As Editor-in-Chief of this journal for the last 35 years, I am very conscious of the fact that my term of office is coming to an end. Indeed, I tendered my resignation in May of this year, well aware that the responsibility and task of leading Defense and Security Analysis is now beyond the scope of my knowledge of the subject and, furthermore, I have lost touch with many leading commentators and scholars on whom I have relied in the past. For this reason – but there are also many others – I want this, my penultimate edition and the final December one, to be memorable. In the meanwhile, both I and the publishers are canvassing for my replacement; if any of our readers would be attracted by the idea of taking over the Editorial of the journal, perhaps they might let me, or Taylor and Francis, know.
It is customary with each edition to make reference to international defence and security developments over the previous three months. What is different this time is that the focus has tended to be on internal security developments, rather than those between states. For example, there is the confrontation between President Trump and the FBI; there is the tension between Prime Minister Theresa May and members of her cabinet, Boris Johnson especially, and the uncertainties that have come with the defeat of the right-wing leader, Marine Le Pen, and the moderate new President, Emmanuel Macron. This has not, however, eradicated tensions between states, as the confrontation between President Trump and President Putin over Syria bear testimony.
In line with our ambition for the journal, the six articles in this edition meet both my determination to end on a high note, but also to reflect the journal's remit to pick up on the contemporary major issues in global security and defence. It is appropriate, therefore, that the leading article is that by Stephen J. Cimbala, who has both been a constant support of the journal and who has contributed authoritative and leading articles on arms control in the relations between the Russian Federation and the United States during and after the Cold War. In this edition, he addresses the issue of nuclear deterrence and cyber war, the most recent development in global security. He draws the distinction between the two, arguing that they have the potential to cause confusion and conflict in the future. It is a situation that could be a source of concern in the future, one that as Cimbala emphasises needs to be both recognised and addressed.
The journal is honoured to have received a submission from a group of eight scholars led by Christopher Pernin at the RAND Corporation in Santa Monica. The reputation of that organisation is well known and universally recognised, and to have a study prepared by these eight members is a rare privilege. Their choice of subject likewise warrants highlighting, namely the global landpower network; their objective is to assess what value it might provide, particularly when working closely with partner countries to achieve US strategic objectives. Their conclusion, that the United States can move from an ad hoc reactive set of relationships to one that should be developed to meet US strategic objectives.
Given the emphasis that this journal has given in the past to, initially, cold war security issues and subsequently to Russia and European security concerns, it is seldom that security matters beyond that geographical area are addressed. It is therefore welcome after so many years that an article on Latin American security and the region's relations with the United States should have been submitted and accepted for this edition. Raul Gouvea takes into account recent developments in US-Latin American security concerns and explores the multi-dimensional relationship between the two, especially in the light of marked alterations in US policy towards the region.
Over the past decade, international security has focused on the Middle East, and especially the rise of Muslim terrorists – jihadists – in the form of ISIS, who have been harbouring ambitions to create a new caliphate to rule and control the region from Iraq and Iran in the East to Libya and Tunisia in the West. The tactics and strategies employed by ISIS have been violent, brutal, and cruel in a way uncompromising to a degree that is antithetical to Western values. Simon Haddad's article, though mainly focused on the Lebanon, is a valuable contribution towards helping understanding how and why ISIS generates support amongst the Muslim population, and what it is that persuades young men – and women, too – to lend their support. His conclusions are significant: the tenets of political Islam; sectarianism; and educational attainment together proving the major predictors of endorsement of ISIS.
The final two articles, those of Hans-Georg Ehrhart and Ian Westerman are more in a philosophical vein, the one drawing on theoretical work in the field of civil–military relations as derived from Western, liberal democratic culture, the other postmodern warfare, as manifest in influencing information space, networked approaches, the incorporation of indirect and covert action, and, lastly, the special quality of new technologies cyberspace in particular. Westerman's prognosis for the future has already been underscored by the degree of “hacking” conducted by states to intercept other states secret documents. Ehrhart, however, confines his analysis to security sector reform and, in particular, the absence of alternative non-orthodox models upon which to draw. This he contends should be addressed and more suitable security sector reform models developed.