monocle : I do not want to pursue a PhD since I am not interested in such exercise (I enjoyed doing my master's thesis, but a PhD thesis would just not be my cup of tea. I like doing some research, but researching for years would most likely annoy me, a lot) and I do not think it would bring me anything really essential, considering what I want to do. I already hold the LL.M. equivalent (French Master 2) in Public International Law, and hopefully by the end of this academic year I'll hold another LL.M. (a "proper" one this time) in International Humanitarian Law (law of armed conflict) and Human Rights. AND if I am admitted to one of these programs and make it through, I would also have a M.A. in International Security. PhDs are usually useful when you want to research more about a topic or become a professor/specialized scholar ; which is not what I want to be.
Regarding searching on LinkedIn I already did that but I could not find many people this way. Maybe I did not search correctly though. I'll give it a shot again.
Thank you very much for your input monocle !
went_away : Regarding the programs : what do you think about Columbia ? I am not sure at all I am going to be admitted there but I have been wondering if it would be good to be in NYC to study international security. D.C. looks like it's the place to be, right ? Plus the program director, when presenting this program, says that they do a trip during the second year in D.C. to see the policy-making etc (obviously if you are already in D.C. you can see that everyday, right ?) and that many of their professors come from D.C. (so I also assume that if they go to Columbia to give some lessons, they probably do the same in D.C. schools ?). So even in the case the Columbia program is slightly better than some other program in D.C., it would still be better to go to D.C., right ? I guess there are many more opportunities to seize there ? (obviously if it happens that the program in Columbia is WAY better than a D.C. program then what I said above is irrelevant)
Regarding your advice about people who have military experience : I think the pathways are different. I may be wrong but I guess that apart from former commissioned officers and people who worked in the "high spheres" of the military, most people with military experience working in security would have a clear and very, very strong advantage in field positions, right ? With my background and what I want to do, I am not too worried, since I guess (I may be wrong, once again), that most people with military experience who want to work in security stuff end up on the field because of their experience, right ? Again, apart from former commissioned officers and the likes who have a more theoretical/management/strategic approach to security than privates and NCOs.
Thanks for your advices !