Scope and fit (submit the right paper)
We consider manuscripts that offer a clear research question and evidence‑based argument related to defence policy, security governance, armed forces and society, strategic studies, arms control/disarmament, peace and conflict processes, and the institutional boundaries between military and police functions. Comparative work is welcome when Latin America is a core case or when the theoretical contribution is transferable to the region.
We do not consider texts that are purely opinion, advocacy without evidence, or narrative summaries without a testable claim. If your central evidence is “common knowledge,” your paper is not ready.
Article types
- Research Article: original empirical or theoretical contribution with explicit methods and evidence.
- Policy Analysis: problem framing plus options and trade‑offs grounded in sources.
- Review Essay: structured synthesis of a literature area with clear selection logic.
- Document / Interview: primary material with contextual introduction and source verification.
Manuscript structure (what we expect to see)
Strong papers are readable and audit‑friendly. Use clear headings and keep claims tied to sources. A typical Research Article should include:
- Title (specific, not poetic) and short running title (optional).
- Abstract (150–250 words) stating the question, approach, main finding, and significance.
- Keywords (4–6) for indexing (e.g., civil–military relations; defence policy; oversight; Latin America).
- Introduction: question, contribution, and why it matters.
- Background / Literature: what is known, what is missing, what you add.
- Methods / Evidence: data, cases, sources, limitations.
- Analysis: results and interpretation tied to evidence.
- Conclusion: what follows from the evidence (not what you wish were true).
- References: complete, consistent, and traceable.
- Appendix / Supplementary (optional): datasets, coding notes, documents list.
Length, formatting, and files
- Recommended length: 6,000–9,000 words for Research Articles (including footnotes/endnotes, excluding references).
- File format: DOCX or RTF preferred; include tables/figures placed near first mention in the text.
- Figures/tables: provide clear titles and source notes; use editable formats where possible.
- Language: English or Spanish. If writing in English, keep terminology consistent (US or UK spelling).
Write for precision. Avoid unnecessary jargon. Define key concepts (security, defence, oversight, governance) the first time you use them, and don’t switch definitions mid‑paper.
References and citations (don’t lose trust)
Use any recognized citation style as long as it is consistent and complete. Every reference must include author(s), title, publication year, source (journal/book/publisher), and pages where relevant. Add DOIs when available.
Do not “launder” citations by referencing a secondary source when you actually used a primary document. If you rely on a primary strategy paper, treaty text, dataset, or official report, cite it directly.
Ethics, originality, and disclosures
Submissions must be original and not under review elsewhere. Manuscripts may be screened for plagiarism and redundant publication, including self‑plagiarism. If you reuse any previously published material (text, tables, figures), you must disclose it and provide permissions where required.
- Authorship: list as authors only those who made substantial contributions and take accountability.
- Conflicts of interest: include a statement disclosing financial or non‑financial competing interests.
- Funding: disclose all sources of support and the role of funders (if any).
- Human subjects / sensitive data: explain approvals, consent, and protection measures where relevant.
Peer review (how to avoid easy rejection)
Manuscripts are evaluated for scope fit, clarity of question, strength of evidence, and contribution to the field. To maximize your chances:
- State your research question in the first page, not on page six.
- Make your evidence auditable: name archives, datasets, documents, and selection criteria.
- Separate facts from interpretation. Label uncertainty instead of hiding it.
- Don’t overclaim. Reviewers punish exaggeration faster than they reward ambition.