Expert Commentary
Bring specialist knowledge and independent analysis to CISES’s global audience.
What is Expert Commentary?
Expert Commentary brings external specialists’ perspectives to the Centre for International Security and Economic Strategy (CISES). These concise analytical pieces make an argument, draw attention to an important issue or emerging development, and explain its wider implications.
We welcome contributions from academics, established analysts, policy professionals, government and international-organisation personnel, military professionals, industry specialists and experienced practitioners with demonstrable expertise relevant to their proposed subject. Doctoral researchers with relevant professional experience may also be considered. This is not an undergraduate or master’s student submission route.
Selection rests on subject-matter expertise, independent analytical judgement and the quality of the submission. Expert Commentary is for external contributors; it is separate from our internal Policy Analyst outputs and Fellowship Programme.
Commentaries are normally 800–1,600 words, excluding the author biography and sources. Exceptions must be agreed in advance. Contributions are unpaid.
What we are looking for
We favour timely contributions connected to the current news cycle, while also welcoming original analysis of enduring policy questions. Pieces may explain developments, assess options, forecast implications or make recommendations. Each should offer a clear argument or deepen understanding of a significant issue.
Our geographical scope is global. Select the closest of our four broad thematic programmes; if you are unsure, say so in your pitch.
International Security and Conflict
Defence and Military Strategy
Economics and Trade
Emerging Technologies and Risks
The submission process
-
Pitch or submit
Email a 100–200-word pitch or a complete, unpublished commentary.
-
Initial review
The Director of Policy assesses expertise, relevance and editorial fit.
-
Complete the piece
If a pitch is approved, submit the full commentary by the agreed date.
-
Edit & verify
Copy-editing, evidence and sourcing checks, followed by an internal double-check.
-
Author approval
Review and approve the final edited text before it is scheduled.
-
Publication
CISES schedules, publishes and promotes the approved commentary.
Pitch approval is not publication approval.
CISES may decline a commentary at any stage before publication. Approval of a pitch, or completion of editing, does not create an obligation to publish.
Send your pitch or complete commentary to alexander.anderson@cises.org. Alexander Anderson, Director of Policy, makes the initial approval decision.
Your email should include:
- A proposed title and a 100–200-word summary identifying the central argument.
- The topic’s relevance, timeliness and intended contribution.
- The closest thematic programme, or a note that you are unsure.
- The proposed word count and expected completion date, if pitching.
- Initial sources supporting the argument.
- A brief introduction to your relevant expertise, any relevant conflicts of interest, and your AI declaration.
For a completed commentary, also include a proposed standfirst and the author information described below.
Seven working days
We aim to respond to initial submissions within seven working days. If you have received no response after that period, exclusivity automatically lapses and you may submit elsewhere.
Expertise with editorial independence
Original and unpublished
Submit your own original work. We do not accept previously published pieces, plagiarism, fabricated evidence or copyright infringement.
Non-partisan analysis
Strong arguments and policy recommendations are welcome. Party-political advocacy, polemics, propaganda and work intended to advance the interests or official narrative of a government, political party or other organisation are not.
Evidence and counterarguments
Support material claims with reliable evidence and acknowledge relevant counterarguments or evidence that complicates your thesis. A firm conclusion is welcome; selective omission of material evidence is not.
Conflicts of interest
Disclose relevant employment, consultancy, funding, political or government affiliations, financial interests and close organisational relationships. Material disclosures may be published alongside the piece. Undisclosed relevant conflicts may lead to rejection or retraction. Notify CISES if a significant relevant conflict arises after publication.
AI: every final sentence must be human-written
Generative AI may be used for brainstorming, as a translation aid, or to discover potential sources, provided the contributor independently reads and verifies those sources. All use must be declared when submitting a pitch or commentary.
Every phrase and sentence in the final commentary submitted to CISES must be written by a human. AI drafting, rewriting, paraphrasing or an AI-produced English translation used as the final prose is not permitted. Translation assistance does not waive the requirement to write the final English wording yourself.
Undeclared AI use or prohibited AI-generated prose will result in rejection. Include the following declaration, choosing the appropriate option and explaining any permitted use:
I confirm that all prose in this submission was written by me. I [did / did not] use generative AI for permitted brainstorming, translation assistance or source discovery. [If used, briefly explain the tools and purposes.]
Writing, sources & author information
Proofread rigorously before submission. A clear, well-supported draft helps us move from review to publication promptly.
Writing and house style
- Use British or American English consistently; do not mix them.
- Write for an informed general audience. Avoid unnecessary jargon and first-person prose.
- Explain acronyms at first use. Write “US”, not “U.S.”, and use the % symbol.
- Use clear, conventional spelling, punctuation, dates and capitalisation. For transliteration, follow established UN, BBC or CNN usage consistently.
- Propose a title under 75 characters and a standfirst of roughly 250 characters or fewer summarising the central argument.
CISES may amend titles and standfirsts for clarity, consistency, accessibility and discoverability. Changes that materially alter the argument require author approval.
Sources and evidence
Embed hyperlinks directly in the factual claim or phrase they support. Avoid routine constructions such as “an article by X in 2023” where a link on the relevant claim will suffice. Footnotes and endnotes are not permitted.
Prioritise primary sources, official data, reputable academic research and established journalism. Specialist and open-source intelligence sources are acceptable where appropriate and verifiable. Wikipedia, anonymous social-media accounts, AI-generated sources and dubious aggregators are not acceptable substantive evidence.
Avoid paywalled sources where an accessible authoritative alternative exists. Use them only where necessary to support the claim, and independently verify every source.
Images, charts and tables
Submit graphics only when essential to the argument. You must own the material or it must be in the public domain. Provide its source, underlying data where applicable, and evidence of ownership or public-domain status.
CISES reserves the right to omit submitted graphics or add its own. Complex graphics and tables can lengthen the editorial process.
Author information and exceptional arrangements
Provide a headshot, a 50–100-word biography, institutional affiliation and relevant LinkedIn or other social links. An ORCID identifier is optional.
Anonymous or pseudonymous publication is considered only in exceptional cases agreed with the Director of Policy. Publication embargoes must also be agreed in advance.
The author’s views do not necessarily represent CISES or the author’s employer, university or other affiliated institution. Publication does not imply institutional endorsement.
Editorial process & publication terms
Editing, verification and author approval
Our process centres on copy-editing and checks of evidence and sourcing, followed by an internal double-check. We normally expect no more than one round of revisions. Pieces requiring substantial rewriting may be declined.
We may reject materially inaccurate, misleading, biased or nationalistic work, as well as defamatory or unsubstantiated allegations, undisclosed conflicts and material creating unacceptable legal or reputational risk.
The Director of Policy will seek to mediate disagreements between the author and the Centre. If differences cannot be resolved, the piece will not be published. Authors approve the edited text before scheduling. Minor formatting, spelling, house-style, headline and SEO changes may subsequently be made without renewed approval; substantive changes require it.
Exclusivity and withdrawal
From initial submission, the pitch or commentary must not be shared with another publication or be under consideration elsewhere while CISES considers it. If there is no initial response within seven working days, this restriction automatically lapses.
Following pitch approval or an agreement to consider a full piece, exclusivity continues until publication, rejection or withdrawal. Authors may withdraw at any point before publication, but should notify the Director of Policy as early as possible and submit only if they intend to publish with CISES.
Publication timing
Following author approval, we aim to publish within five working days, particularly for time-sensitive analysis. This is an aim, not a guarantee, and depends on internal review and scheduling.
Longer pieces, graphics, tables and issues requiring clarification can extend the overall process. Carefully checking the draft and sources before submission helps avoid delays.
Copyright, promotion and republication
Authors retain copyright. By agreeing to publication, they grant CISES the right to publish, archive, promote and adapt the commentary for its channels, including social graphics, extracts, newsletters and video material.
Republication elsewhere requires prior permission from CISES and acknowledgement of the original CISES publication, including a link or tag where applicable.
Corrections and post-publication concerns
Report errors or relevant post-publication conflicts to alexander.anderson@cises.org. Corrections to factual inaccuracies will carry a correction notice to preserve transparency. Minor typographical corrections do not require a factual correction notice.
Withdrawal after publication is handled as a correction or retraction matter rather than ordinary pre-publication withdrawal. Failure to disclose a relevant conflict may result in retraction.
Interested in contributing regularly?
The CISES Fellowship Programme is a separate in-house affiliation for experienced professionals contributing high-quality analytical output. It is not a training role, internship or early-career pathway.
Eligible applicants include mid-career professionals with postgraduate, doctoral or postdoctoral study and at least four years of applied experience; experienced professionals in government, the armed forces, international organisations or related sectors currently undertaking such study; and established practitioners or analysts demonstrating independent analytical judgement and subject expertise.
Fellows are expected to produce at least one high-quality written analytical output per calendar month. Failure to meet this standard without prior communication may lead to review or removal. Initial appointments are normally at Associate Fellow level; advancement is discretionary and depends on sustained contribution quality.
We prefer prospective Fellows to have published at least one Expert Commentary with CISES so both sides can assess editorial and analytical alignment. Expert Commentary and Fellowship remain separate: publication does not guarantee Fellowship, and Fellowship is not a condition of publication.
Explore the Fellowship ProgrammeHave an idea?
Send a 100–200-word pitch or a completed, unpublished Expert Commentary, together with your relevant expertise and required declarations.
Alexander Anderson
Director of Policy
alexander.anderson@cises.org