ISC Defence Intelligence publishes open-source intelligence research and analysis for WOME (Weapons, Ordnance, Munitions, and Explosives) professionals, explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) practitioners, munitions engineers, and members of the defence and security community.
Our editorial mission is to deliver rigorous, standards-grounded, and independently verified analysis of defence procurement, industrial developments, regulatory changes, and capability advancements. All content is sourced from publicly available information and conforms to NATO STANAG 2022 methodology.
ISC Defence Intelligence maintains absolute editorial independence. We:
All published analysis applies NATO STANAG 2022 methodology for source evaluation and attribution. Sources are classified on two dimensions:
| Rating | Definition |
|---|---|
| A | Completely reliable. Official government sources, verified primary documents, published standards bodies. |
| B | Usually reliable. Quality broadsheet media, established think-tanks, named expert sources. |
| C | Fairly reliable. Regional media, industry reports, specialist blogs with identified authors. |
| D | Not usually reliable. Trade publications, anonymous commentary, social media from unnamed sources. |
| E | Unreliable. Unverified claims, conspiracy theories, deliberate misinformation. |
| F | Cannot be judged. Source unknown, context missing, or authenticity unverifiable. |
| Rating | Definition |
|---|---|
| 1 | Confirmed. Corroborated by multiple independent A/B sources or primary documentation. |
| 2 | Probably true. Consistent reporting from A/B sources with minor discrepancies. |
| 3 | Possibly true. Single B-source reporting or multiple C sources with consistency. |
| 4 | Doubtful. D sources or A/B sources with significant unexplained inconsistencies. |
| 5 | Improbable. D/E sources, contradicted by A/B sources, or significant credibility gaps. |
| 6 | Cannot be judged. Insufficient information or context to assess. |
Who is accountable. Every article published by ISC Defence Intelligence is issued under the editorial responsibility of a named person, Steve Sawyers MIExpE VR, for Integrated Synergy Consulting Ltd. That responsibility is not transferable and does not change according to which tools were used to produce the work. If an ISC article is wrong, a named human is answerable for it.
What we use. ISC uses its own domain-trained research and drafting system, built for weapons, ordnance, munitions and explosives analysis. It is used to gather and organise open-source material, to check claims against the governing technical regime, to structure analysis, and to prepare drafts. It is directed by an analyst, and it works only from source material that has already been collected and rated. It does not originate facts, and nothing it produces reaches publication unverified.
The review an article passes before publication. Sources are rated for reliability and credibility under NATO STANAG 2022. Ordnance and classification claims are checked against the governing regime for the nature in question, whether UK DSA 03.OME, NATO STANAG and AOP, US DESR 6055.09, or the relevant national authority. Quantitative claims are validated arithmetically, and any figure without a traceable source is removed rather than estimated. The draft is then put through an independent factual review before release. Structure, sourcing and internal consistency are checked against a defined standard, and an article that fails any of these is held rather than published.
What we do not do. We do not publish unreviewed machine output. We do not present an AI system as an author, because authorship carries accountability that cannot be assigned to a tool. We do not use AI to generate imagery presented as photography of real events. We do not use AI to fabricate quotations, sources or attributions.
Regulatory position. Article 50(4) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, the EU Artificial Intelligence Act, requires disclosure of artificially generated text published to inform the public on matters of public interest. That obligation expressly does not apply where the content has undergone human review or editorial control and a natural or legal person holds editorial responsibility for the publication. ISC meets that condition, and states its editorial responsibility on every article regardless.
If you believe something is wrong. The corrections process below applies to every article, whatever produced the first draft. Verified corrections are incorporated and credited.
If you identify an error in a published article, please contact us:
Email: [email protected]
Response time: We aim to respond within 48 hours
Individuals, organisations, or official bodies mentioned in critical context in our articles have the right to submit a response for publication. We provide a 30-day window from publication.
Accepted responses will be published with an editor's note indicating that this is a right of reply submission. They will appear as a response to the original article, not as editorial content.
Send your complaint to: [email protected]
Include: Article title/date, specific claim disputed, explanation of your concern
The Editorial Director will respond within 20 working days with:
If you are dissatisfied with the editorial response, you may escalate to the Managing Director:
Email: [email protected]
ISC Defence Intelligence is not subject to IMPRESS or other press regulatory bodies. However, we remain subject to:
ISC Defence Intelligence maintains strict conflict-of-interest policies:
All ISC Defence Intelligence journalism adheres to:
Editorial: [email protected]
Management: [email protected]
General: [email protected]