E-International Relations Submission Guidelines

Key Takeaways

• E-International Relations (E-IR) is an open-access publisher of articles, book reviews, blogs, and free textbooks on international politics. It has published continuously since 2007 and carries the ISSN 2053-8626.
• Most E-IR content goes through editorial review rather than double-blind peer review, so a clear argument and readable prose matter more than an exhaustive literature review.
• Feature articles usually run somewhere between 1,500 and 3,000 words. Confirm the current limits, reference style, and submission route on E-IR's own guidelines page before you send a draft.
• Rejections most often trace back to four problems: no stated argument, an oversized theory section, impenetrable writing, and a topic the site has already covered.
• E-IR fits early-career researchers, students, and teaching-focused academics. News-driven outlets and technology-policy platforms serve different formats, timelines, and readers.

1. Introduction

Every year, thousands of international relations students and early-career researchers finish a seminar paper, a thesis chapter, or a well-argued blog post and start looking for somewhere to publish it. E-International Relations is one of the first names they encounter, partly because it is free to read, partly because it publishes work by people without a professorship, and partly because its editorial standards are demanding enough to make a publication there mean something.

The confusion starts when writers try to work out what E-IR actually wants. Is it a journal? A magazine? A student platform? The answer is none of those exactly, and the submission guidelines read differently depending on which of those assumptions you carry in. A writer who treats E-IR like a peer-reviewed journal will produce a 6,000-word draft with forty footnotes and wait three months for a desk rejection. A writer who treats it like a blog will send 700 words of opinion and get the same outcome.

This guide explains what E-IR publishes, how to shape a manuscript that fits, how the editorial process runs, and where E-IR sits relative to other outlets that publish international politics commentary. The mechanics below reflect E-IR's general practice. Because word limits and style rules get revised, treat the site's own submissions page as the final authority before you send anything.

2. What E-International Relations publishes and who reads it

E-IR is an independent, open-access publisher based in the United Kingdom. Its catalogue includes feature articles, shorter blog pieces, book reviews, and a set of free textbooks that universities assign in undergraduate courses, including the edited volume International Relations. The site does not sit behind a paywall or a login, which shapes both its readership and its style.

The audience is broad: undergraduates encountering a topic for the first time, graduate students looking for a concise overview, lecturers hunting for teaching material, journalists checking a concept, and policy-adjacent readers who want context without a subscription. That mix pushes writers toward explanation over display. A sentence that only makes sense to someone who has already read the canon will lose most of the readership.

What fits well:

• A piece that states a position on a live question and defends it with evidence.
• An article that takes one concept (sovereignty, deterrence, multilateralism) and tests it against a specific case.
• Analysis that translates academic research for a reader who has not read the research.
• Book reviews that assess an argument rather than summarise chapters.

What fits badly:

• Literature reviews with no claim.
• Policy prescriptions that ignore the politics of implementation.
• Long theoretical debates whose relevance to current events stays implicit.
• Partisan statements presented as analysis.

A useful test: write your central claim in one sentence. If the sentence runs past two lines or contains the word "and" three times, the scope is too wide.

3. Preparing the manuscript

Start by reading the current guidelines page in full, then read three recent E-IR articles in your subfield. You are looking for the house rhythm: how quickly the argument appears, how much theory gets used, how sources are cited, how subheadings are spaced. Copy the structure, not the topic.

Open with the argument. E-IR articles typically establish the problem and the claim within the first two or three paragraphs. A reader should know what you are arguing before the first subheading. Long wind-ups about the importance of the topic waste the opening, which is also the section most editors read closely.

Keep theory proportionate. One or two paragraphs that connect your case to a framework will usually do. If your draft has four pages of conceptual groundwork before the first example, cut it. The framework exists to sharpen the analysis, and readers will judge the piece on what you do with it.

Structure for skimming. Break the body with subheadings roughly every 400 to 600 words. Each section should carry a claim of its own, not just a chunk of narrative. A common shape is: framing, case evidence, counterargument, implications.

Write plainly. Short sentences carry complicated material better than long ones. Define terms the first time you use them. Pick British or American spelling and stay consistent, since E-IR is UK-based and many readers expect British conventions. Avoid acronyms that appear only once.

Handle sources carefully. E-IR articles generally use author-date in-text citations with a short reference list, and hyperlinks to primary documents where a stable source exists. Check the current style guide, because citation practice on the site has changed over time and the version you find in an old article may not match what editors ask for now.

Prepare the file properly. Most submissions arrive as a Word document with the title, the author's name and affiliation, a short biographical note, and an accurate word count. If you are a student or an independent researcher, say so rather than leaving the field blank. Editors assess the argument, and an honest descriptor helps them route the piece.

Check originality and exclusivity. E-IR publishes original work that has not appeared elsewhere, including on a personal blog or a university repository. If a version of the piece exists online, tell the editors at submission and let them decide. Simultaneous submission to another outlet usually causes problems, so ask before you do it.

4. How the editorial process works

Understanding the sequence removes most of the anxiety around waiting.

1. Submission. You send the manuscript through the site's form or by email, depending on the current instructions. An automated acknowledgement may or may not arrive.
2. Editorial screening. An editor checks fit, length, quality, and whether the topic has been covered recently. Many pieces are declined at this stage, often within days.
3. Review. Pieces that pass screening go to one or more reviewers, or get handled directly by a section editor. You may receive a request for revisions, a conditional acceptance, or a decline.
4. Revision. Revision requests usually focus on structure, argument clarity, and length rather than line edits. Turn them around promptly and note what you changed.
5. Copy-editing and scheduling. An editor checks style, links, and headings, then places the piece in the publication queue. Timelines depend on the editorial calendar and on how quickly other pieces in the queue move.

Response times vary with editor workload and with the news cycle. A reasonable rule is to wait four weeks before sending a short, polite follow-up, and to mention the date of your original submission. If you have not heard anything after two follow-ups spaced a few weeks apart, the piece is probably sitting unread, and you can ask whether to withdraw it.

Two practical points about publication. E-IR content is open access, and published pieces typically carry a Creative Commons licence, so check the current terms if your funder or employer has requirements. Articles appear at a stable URL, and the site's ISSN makes them citable in a reference list. Verify the exact citation format the site recommends rather than copying an old example.

5. Common reasons submissions are declined

Most declines fall into a small number of categories, and all of them are fixable before submission.

The pre-submission checklist that catches most of these:

• The claim appears in the first three paragraphs.
• The word count sits inside the current limit.
• Every subheading covers a claim, not a topic.
• Each factual assertion has a citation or a linked primary source.
• The bio, affiliation, and contact details are present.
• No part of the piece has been published elsewhere without disclosure.
• The piece reads cleanly aloud, which catches most awkward sentences.

6. Comparing E-IR with other outlets

Publishing decisions depend on format, audience, and how quickly you need the piece to appear. The table below sets out how several outlets differ for a writer working on international politics.

Two judgements follow from this. First, E-IR rewards durable explanation more than speed, so a piece that will still make sense in a year performs better there than a reaction to this week's statement. Second, if your topic moves fast or sits deep in technology policy, an outlet built for that rhythm will serve you better, and submitting the same draft to both wastes the version that does not fit.

7. FAQ

Q1. Can students and first-time authors submit to E-International Relations?

Yes. E-IR publishes work from undergraduates, graduate students, and independent researchers, and the site does not require a doctorate or an institutional affiliation. Editors assess the argument, the evidence, and the writing. A tightly argued 2,000-word analysis of a specific case has a realistic chance, while a sprawling essay without a claim will struggle regardless of the author's credentials.

Q2. Does E-IR accept work that has already appeared on a blog or repository?

Generally no. E-IR publishes original material that has not appeared elsewhere, and a post on a personal blog or a university repository usually counts as prior publication. If a draft version exists online, disclose it at submission and let the editors decide. Ask before submitting simultaneously to another outlet, since most publishers treat that as a problem.

Q3. How long does the review take, and when should I follow up?

Screening decisions often arrive within days. Full review takes longer and depends on editor workload, so response times range from a couple of weeks to several months. Send a short follow-up after four weeks, then another after a similar gap. If both go unanswered, ask whether you may withdraw the piece and place it elsewhere.

Q4. Do I need to follow a particular citation style?

Yes, and it is worth confirming which one, because the site's practice has shifted over the years. Current E-IR articles typically use in-text author-date citations with a short reference list, plus hyperlinks to primary documents where a stable link exists. Old articles may show a different convention. Check the style guidance on the submissions page as it stands on the day you send the manuscript.

8. Conclusion

E-IR occupies a specific place in international politics publishing: open access, editor-reviewed, aimed at readers who want explanation rather than posturing. That position determines what gets accepted. A piece with one clear claim, a proportionate theory section, evidence tied to a specific case, and prose a first-year student can follow will do better than a longer manuscript with more footnotes.

The practical sequence is straightforward. Read the current submission guidelines. Read three recent articles in your subfield. Write the claim in one sentence and build the structure around it. Keep the length inside the stated limit, cite consistently, and include the bio and word count. Then submit, wait four weeks, and follow up once. If the topic is time-sensitive or sits at the edge of technology policy, decide first whether E-IR's longer publication rhythm matches what the piece needs, because a well-matched outlet saves months of revision.