This article was downloaded by: [178.221.110.

227]
On: 14 January 2014, At: 07:34
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,
UK
Journal of Strategic Studies
Publication details, including instructions for authors
and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fjss20
From the Editors
Published online: 19 Dec 2013.
To cite this article: (2013) From the Editors, Journal of Strategic Studies, 36:6,
757-760, DOI: 10.1080/01402390.2013.862063
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2013.862063
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the
information (the Content) contained in the publications on our platform.
However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or
suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed
in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the
views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should
not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions,
claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection
with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-
licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly
forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
1
7
8
.
2
2
1
.
1
1
0
.
2
2
7
]

a
t

0
7
:
3
4

1
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
4

From the Editors
International coalitions and partnerships remain a staple of interna-
tional security in the modern era, particularly for states in uncertain
security environments with constrained resources.
1
In this issues lead
article, Magnus Petersson and Hakon Lunde Saxi of the Norwegian
Institute for Defence Studies examine the alliance policies of smaller
powers in the Cold War and post-Cold War periods. Shifted Roles:
Explaining Danish and Norwegian Alliance Strategy 19492009
looks at the alliance roles and strategies of Norway and Denmark as
part of the NATO alliance. The authors stress the importance of proxi-
mity to the Soviet Union (now Russia) and the role of domestic politics
in explaining the differences between the two states in living up to Cold
War NATO commitments and later in agreeing to participate in out of
area operations in a post-Cold War world.
Interest in maritime warfare, and particularly anti-commerce cam-
paigns, has increased in the last two years, primarily in the context of
strategies for persuading or defeating Chinese aggression in the Pacific
Rim. Richard Hammond, of the University of Wolverhampton, contri-
butes to this debate with his assessment of British policy and strategy in
World War II. British Policy on Total Maritime Warfare and the Anti-
Shipping Campaign in the Mediterranean, 19401944 examines the
evolution of British efforts from an initially constrained approach hop-
ing to maintain global adherence to interwar norms into what he refers
to as a unique combined arms offensive. Britains adaptation to a
changing environment and a protracted war offer important
insights for analysts considering total maritime warfare in the future
whatever form that warfare may take.
2
1
Steven E. Lobell, Bringing Balancing Back In: Britains Targeted Balancing, 1936
1939, Journal of Strategic Studies 35/6 (Nov./Dec. 2012), 74773; Dag Henriksen,
Inflexible Response: Diplomacy, Airpower and the Kosovo Crisis, 19981999, Journal
of Strategic Studies 31/6 (Nov./Dec. 2008), 82558; Philip G. Dwyer, Self-Interest
versus the Common Cause: Austria, Prussia and Russia against Napoleon, Journal of
Strategic Studies 31/4 (July/Aug. 2008), 60532.
2
Sean Mirski, Stranglehold: The Context, Conduct and Consequences of an American
Naval Blockade of China, Journal of Strategic Studies 36/3 (May/June 2013), 385
421; Evan Braden Montgomery, Reconsidering a Naval Blockade of China: A
Response to Mirski, Journal of Strategic Studies 36/4 (July/Aug. 2013), 61523;
The Journal of Strategic Studies, 2013
Vol. 36, No. 6, 757760, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2013.862063
2013 Taylor & Francis
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
1
7
8
.
2
2
1
.
1
1
0
.
2
2
7
]

a
t

0
7
:
3
4

1
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
4

Students of history recognize the importance of individuals in shaping
events, but often fail to consider the role of individuals in shaping the
historical record of those events. Ken Young, of Kings College London,
examines the importance of Lewis Strauss in the historiography of the
Cold War, and in particular of the US decision to pursue thermonuclear
weapons. In The Hydrogen Bomb, Lewis L. Strauss, and the Writing of
Nuclear History, Young examines the importance of Strauss not only
in the decision process itself, but also in the way that decision process
was portrayed after the fact. As Young notes: Were it not for Strauss
and his journalist allies, it is unlikely that the narrative of a reluctant,
foot-dragging science community, organized in secret cabals and orche-
strated by Oppenheimer against the visionary Teller would have gained
popular credence. He also notes, however, that if Strauss version had
not gained significant attention, then the actors would have been less
likely to speak openly to historians about their views and perspectives.
Continuing concern over Iran and Syria demonstrates that the pro-
liferation of weapons of mass destruction and particularly of nuclear
weapons remains a major international priority. Sbastien Miraglia, of
the Department of Civil-Military Relations at the Norwegian Institute
for Defence Studies, examines specific difficulties new nuclear states
face once their weapons are actually developed. Deadly or Impotent?
Nuclear Command and Control in Pakistan assesses the problems that
Pakistan faces in creating reliable and flexible command and control
(C2) structures. He notes the significant barrier Pakistans civil-military
relations and domestic politics pose in creating a command and control
system with civilian control, and the potential destabilizing role that
military autonomy might play in an atmosphere of rising tensions.
3
He
concludes that the characteristics of Pakistans C2 structure provides for
safe operations in peacetime, but is vulnerable to inadvertent or
unauthorized nuclear release when deploying. This increases the risk
of escalation and/or loss of control of weapons during the early stages
of a crisis a possibility that should affect the responses of the US and
international community in times of potential friction in the
subcontinent.
Duncan Redford, Inter and Intra-Service Rivalries in the Battle of the Atlantic, Journal
of Strategic Studies 32/6 (Nov./Dec. 2009), 899928.
3
C. Christine Fair, Feroz Khan, Eating Grass: The Making of the Pakistani Bomb,
Journal of Strategic Studies 36/4 (July/Aug. 2013), 62430 and Feroz Hassan Khan,
Response to C. Christine Fair, Journal of Strategic Studies 36/4 (July/Aug. 2013), 630
4; C. Christine Fair and Shuja Nawaz, The Changing Pakistan Army Officer Corps,
Journal of Strategic Studies 34/1 (Jan./Feb. 2011), 6394; Tom Sauer, A Second
Nuclear Revolution/ From Nuclear Primacy to Post-Existential Deterrence, Journal of
Strategic Studies 32/5 (Sept./Oct. 2009), 74567.
758 From the Editors
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
1
7
8
.
2
2
1
.
1
1
0
.
2
2
7
]

a
t

0
7
:
3
4

1
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
4

Our final submission is an article and interchange on the issue of
national operational styles in war. T.W. Brocades Zaalberg, of the
Netherlands Institute of Military History, opens the dialogue with a
critique of the concept of a Dutch style of counterinsurgency (COIN).
The Use and Abuse of the Dutch Approach to Counterinsurgency
argues that the evidence for a unique Dutch approach to COIN rooted
in national culture and the historical Indonesia experience is dubious,
and that proponents of this assessment have distorted history for
domestic political purposes. Joseph Soeters of the Netherlands
Defence Academy and Tilburg University counters in Do Distinct
(National) Operational Styles of Conflict Resolution Exist? Soeters
argues that dismissing the notion of national style may be premature,
and certainly deserves further study. Zaalberg then replies in The
Pitfalls of Cross-National Comparison in Conflict Research. He agrees
that there is important room for study of culture and national behavior,
but argues that true causal links between on the one hand strategic
culture and the resulting strategic narratives the way that conflicts are
presented or framed and actual tactical behaviour by (military)
personnel on the ground need yet to be established in future research.
This issue of national style and strategic culture, particularly in irregular
warfare and conflict termination, remains a topic of great interest and
attention.
4
4
Jan Angstrom and Jan Willem Honig, Regaining Strategy: Small Powers, Strategic
Culture, and Escalation in Afghanistan, Journal of Strategic Studies 35/5 (Sept./Oct.
2012), 66387; Martin Kitzen, Close Encounters of the Tribal Kind: The
Implementation of Co-option as a Tool for De-Escalation of Conflict The Case of
the Netherlands in Afghanistans Uruzgan Province, Journal of Strategic Studies 35/5
(Sept./Oct. 2012), 71334; Bruno C. Reis, The Myth of British Minimum Force in
Counterinsurgency Campaigns during Decolonisation (1945-1970), Journal of
Strategic Studies 34/2 (March/April 2011), 245279; Theo Farrell and Sten Rynning,
NATOs Transformation Gaps: Transatlantic Differences and the War in Afghanistan,
Journal of Strategic Studies 33/5 (Sept./Oct. 2010), 67399; Jacqueline Newmyer, The
Revolution in Military Affairs with Chinese Characteristics, Journal of Strategic
Studies 33/4 (July/Aug. 2010), 483504; Ljell Inge Bjerga and Torunn Laugen
Haaland, Development of Military Doctrine: The Particular Case of Small States,
Journal of Strategic Studies 33/4 (July/Aug. 2010), 505-33; Rudra Chaudhuri, Why
Culture Matters: Revisiting the Sino-Indian Border War of 1962, Journal of Strategic
Studies 32/6 (Nov./Dec. 2009), 84169; General Sir Mike Jackson GCB CBE DSO DL,
British Counter-Insurgency, Journal of Strategic Studies 32/3 (May/June 2009), 347
51; Paul Dixon, Hearts and Minds? British Counter-Insurgency from Malaya to Iraq,
Journal of Strategic Studies 32/3 (May/June 2009), 353-381; Karl Hack, The Malayan
Emergency as Counter-Insurgency Paradigm, Journal of Strategic Studies 32/4 May/
June 2009), 383-414. Gil-li Vardi, Pounding Their Feet: Israeli Military Culture as
Reflected in Early IDF History, Journal of Strategic Studies 31/2 (March/April 2008),
295324.
From the Editors 759
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
1
7
8
.
2
2
1
.
1
1
0
.
2
2
7
]

a
t

0
7
:
3
4

1
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
4

The team at the Journal of Strategic Studies would like to thank our
readers, reviewers, and contributors. With your support, the Journal of
Strategic Studies continues to publish an expanding range of relevant
and scholarly articles, to encourage and enhance interdisciplinary study
and debate, and to increase its reputation as the leading journal in the
field of Strategic Studies.
Bibliography
Angstrom, Jan and Jan Willem Honig, Regaining Strategy: Small Powers, Strategic Culture, and
Escalation in Afghanistan, Journal of Strategic Studies 35/5 (Sept./Oct. 2012), 66387.
Bjerga, Ljell Inge and Torunn Laugen Haaland, Development of Military Doctrine: The Particular
Case of Small States, Journal of Strategic Studies 33/4 (July/Aug. 2010), 50533.
Chaudhuri, Rudra, Why Culture Matters: Revisiting the Sino-Indian Border War of 1962,
Journal of Strategic Studies 32/6 (Nov./Dec. 2009), 84169.
Dixon, Paul, Hearts and Minds? British Counter-Insurgency from Malaya to Iraq, Journal of
Strategic Studies 32/3 (May/June 2009), 35381.
Dwyer, Philip G., Self-Interest versus the Common Cause: Austria, Prussia and Russia against
Napoleon, Journal of Strategic Studies 31/4 (July/Aug. 2008), 60532.
Fair, C. Christine, Feroz Khan, Eating Grass: The Making of the Pakistani Bomb, Journal of
Strategic Studies 36/4 (July/Aug. 2013), 62430.
Fair, C. Christine and Shuja Nawaz, The Changing Pakistan Army Officer Corps, Journal of
Strategic Studies 34/1 (Jan./Feb. 2011), 6394.
Farrell, Theo and Sten Rynning, NATOs Transformation Gaps: Transatlantic Differences and the
War in Afghanistan, Journal of Strategic Studies 33/5 (Sept./Oct. 2010), 67399.
Hack, Karl, The Malayan Emergency as Counter-Insurgency Paradigm, Journal of Strategic
Studies 32/4 (May/June 2009), 383414.
Henriksen, Dag, Inflexible Response/ Diplomacy, Airpower and the Kosovo Crisis, 19981999,
Journal of Strategic Studies 31/6 (Nov./Dec. 2008), 82558.
Jackson, General Sir Mike GCB CBE DSO DL, British Counter-Insurgency, Journal of Strategic
Studies 32/3 (May/June 2009), 34751.
Khan, Feroz Hassan, Response to C. Christine Fair, Journal of Strategic Studies 36/4 (July/Aug.
2013), 6304.
Kitzen, Martin, Close Encounters of the Tribal Kind: The Implementation of Co-option as a Tool
for De-Escalation of Conflict The Case of the Netherlands in Afghanistans Uruzgan Province,
Journal of Strategic Studies 35/5 (Sept./Oct. 2012), 71334.
Lobell, Steven E., Bringing Balancing Back In: Britains Targeted Balancing, 19361939, Journal
of Strategic Studies 35/6 (Nov./Dec. 2012), 74773.
Mirski, Sean, Stranglehold: The Context, Conduct and Consequences of an American Naval
Blockade of China, Journal of Strategic Studies 36/3 (May/June 2013), 385421.
Montgomery, Evan Braden, Reconsidering a Naval Blockade of China: A Response to Mirski,
Journal of Strategic Studies 36/4 (July/Aug. 2013), 61523.
Newmyer, Jacqueline, The Revolution in Military Affairs with Chinese Characteristics, Journal of
Strategic Studies 33/4 (July/Aug. 2010), 483504.
Redford, Duncan, Inter and Intra-Service Rivalries in the Battle of the Atlantic, Journal of
Strategic Studies 32/6 (Nov./Dec. 2009), 899928.
Reis, Bruno C., The Myth of British Minimum Force in Counterinsurgency Campaigns during
Decolonisation (1945-1970), Journal of Strategic Studies 34/2 (March/April 2011), 24579.
Sauer, Tom, A Second Nuclear Revolution: From Nuclear Primacy to Post-Existential Deterrence,
Journal of Strategic Studies 32/5 (Sept./Oct. 2009), 74567.
Vardi, Gil-li, Pounding Their Feet: Israeli Military Culture as Reflected in Early IDF History,
Journal of Strategic Studies 31/2 (March/April 2008), 295324.
760 From the Editors
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
1
7
8
.
2
2
1
.
1
1
0
.
2
2
7
]

a
t

0
7
:
3
4

1
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
4