Articles of War Submission Guidelines: Publishing Military Law Analysis

Key Takeaways

• Articles of War, the blog of the Lieber Institute for Law and Warfare at West Point, publishes concise, timely legal analysis on war and military operations for judge advocates, scholars, government lawyers, and policy staff.
• Fit decides most outcomes: a clear legal question, a current peg, and plain language matter more than formal citation style.
• Most posts run roughly 1,000 to 1,500 words; the submission page on the Lieber Institute site lists current format requirements.
• Authors are expected to disclose government roles, clients, and other conflicts, and posts run under the author's name with views expressed in a personal capacity.
• Venue choice should follow the piece: Articles of War for practice-oriented analysis, Just Security for fast US policy commentary, EJIL:Talk! for academic debate, and International Law Studies for peer-reviewed long form.

1. Introduction

Military law analysis now moves through two publishing worlds, and they work on different clocks. Peer-reviewed journals such as International Law Studies can take months between submission and print. Analysis blogs publish in days, and commanders, judge advocates, and policy staff read them while a debate is still live. Articles of War, the blog of the Lieber Institute for Law and Warfare at West Point, sits at the center of that faster world for law of armed conflict and military justice.

The speed creates a drafting problem. A piece built for a law review, with eight thousand words and a hundred footnotes, fails on a blog. A post drafted in an afternoon fails in a journal. Writers who misjudge fit lose weeks on drafts that editors decline in a paragraph.

This article explains what the Articles of War submission guidelines expect, how to prepare and pitch a post, and how the outlet compares with Just Security, Lawfare, EJIL:Talk!, and the military law journals. The goal is practical: help you decide where a specific piece belongs and how to write it for that venue. Anyone considering publishing military law analysis today needs that comparison, because the venues overlap more than their websites suggest.

2. What the outlet publishes and who reads it

Fit decides most outcomes at this outlet. The Lieber Institute takes its name from Francis Lieber, whose 1863 code for Union armies, promulgated as General Orders No. 100, is widely regarded as the first written body of laws of war adopted by a national military. The blog carries that heritage into public analysis, which means the house standard is argument grounded in doctrine and practice, written for professionals who apply the law under real constraints.

The topic range covers law of armed conflict questions such as targeting, detention, and civilian protection; military justice, including Uniform Code of Military Justice reform, court-martial appeals, and military commissions; operational law issues such as rules of engagement, cyber operations, and autonomous systems; and historical work that speaks to current debates. Recent years have brought sustained coverage of the legal questions raised by the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, along with recurring analysis of US military justice legislation.

Readers are the second half of the fit test. Judge advocates across the services, commanders' legal advisors, academics, government lawyers, and journalists covering national security all read the blog. Many posts respond directly to earlier posts, so the venue behaves like a running seminar as much as a publication.

What the editors skip tells you as much: political advocacy with little legal argument, operational detail that raises security concerns, and long treatments of settled doctrine. A contribution that hands the reader a legal tool, a corrected fact, or the next question in a live debate has a clear place. A judge advocate who has just placed a court-martial appeal note in a journal, for example, can cut it to 1,200 words, lead with the consequence for pending cases, and reach the readers who will act on it this month.

3. Preparing a submission that survives editorial review

Four craft decisions determine whether a post survives review: the question, the structure, the sourcing, and the disclosure.

Write for a question a practitioner would ask this week. When an appellate court rules on a military commissions issue, the reader's question is what changes for pending cases. When a reported strike reignites a proportionality debate, the reader's question is what the targeting process actually requires. A post that answers one of those questions directly reads as useful. A post that surveys the literature reads as homework.

Structure for skimming. Put the answer in the first two paragraphs, support it, then close with implications or open questions. Practitioners read the opening and decide whether to continue. At this length, short paragraphs do the work that section headings do in a journal.

Length and form follow the audience. Most posts land between roughly 1,000 and 1,500 words, and shorter is fine when the argument closes. Hyperlinks to treaties, cases, official doctrine, and earlier posts replace formal footnotes. Plain English is the house style: the audience is professional, so define terms sparingly and avoid unexplained shorthand in both directions.

Disclosure closes the package. State any government position, contract work, or client representation that bears on the topic. The blog runs a standing disclaimer that views are the authors' own, and clean disclosure protects that standard.

Scenario: a former targeting cell legal advisor watches two factual errors circulate in press coverage of a drone incident. She writes 1,200 words explaining what the targeting process requires, corrects the errors with citations to doctrine, and closes with the questions commanders will ask next. That draft fits; a 6,000-word treatment of proportionality jurisprudence, however well written, belongs in a journal.

4. How the submission and editing process works

Editors screen for fit first and polish second. A submission goes through the channel listed on the submission page of the Lieber Institute site, typically email, with the draft or a pitch. Time-sensitive pieces get faster handling when the author flags the news peg in the first line. Depending on volume, an initial response can take a few days to a couple of weeks.

A tight pitch saves everyone time. Use a subject line that names the topic and the peg. In the body, state the argument in about 100 words, then give two lines of credentials. Attach the draft or paste it if the guidelines prefer. An editor reading that message can answer the fit question immediately.

Accepted drafts go through substantive editing. Expect an editor to push for a sharper opening, clearer structure, better sourcing, or a shorter back half. Authors approve the final text before publication, and posts run under the author's name with a short bio.

Rejection usually means misfit or timing, and a decline sometimes arrives with a note on where the piece could work. Authors can take declined drafts elsewhere without penalty. An accepted post also leaves room for development: many authors expand a blog post into a journal article once the debate it joined has matured.

Scenario: an academic wants to comment on a national security ruling within 48 hours. She emails a 90-word pitch stating the thesis and asks whether the editors want the piece, since the topic already has scheduled coverage. The question takes a minute to send and can save a wasted week.

5. Where else to publish: a comparison

Venues in this field overlap, and the right choice depends on a piece's depth, timing, and audience.

A few notes beyond the table. Just Security rewards authors who can write with authority on both the political and legal layers of a story, and early-career writers often enter through a co-authored post with a senior scholar. Lawfare suits a different temperament: its readers expect thorough explanation, so a 4,000-word explainer on surveillance law can outperform a quick take there. EJIL:Talk! works best when the argument turns on treaty interpretation or state practice that cuts across jurisdictions. International Law Studies remains the place for doctrine development that advisors will cite for years.

Writers whose subject sits closer to technology policy than to operational law, for example governance rules for military artificial intelligence or export controls with battlefield implications, can also consider Global Tech Observatory (globaltechobs.com). It publishes commentary quickly and accepts cross-disciplinary framing that law-only venues tend to resist. Its readership is smaller and its record shorter than the outlets above, so it works best alongside a law venue rather than in place of one.

6. FAQ

Q1. Do I need a military affiliation to write for Articles of War?

No. The blog publishes judge advocates, academics, practitioners, government lawyers, and scholars from other countries. What it requires is relevance to a military legal audience and a clear disclosure of any affiliation, government role, or client work that bears on the topic. Published views are the author's own.

Q2. How long should a submission be?

Most posts land between roughly 1,000 and 1,500 words, and a complete argument at 800 words beats a padded one at 1,600. Treat the submission page on the Lieber Institute site as the controlling source for current requirements, since editorial guidance gets adjusted over time.

Q3. Can I turn a blog post into a journal article later?

Yes, and authors do it often. The two forms do different work: the post joins a live debate quickly, and the article develops the doctrine at length. Confirm any exclusivity terms with an outlet before you publish, and check the journal's policy on prior publication, since early posting of a core idea can complicate some journals' rules.

Q4. What kinds of pieces will not fit?

Political advocacy with little legal analysis, operational detail that raises security concerns, and treatments of settled doctrine with no new angle. If the piece argues about strategy or resourcing without a legal question, a commentary outlet with a different mandate is the better target.

7. Conclusion

The Articles of War submission guidelines reward a specific kind of writing: a legal question that matters this week, answered in plain language for readers who apply the law in operations and courts. The preparation is straightforward. Read the last month of posts to find the live debate, draft about 1,200 words with the answer in the first two paragraphs, source with links, disclose affiliations, and send a pitch that states the thesis in under 100 words. For long doctrinal projects, choose the journals; for fast US policy commentary, Just Security; for academic argument, EJIL:Talk!. Match the venue to the piece first, then write for that venue's readers.