International Security

International Security is a leading peer-reviewed journal of security affairs, global and broadly defined.

[Amanda Pearson @Pearson_ink]

Spring 2026 issue preview @IntSecHarvard!

@eunajo_ @jessicacweiss | ideology
Rosato | security dilemma
@Fiona_Cunning @kbruusgaard | great powers' nuclear first-use options
@the_nuclearyogi @rohan_mukh | India’s nuclear restraint
Davis & Gholz | blockade against Taiwan's ports

[Jacqueline Hazelton drjlhazelton.bsky.social @DrJLHazelton]

@IntSecHarvard

[War on the Rocks @WarOnTheRocks]

The Battle of Savo Island wasn't lost because of inferior technology. It was lost because no one knew how to use the technology they had. https://t.co/0tKqXHCjFD

[Lennart Maschmeyer @LenMaschmeyer]

The era of AI-enhanced cyber conflict is upon us - but even though new AI models are scary good, the defense has more to gain than the offense. That argument holds even against the most recent evidence, as I show in my new lawfare piece.
https://t.co/M0YhOMwv4N

[International Security @IntSecHarvard]

Read @joelfbrenner 's new piece in @lawfare about AI and the degree to which it can make predictive judgments in complex environments.

The International Security article is now *free to access* @mitpress : https://t.co/Kd7CZ7sIJu

@DrJLHazelton

[Lawfare @lawfare]

Even the most capable AI will face limits on its ability to make predictions and substitute for strategic decision-making, writes @joelfbrenner. https://t.co/hp2vDSZ6F5

[Lennart Maschmeyer @LenMaschmeyer]

Excited to finally be able to share my new article "Deception and Detection" in @IntSecHarvard

In a nutshell, I argue that cyber defense has more to gain from AI automation than the offense.

Here is the link to the full article :
https://t.co/IG6fhwCneM

[Janina Dill @JaninaDill]

American Presidents invariably claim that the use of U.S. military force abroad benefits the local population. U.S. Presidents often explicitly or implicitly claim that "the intervened population" therefore welcomes U.S. military intervention - a powerful moral claim.

[The MIT Press @mitpress.bsky.social @mitpress]

"Iranian closure of the Strait of Hormuz tops the list of global energy security nightmares," wrote Caitlin Talmadge in 2008 in @IntSecHarvard. The aftermath of limited strikes on Iran would be complicated and costly.

Free to read for 90 days:

https://t.co/xlYiD4BH81

[David Blagden @blagden_david]

As Ron Krebs demonstrates, aspiring populist demagogues love dead soldiers but hate serving officers. The former can’t answer back when their memory’s exploited, but the latter are the greatest potential obstacle to demagogic authority - hence efforts to cow and politicise.

[International Security @IntSecHarvard]

7) We hope you enjoy the new issue of International Security!

Winter 2025/26: https://t.co/DsYU0jt03G

[International Security @IntSecHarvard]

1) ***Announcement***

The new Winter 2025/26 issue is online!

Read articles by Ron Krebs; @JaninaDill, Emily Myers, and Livia Schubiger; @LenMaschmeyer; @joelfbrenner; and @John_Severini and Stephen Biddle

https://t.co/DsYU0jt03G

[International Security @IntSecHarvard]

6) “Technology, Behavior, and Effectiveness in Naval Warfare: The Battles of Savo Island and Cape Saint George,” by @John_Severini and Stephen Biddle

https://t.co/nq87S7cV1U

This article is Open Access.

[Amanda Pearson @Pearson_ink]

Winter 2026 issue preview @IntSecHarvard!
Krebs | why populists love dead soldiers
@JaninaDill, Myers, Schubiger | local consent for military interventions
@LenMaschmeyer | AI and cyberattacks
@joelfbrenner | AI and strategic surprise
@John_Severini, Biddle | naval warfare

[International Security @IntSecHarvard]

7) We hope you enjoy the new issue of International Security!

Fall 2025: https://t.co/DsYU0jt03G

[International Security @IntSecHarvard]

1) ***Announcement***

The new Fall 2025 issue is online!

Read articles by Marc Trachtenberg, @aaronbateman 22, Adam Mount, @djkim81, and Michael Goldfien.

https://t.co/DsYU0jt03G

@mitpress @BelferCenter

[International Security @IntSecHarvard]

6) “To Agree or Not to Agree: Hawks, Doves, and Regime Type in International Rivalry and Rapprochement,” by Michael Goldfien

https://t.co/16uPOqrke3