Acta Universitatis Danubius. Relationes Internationales

Impact of Ideological Bias on Intelligence Analysis

Mircea Mocanu — 2025-07-17

This paper intends to explore the consequences of considering that Intelligence support is a communication process between the analyst and the decision-maker. This is important when working to identify ways to improve the quality of intelligence analysis. There are multiple studies on communication process and general analysis to build upon, but there are few interdisciplinary approaches between psychology and intelligence theory. Current approach uses a systemic view of the intelligence cycle as open system and applies psychological concepts and security/analytical requirements. Observation of intelligence failures and intelligence analysis experience, as methods employed in systemic logic, lead to relevant conclusions regarding the main factors to be considered for improving intelligence analysis. Main results of this approach point to the importance of understanding the psychological determinants of the key participants in Intelligence support. The implications of controlling the factors able to corrupt intelligence analysis have practical value for the work of researchers and practitioners in intelligence. This approach opens avenues for better understanding analytical errors and for identifying ways to preserve the quality of Intelligence support, at both individual and institutional levels. Conclusions of such research may extend to the quality of public debates in the media.

Leadership and Regional Security Architecture: Between Strategic Stability and Defense Diplomacy

Alin Mihăiță Goga — 2025-07-31

This study explores the critical interface between military leadership and regional security architecture, arguing that the strategic decisions of military leaders not only shape operational effectiveness but also exert a profound influence on diplomatic dynamics within multilateral defense frameworks. By analyzing command structures, defense diplomacy initiatives, and regional interoperability mechanisms across distinct case contexts, the article demonstrates how leadership paradigms grounded in proactive engagement and institutional trust-building underpin strategic stability. Through qualitative exploration of policy frameworks, joint-training protocols, and senior-level military diplomacy, the author elucidates three emergent leadership modalities hierarchical command, strategic-diplomatic engagement, and adaptive hybrid models each contributing to the cohesion and resilience of regional security regimes. The findings suggest that military leadership which integrates diplomatic acuity with operational command fosters environments conducive to cooperative security, challenging traditional depictions of military hierarchies as rigidly coercive. Drawing on theoretical insights from regional security studies, the paper contends that defense diplomacy enacted by military leaders can catalyze institutional legitimacy, enhance crisis responsiveness, and strengthen trust across state and alliance networks. Ultimately, the article proposes a reconceptualization of military leadership in international security theory, emphasizing its dual role as a driver of both strategic stability and normative institutionalization. The conclusion underscores the imperative for comprehensive leader development programmes that fuse diplomatic competence with operational expertise, advocating policy frameworks that institutionalize defense diplomacy as a pillar of regional security governance.

Strategic Communication Leadership in International Security Crises: A Case Study of Military Discourse in the Russo‑Ukrainian Conflict

Cornel Zamfirescu — 2025-07-31

This study critically examines how senior Ukrainian military leaders exercised communication leadership during the 2022–2023 hybrid crisis, situating strategic messaging within the broader framework of defense diplomacy and international legitimacy. Drawing on theoretical frameworks in strategic narrative (Navumau et al., 2024) and crisis communication within hybrid warfare contexts, the analysis builds upon situational crisis communication theory to contextualize how discourse can mitigate reputational threats. Through qualitative thematic content analysis, the article systematically evaluates official speeches, press releases, social media messaging, and rapid-response platforms, highlighting shifts in discourse in response to Russian disinformation campaigns. The findings reveal a deliberate transition toward proactive, narratively coherent, and digitally adaptive communication, emphasizing transparent yet strategically calibrated messaging. This approach corresponded with substantial increases in public trust, rising above 80% and reinforced Ukraine’s credibility within NATO-aligned international networks. The study underscores the pivotal role of communicational leadership in sustaining military legitimacy and alliance cohesion, advocating for its integration into defense governance, crisis protocols, and IR scholarship on information resilience. By offering original empirical insights into the communicational dimension of hybrid warfare, this article equips military educators, policymakers, and international relations scholars with a refined framework for understanding and operationalizing discourse as strategic defense in contested security environments.

Diaspora Militancy and Homeland Security Dilemmas: Between Transnational Loyalty and State Sovereignty

Catalin Basescu — 2025-07-31

This article examines the complex and often contentious relationship between diaspora communities exhibiting militant tendencies and the homeland security strategies of their countries of origin. It explores how transnational affiliations, ideological mobilizations, and dual loyalties challenge traditional notions of state sovereignty, internal cohesion, and national security. Building on theories of transnationalism, hybrid citizenship, and extended security frameworks, the study investigates how certain diasporas such as the Tamil, Kurdish, and Chechen communities have been perceived not only as political actors in host societies but also as security threats or insurgent supporters by their states of origin. Using a comparative case study approach, the article analyzes the dual role of these diasporas: as external pressure groups lobbying for human rights and autonomy, and simultaneously, as entities implicated in funding, legitimizing, or facilitating armed resistance. It highlights the tension between host country protections (e.g., free expression and political asylum) and homeland security interests, raising critical questions about international cooperation in surveillance, intelligence sharing, and counter-militancy measures. The study argues that diaspora militancy occupies a liminal zone in international relations, where legal norms, sovereignty claims, and diasporic agency intersect in volatile configurations. Ultimately, the article proposes a set of normative and policy recommendations for states navigating this dilemma, advocating for multi-level governance models that balance national security imperatives with democratic principles and the rights of transnational citizens.