Study title

This is a cross-sectional dataset with 608 observations. Variables are organised thematically by respondent attitudes to international security threats, the importance of foreign policy goals and the European Union. The first sub-sample consists of 64 members of the Defence Academy, where the survey was fielded in December of 2016 (after the election of President Trump, but before he took office). Ninety-three percent are active military (including representatives of all branches). The second sub-sample consisted of 533 members of RUSI and the RUSI extended network, and that survey was fielded in March-April of 2017 (before the 2017 General Election was announced). Forty-two percent had served in the military (in all three branches).This project seeks to explain how security policy is developed in the UK, and suggest how relationships between different security and defence agencies can be improved. Security policies protect the borders of a nation-state and the security of its citizens and include military, economic, environmental and cyber security policies. These policies are designed and implemented by different agencies including military organizations, the intelligence community, and government departments such as the Cabinet Office and the Ministry of Defence. We live in a fast-paced world where security threats may unexpectedly emerge from state actors such as the Syrian government, or non-state actors such as terrorist organizations. In this rapidly changing security environment it is paramount that national security policies be designed with enough flexibility so as to increase the likelihood of success. Important constraints can hinder this need for flexibility. One such constraint is that members of the security and defence community might fear losing support, appearing as incompetent, or harming the reputation of their agency if they fail to implement a security policy they had previously committed to implementing. This can make them wary of...