization of Cyberspace, ’ Christopher Hughes of the University of Warwick and Paul Kyle Kallender of the Global Security Research Institute in Tokyo, Japan, argue that Japan has rapidly become a serious player in the cyber domain, bolstering the US–Japan alliance but also potentially raising tensions with China.⁶

China’s military modernization and its strategic impact continue to be topics of considerable interest. In ‘Expanding the Dragon’s Reach: The Rise of China’s Anti-access Naval Doctrine and Forces,’ Yves-Heng Lim of Macquarie University in Australia discusses the development of China’s anti-access forces that influence the naval balance in the Western Pacific, arguing that they are the result of a shift in China’s naval doctrine toward a distinctly preemptive posture.⁷ In ‘A Brave New World for Chinese Joint Operations,’ Joel Wuthnow of the US National Defense University explores the military reforms that the Chinese Communist Party launched in 2016 aimed at instituting effective command and control of the People’s Liberation Army for Joint Operations.⁸ He argues that these reforms are likely to add operational challenges for China’s neighbors and the US.

Over the years, the Journal has been at the forefront of examining the theory and practice of military innovation.⁹ In ‘Military Innovation Studies: Multidisciplinary or Lacking Discipline?,’ Stuart Griffin of King’s College London provides a critical exploration of the field, setting out challenges that must be overcome if it is to fulfill its potential and enhance its contribution to the theory and practice of strategic studies.

Finally, in ‘Regina Maris and Command of the Sea,’ Beatrice Heuser of the University of Reading explores the sixteenth-century origins of the concept of command of the sea and its impact on naval warfare.

The issue continues with a symposium on the divide between the world of ideas and the world of action. The symposium includes contributions by Sir Laurence Freedman of King’s College, London; Francis Gavin of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, Christopher Preble of the Cato Institute, and Jochem Wiers of the Netherlands Foreign Ministry.

The issue concludes with three review essays. In the first, Robert Jervis of Columbia University reviews the British government’s inquiry into the Iraq War, the Chilcot Report. In the second review essay, Michael Clarke and Anthony Ricketts of the Australian National University review the growing literature as to whether the Obama administration had a grand strategy. Finally, Peter Feaver reviews a sampling of a new wave of scholarship on civil–military relations.

We are grateful to our authors for the contributions that they have made to the field of strategic studies over the past four decades, and look forward to an equally rich discussion in the decades to follow.

Notes

¹ See also Sumit Ganguly, ‘A Tale of Two Trajectories: Civil–Military Relations in Pakistan and India’, Journal of Strategic Studies 39/1 (2016), 142–157; Shashank Joshi, ‘India’s Military Instrument: A Doctrine Stillborn’, Journal of Strategic Studies 36/4 (2013), 512–540; Walter C. Ladwig III, ‘Indian Military Modernization and Conventional Deterrence in South Asia’, Journal of Strategic Studies 38/5 (2015), 729–772; Srinath Raghavan, ‘Civil–Military Relations in India: The China Crisis and After’, Journal of Strategic Studies 32/1 (2009), 149–175.

² See also C. Christine Fair, ‘The Changing Pakistan Army Officer Corps’, Journal of Strategic Studies 34/1 (2011), 63–94; Sebastien Miraglia, ‘Deadly or Impotent? Nuclear Command and Control in Pakistan’, Journal of Strategic Studies 36/6 (2013), 841–866; Evan Braden Montgomery and Eric Edelman, ‘Rethinking Stability in South Asia: India, Pakistan, and the Competition for Escalation Dominance’, Journal of Strategic Studies 38/1–2 (2015), 159–182; Muhammad Zubair, ‘Fighting to the End: The Pakistan Army’s Way of War’, Journal of Strategic Studies 37/6–7 (2014), 1071–1074.

³ See also Kersti Larsdotter, ‘Regional Support for Afghan Insurgents: Challenges for Counterinsurgency Theory and Doctrine’, Journal of Strategic Studies 37/1 (2014), 135–162.

⁴ See also Javier Jordan, ‘The Effectiveness of the Drone Campaign against Al Qaeda Central: A Case Study’, Journal of Strategic Studies 37/1 (2014): 4–29; C. Christine Fair, ‘Pakistani Political Communication and Public Opinion on US Drone Attacks’, Journal of Strategic Studies 38/6 (2015), 852–872.

⁵ See also David Betz, ‘Cyberpower in Strategic Affairs: Neither Unthinkable nor Blessed’, Journal of Strategic Studies 35/5 (2012), 689–711; Adam P. Liff, ‘Cyberwar: A New “Absolute Weapon”? The Proliferation of Cyberwarfare Capabilities and Interstate War’, Journal of Strategic Studies 35/3 (2012) 401–428; Thomas Rid and Ben Buchanan, ‘Attributing Cyber Attacks’, Journal of Strategic Studies 38/1–2 (2015), 4–37.

⁶ Fintan Hoey, ‘Japan and Extended Nuclear Deterrence: Security and Non-proliferation’, Journal of Strategic Studies 39/4 (2016), 484–501.

⁷ See also Thomas G. Mahnken, ‘China’s Anti-Access Strategy in Historical and Theoretical Perspective’, Journal of Strategic Studies 34/3 (2011), 299–323; Luis Simon, ‘The “Third” US Offset Strategy and Europe’s “Anti-access” Challenge’, Journal of Strategic Studies 39/3 (2016), 417–445.

⁸ Dennis J. Blasko, ‘Integrating the Services and Harnessing the Military Area Commands’, Journal of Strategic Studies 39/5–6 (2016).

⁹ See, for example, Lazar Berman, ‘Capturing Contemporary Innovation: Studying IDF Innovation Against Hamas and Hizballah’, Journal of Strategic Studies 35/1 (2012); Tai Ming Cheung, ‘The Chinese Defense Economy’s Long March from Imitation to Innovation’, Journal of Strategic Studies 34/3 (2011); Adam M. Jungdahl and Julia M. Macdonald, ‘Innovation Inhibitors in War: Overcoming Obstacles in the Pursuit of Military Effectiveness’, Journal of Strategic Studies 38/4 (2015); Nina A. Kollars, ‘War’s Horizon: Soldier-Led Adaptation in Iraq and Vietnam’, Journal of Strategic Studies 38/4 (2015), 529–553; Nina A. Kollars, Richard R. Muller and Andrew Santora, ‘Learning to Fight and Fighting to Learn: Practitioners and the Role of Unit Publications in VIII Fighter Command 1943–1944’, Journal of Strategic Studies 39/7 (2016); Raphael D. Marcus, ‘Military Innovation and Tactical Adaptation in the Israel–Hizballah Conflict: The Institutionalization of Lesson-Learning in the IDF’, Journal of Strategic Studies 38/4 (2015), 500–528.