Venues
Military Review provides venues for research, reporting, and discussion on a broad range of
topics related to military affairs, especially with regard to what is widely termed the operational
level of war. The journal strives to provide its readers with articles that express clear thinking
by knowledgeable writers on important issues; articles that can be read with ease and pleasure by
both the community of military professionals as well as a broad general audience.
Military Review sponsors two English-language publication venues for writers concerned with
military affairs, the traditional hard-copy publication and the online-only publication.
- Military Review publishes a hard-copy publication bimonthly (also posted online
coincident with physical publication). The journal publishes several categories of material:
research articles, generally between 3,500 to 5,000 words in length, that are supported by
research of credible sources detailed in endnotes; insight articles, also generally between
3,500 and 5,000 words in length, that provide insights derived from personal experience and
observation; and book review essays that are generally 2,000- to 3,000-word discussions of new
books. Military Review also occasionally publishes specialty material such as war
poetry or film reviews.
- Military Review Online Exclusive articles are published only online to support timely
discussion on emerging time-sensitive issues. Online publication also allows us to publish more
articles than before due to the unconstrained nature of the website. Research and insight
articles for online publication should be generally between 3,500 and 5,000 words in length.
- Book reviews are also published exclusively online on a separate page of the Army University
Press website at https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/Military-Review/MR-Book-Reviews/.
- Articles and book reviews published exclusively online will be permanently archived with
hard-copy articles on the Army University Press website and by the U.S. Government Publishing
Office at Govinfo.gov.
The criteria described below for suitability of publication under the imprimatur of the Army
University Press and Military Review apply for all articles submitted, both hard copy and
online exclusive. Therefore, all articles will be juried the same based on the criteria described.
The decision to publish online versus hard copy is the editorial staff’s, but author
preferences will be taken into account as much as possible.
Consideration of Submitted Articles
Military Review seriously considers all submissions regardless of topic. However,
Military Review places highest priority on publishing “tip of the spear”
articles that introduce new concepts or provide fresh perspectives. As a result, well-researched,
well-written, persuasive articles rejected elsewhere for publication that espouse a view that
differs from orthodox views have a good chance of finding a home at Military Review.
All unsolicited manuscripts received at Military Review are reviewed “in the
blind” by an editorial board that evaluates them without being apprised of who the author is.
This is necessary to promote objectivity in the evaluation process. Military Review makes
no final commitments to accepting a manuscript for publication until it has been thoroughly reviewed
by an editorial board and as required, until revisions are made that satisfy Military
Review concerns for accuracy and clarity, or that make the article conform to Military
Review editing and publication conventions.
Notwithstanding, occasionally manuscripts with especially unique and original ideas that may suffer
from requiring significant editing to bring them up to a professional publication standard in terms
of clarity, development, or improved organization are sometimes tentatively accepted for
publication. The author of such articles must, however, agree to accept revisions to the manuscript
under the guidance of the Military Review staff. Additionally, final acceptance of such
special case manuscripts remains a Military Review prerogative based on the willingness and
effort the prospective author shows in working with its staff together with assessment of the
quality of the revised product with regard to suitability for publication.
When a manuscript has multiple authors, a single point of contact needs to be clearly designated with
the initial submission. To avoid confusion that results from multiple authors providing independent
modifications of a manuscript to the assigned Military Review editor without consultation
among them, the point of contact will be responsible for resolving with coauthors any issues related
to manuscript revision as coordinated with Military Review.
As a matter of policy, irrespective of who the main author of an article may be asserted to be,
Military Review will list in the byline the authors by rank order, from highest rank to
lowest rank, when attributing authorship. Civilian authors will be listed by last name in alphabetic
order after uniformed military authors. The biographies at the end the manuscripts will list the
authors in the same order.
Evaluation criteria. Evaluation is an unavoidably subjective
process. However, in an effort to provide a sense of the standard upon which manuscripts are
evaluated for suitability of publication at Military Review, the below noted questions are
noted to help prospective authors evaluate the progress of their own manuscripts:
- Does the article contribute anything new to the literature of military affairs or security
issues?
- Does the author of the article appear to know what he or she is talking about? Does the article
accurately represent background facts and provide a credible examination of issues based on the
facts presented?
- Is the article a product of original thinking, offering well-thought-out and well-researched
alternate proposals, alternate viewpoints, or dissenting opinions with regard to issues of
contemporary importance?
- Is the article well written? Does it move logically from a clear thesis through a well-developed
argument using supporting evidence to yield persuasive conclusions?
- Does the use of obscure or arcane language, or overly ornate sentence and paragraph structure,
make the article difficult for the average reader to follow or understand?
- Does the article use acronyms? Are they defined for the reader?
- Is the article written in a straightforward manner or does it give the impression that it has
been written to impress colleagues rather inform and persuade readers?
- Does the article show evidence of significant research using accepted academic standards?
- Is the article the product of original research?
- If the article is not a product of original research, is it an effective synthesis of existing
research, and has it yielded significant insight?
- Does the article offer plausible solutions to a problem or issue?
- Is research backed up by careful citations in the endnotes?
- Does the manuscript show significant reliance on questionable or spurious sources in its
endnotes?
- If the manuscript is a historical article, do the issues associated with the historical events
evaluated have any direct relevance to current events or the conditions of the current security
environment?
Review process. Military Review will send an acknowledgment to
the author upon receipt of manuscript. Submissions not forwarded to our referees for further
consideration are generally returned to the author within three to four weeks. For submissions sent
to our referees, the review process can take six to eight weeks from date of receipt.
Area of concentration. Military Review’s main area
of orientation is the operational level of war (i.e., between the strategic and tactical levels of
war). Therefore, the journal seeks mainly articles that address issues of concern to personnel who
serve in either a command or staff capacity that deal with the planning and execution of campaigns
to achieve strategic objectives, or related supporting topics. This provides for a broad spectrum of
possible subjects for examination including dealing with leadership and management issues related to
command of units above battalion level, interface with interagency and coalition partners, training
and education, innovation, and policy or doctrine formulation, among many others.
Preferred original research and insight gleaned from practical experience.
Military Review prefers two types of articles: those based on original research from
primary sources and those stemming from lessons learned via firsthand experience. Military
Review also specifically seeks articles of a practical nature as opposed to abstract
discussions lacking practical insights and concrete application.
Responsibility for accuracy, reliability of research, and originality. Authors are
responsible for their manuscript’s accuracy, originality, and integrity of source
documentation. Plagiarism as defined in the Army University Press Plagiarism Policy is regarded as egregious unprofessionalism and may be grounds for rejecting future submissions for
consideration of publication by the offending author.
Writing Style and Required Formatting Features
Military Review seeks articles that can be clearly understood by the reader. Such are
usually characterized by precise, concise, and direct language written in active voice. The thesis
of the proposed article should be clear, logically developed, and supported by sound reasoning and
evidence. However, dullness of style is not synonymous with either erudition or professional
writing; readers appreciate writing that is lively, accessible, and engaging. Consequently, elegant
use of language is not discouraged if employed literary devices have an obvious purpose, including
metaphorical flourishes; that is, that they are used skillfully to make the points of the author in
an intriguing and fresh way, and are not merely exercises aimed at showcasing the author’s
capacious erudition or vocabulary.
Authors should avoid the use of acronyms. As a rule, acronyms should be spelled out on first
reference. Additionally, authors should avoid the use of professional cant; that is, arcane or
extremely technical language unfamiliar to the average reader that would be more appropriate for
specialized journals. Authors should take special care to eschew military and bureaucratic jargon.
Artwork, illustrations, and photographs. Art is a powerful means of
helping to tell the story of an article. Authors wanting to submit original photographs need to do
so in JPEG format with a resolution of 300 DPI or higher. Submitted photos must be accompanied by a
cutline (citation) identifying the date, location, unit or personnel and description of the action,
and specifying who took the photo. The usual length of such supporting cutlines is between 25 and 50
words.
Copyright sensitivities with regard to submitted art, illustrations, and photographs require
Military Review to insist that the origin of any art, illustrations, or photographs be
identified. If artwork is copyrighted, the author must obtain copyright approvals and submit them to
Military Review along with proposed manuscripts. As a general policy, Military
Review will not use artwork or photo images it cannot attribute.
Article formatting. Manuscripts should conform to the formatting as
found in this Manuscript Sample. Authors should ensure there are no
embedded macros in the document and no footnotes. Manuscripts that are submitted with macros,
especially footnote or endnote macros, will be returned to the author to have them removed before
resubmitting. The default settings in Microsoft Word are suitable. During the editing process, an
author may be asked to use the “track changes” feature in Microsoft Word.
How to track changes in
Microsoft Word
Length of manuscripts. The preferred length for feature articles is
3,500 to 5,000 words, or 15 to 25 typed, double-spaced pages. Military Review reserves the
right to edit submitted manuscripts to conform to overall space requirements. Military
Review will adjust article lengths based on available space in a given issue.
Editing style guide. To edit articles to industry-standard for
professional publication, Military Review follows the professional writing and citation
guidance outlined in The Chicago Manual of Style. For writing and citation guidance not
addressed in Chicago, Military Review consults the Associated Press
Stylebook and the Department of Defense’s Manual for Written Material,
especially with regard to military acronyms and definitions.
Use of endnote as opposed to footnotes Military Review
prefers manuscripts that are clearly the product of conscientious research as demonstrated by
comprehensive and accurate endnotes. Authors should not use footnotes nor should they submit a
bibliography with their manuscripts. Authors should strive to reduce the number of endnotes to the
minimum consistent with honest acknowledgment of indebtedness, consolidating notes where possible.
Lengthy explanatory endnotes are discouraged and will generally be edited out. Use Arabic numbering
not Roman numerals.
Automatic endnote feature. Authors should not use the automatic endnote feature of
Microsoft Word, or any separate automatic endnote program, in the submitted manuscript. (This
feature in Microsoft Word displays the endnote information when the cursor floats above the
superscript endnote number.) The automatic formatting is not compatible with Military
Review’s editing process or the graphic design software. Instead, authors should
manually format the endnote numbers within the text in superscript, and then list the endnotes at
the end of the manuscript. To assist in the editing process, authors should highlight in yellow the
superscripted endnotes within the text. Manuscripts that use the automatic formatting for endnotes
will be returned to the author without action.
See sample manuscript for the correct endnote format
Biographical sketch. Authors must enclose a brief personal biography.
Such biographies might include significant positions or assignments; notes on civilian and military
education together with degrees attained; and brief allusions to other qualifications that establish
the credibility of the author with regard to the subject discussed in the article. Authors can find
examples of biographies in recent editions of Military Review.
See biography at the end of the sample manuscript
Security Review of Manuscript Submissions
Military Review functions under the public affairs principle of “security review at
source.”
Documents submitted by non-U.S. government employees or contractors, or by non-American
authors who are not associated with or in the employ of the U.S. government, do not usually require
a memorandum for record verifying a security review. For authors who are not employees of the U.S.
government, a security review of a manuscript is usually not necessary unless the source material
appears to be from a source inside the government that could represent an unauthorized breach of
confidentiality or appears to be proprietary information of a private organization. It is incumbent
on authors of such manuscripts to resolve any legal issues associated with such manuscripts prior to
publication in Military Review.
For authors who are writing on subjects related to their areas of government expertise or work, it is
the responsibility of authors who are in government service, and whose article may derive from
government information accessed from a government work source, to ensure that manuscripts submitted
for consideration receive the proper security review from appropriate government authorities at
their places of work. This review should be done prior to the manuscript arriving at Military
Review. In most cases, such a review should include a vetting by both the
organization’s security officer and public affairs officer.
Manuscripts by U.S. military personnel on active duty or civilian employees of the
Department of Defense or service departments are subject to the official clearance requirements of
Army Regulation
380-5, Army Information Security Program. This requirement applies mainly to
documents that treat the activities or capabilities of specific military organizations; established
tactics, techniques, and procedures; or technical subjects, open discussion of which has significant
potential for exposing information that should be regarded as controlled.
Current Army policy stipulates that such manuscripts submitted for publication that discuss military
subjects of a technical nature or a current organization, which are written by personnel working for
the U.S. government as an employee or contractor, must arrive at Military Review with a
memorandum for record verifying security review by the writer’s organization of assignment.
This memorandum should contain the words “This manuscript has been cleared for open
publication and unrestricted distribution” and be signed either physically or electronically
by the reviewing security authorities. It may be sent in hard copy accompanying a manuscript, it may
be sent electronically as an Adobe PDF file with appropriate signatures and accompanying electronic
versions of the manuscripts, or it may be sent as an endorsement to a manuscript as part of a
verifiable email chain that is electronically signed.
On acceptance by Military Review, manuscripts requiring memorandums for record may be
subject to further review and clearance by the Department of the Army in accordance with current
regulatory requirements. A decision concerning additional clearance will be made on a case-by-case
basis by the Military Review staff.
Manuscripts that are characterized as opinion pieces, historical pieces, or pieces that do not
discuss or deal with the specific current capabilities or tactics, techniques, or procedures of
military units or organizations need not submit such a memorandum for record. Prudence and
sensitivity to the need to restrict information will dictate when such a memorandum is required.
How to Submit a Manuscript
Unsolicited manuscripts may be submitted in two ways:
- The preferred method is as an attachment via email to usarmy.leavenworth.tradoc.mbx.armyu-army-university-press@army.mil (The
Combined Arms Center firewalls do not allow for document submissions by cell phone.) The
document should be saved in Microsoft Word (version 2007 or later) or some compatible file
format. Do not submit articles directly to any named editor on the Military Review
staff.
- Manuscripts may also be submitted on a compact disc (CD). The manuscript should be saved in
Microsoft Word (version 2007 or later) and be accompanied by a paper memorandum that notes the
name of the author, address, daytime phone number, and mailing address. The CD and memorandum
should be mailed to the following address:
Army University Press
Military Review
290 Stimson Ave, Unit 1
Fort Leavenworth, KS 66027
Authors should carefully edit their text before submission; include their name, address, daytime
phone number, and email address; and tell us what word processing program is used. Military
Review will not accept any faxed or handwritten/typed manuscripts.
Publication agreement on acceptance. Under our publication agreement,
Military Review retains first publication rights for its English, Spanish, Portuguese, and
any other editions of Military Review, including online editions. Except for time-sensitive
articles, the normal time from acceptance to publication is six to eight months.
As an official Army publication, Military Review is not copyrighted; however, publication by
Military Review gives the Combined Arms Center (Military Review’s higher
headquarters) the right to reproduce and use the article for training and other official purposes.
Editors’ prerogative. In the interests of length, security,
clarity, and conformity with the stylistic standards of Military Review, the editor
reserves the right to edit all manuscripts; however, editors will send substantive changes to the
author for approval. When a manuscript is accepted and published, three copies of the journal, which
features the article, will be sent to all authors.
Protocol concerning simultaneous submission to separate
publications. Authors should not submit a manuscript to Military Review while
it is being considered elsewhere; nor should manuscripts be submitted that have been previously
published elsewhere or that are already available on the internet.
As a matter of professional industry-standard convention as well as common professional courtesy,
authors should not submit a manuscript to a second publication until after Military Review
has fully reviewed it and decided whether to publish it. Military Review will generally
accept or reject a manuscript within 60 days of its receipt.
Evidence that an article has been submitted elsewhere concurrent with submission to Military
Review, or that it has already been published or will soon be, are grounds for denying an
author future consideration for publication in Military Review.
Authors Are Encouraged to Disseminate and Distribute their Articles Electronically
To promote electronic distribution and redistribution, we make published articles available in two
easily forwarded formats: HTML and PDF.
One of the outgrowths of the modern web-based publication system is that individual authors
submitting articles for publication frequently have developed their own distribution networks on
social media or are members of internet interest groups that habitually share information on topics
of mutual professional concern. Therefore, we strongly encourage authors to take a personal hand in
disseminating their articles published on the Military Review webpage through their own
network of associates to facilitate maximum distribution of articles to the broadest possible
audience.