How do the motivations to support the use of armed force in times of conflict affect the outlooks of those well-versed in security matters? Do those who support use of national troops out of concern with national interests display similar thought processes? What about those who perceive a nation should intervene militarily out of a moral obligation to act? Questions such as these are tricky to tackle, and the field of international relations has typically attempted to address such issues using qualitative methods such as in-depth interviews. In this exploratory paper, we analyse the first-ever national survey of security elites in the United Kingdom (UK) to help examine these issues from a quantitative perspective. Using network entailment models, we search for shared structures in terms of what threats are considered critical and what foreign policy goals should prevail among future military commanders, staff officers, and security experts who support military intervention.
