Tag: sanctions
Full control
Bassam Barabandi, a former Syrian diplomat, writes:
Talk in Syria is that a government-sponsored money laundering commission has unleashed a wave of investigations on 29 major business elites, including Dureid Assad, Jaber , Hamsho and most significantly Rami Makhlouf himself and his family (his brothers and his father).
Reports are that Rami Makhlouf’s offices at the free zone were raided by the money laundering commission. The scope of the investigations has sent shockwaves into Latakia too. Hamsho’s tender with the Education Ministry is supposedly under investigation
Source:
Analysis:
- The Assad regime is a big mafia and the the fight within the family was expected
- Assad does not want any center of power within his inner circle.
- All the businesspeople who are now under house arrest have created and sponsored local militias in the past 8 years. Some of these militias started challenging Assad forces, especially in Latakia and Hama.
- The regime may feel more confident to do such big step against the warlords after winning in Idlib. This step could be encouraged and/or pushed by Russia to counter Iranian economic influence.
- aSnctioning of Samer Foz was a clear message for the regime that his investments and assets outside Syria by using businesspeople as cover do not help or provide protection. So he is burning all the known names and their affiliations to make it harder for the West to sanction the new faces.
- Asaad wants to send the message that he and his family are in full control.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Trump caves on Iran
President Trump has apparently agreed in principle to a meeting with Iran’s President Rouhani. Best bet is that this might occur at the United Nations in September or October. The big question is what the conditions are: has Trump offered sanctions relief and has Rouhani agreed to talk about the detailed provisions of the nuclear deal, Iran’s missiles, or Iran’s behavior in the region? The answer to the former is clearly yes; the answer to the latter is that there is no evidence Rouhani has agreed to discuss any of these matters. Trump has caved.
It has been clear for some time that Trump was begging for a meeting with the Iranians, who have resisted unless promised sanctions relief. He now says he wants a discussion of missiles as well as extension of the nuclear deal (aka the sunset clauses). He has made it explicitly clear that Iran can hope for economic relief and that he is not looking for regime in Tehran. Both are major concessions. The latter, a no regime change pledge, was a prelude to President Obama’s negotiations with the Iranians and one that will displease many in the Trump Administration, especially National Security Advisor Bolton.
If the sunset clauses of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) were the major issue, it would have been much wiser to stay in the agreement than to renege on it. Missiles were never part of the JCPOA. There was no reason to withdraw from it on that basis. Trump is essentially retreating from the more extreme positions held in the Administration, which regard the JCPOA as fundamentally flawed (and therefore extension would not be desirable) and the Iranian regime as an illegitimate one that should be replaced before any further negotiations.
Trump did not mention Iran’s regional behavior. This could of course have been an unintentional omission. Surely the Israelis, the regional Sunni powers, and America’s Iran hawks will be unhappy about it. On the merits it is the most important issue right now. Iran is actively involved in arming and training militia forces in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen. This is not an issue that should be ignored, though once again: the US would have been better off had we raised the issue while still a party to the JCPOA.
Only time will tell whether the meeting with Rouhani will actually come off, but President Trump is clearly ready and willing, despite Iran’s regional behavior and Israeli resistance to the JCPOA. He has decided to cut and run. But he is erratic, vulnerable to pressure, and may change his mind.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks | July 29 – Aug 2
US-China Relations: The View From Cities And States | July 29, 2019 | 9:30 AM – 11:45 AM | Brookings Institution | Falk Auditorium, 1775 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036 | Register Here
Throughout the United States, local leaders are stepping onto the world stage. Governors and mayors have expanded their international portfolios, including by launching initiatives to attract investment and jointly address transnational challenges like climate change. While economic interests previously guided much of sub-national outreach, cultural exchange and scientific partnership are also becoming important forces of attraction.
The U.S.-China relationship is no exception to this trend. Despite the shift in Washington toward viewing China as a strategic competitor, many state and local leaders continue to explore ways to seize opportunities for closer collaboration with Chinese counterparts. What are the key motivations for this outreach at the sub-national level? Are such efforts generating positive benefits? What effect, if any, are deepening relations between local governments in the United States and China having on the overall bilateral relationship? Are there risks from deepening sub-national U.S.-China relations that deserve greater scrutiny?
On July 29, the John L. Thornton China Center at Brookings will host a public event to explore the costs, benefits, and impacts of sub-national exchanges between the United States and China. Oregon Governor Kate Brown will join a keynote conversation moderated by award-winning journalist and author James Fallows. A high-level panel of experts and practitioners will then convene to discuss the potential promises and pitfalls of sub-national connections within the U.S.-China relationship.
Speakers:
Introduction
- Cheng Li, Director – John L. Thornton China Center, Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy
Keynote Conversation
- The Hon. Kate Brown, Governor – State of Oregon
Moderator:
- James Fallows, National Correspondent – The Atlantic, Co-Author – “Our Towns: A 100,000-Mile Journey into The Heart of America”
Discussion
- The Hon. Bob Holden, Former Governor – State of Missouri, Chairman and CEO –
United States Heartland China Association - Amb. Nina Hachigian, Deputy Mayor of International Affairs – City of Los Angeles
- Reta Jo Lewis, Senior Fellow and Director of Congressional Affairs – The German Marshall Fund of the United States
Moderator:
- Ryan Hass, The Michael H. Armacost Chair, Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center for East Asia Policy Studies, John L. Thornton China Center
Development of Environmental Law and Enforcement in China | July 29,
This year marks the 40th anniversary of the establishment of the diplomatic relations between the United States of America and the People’s Republic of China. Over the past decade, the U.S. government, civil society, academia, and businesses have been actively engaging with China on environmental governance through capacity-building, knowledge transfer, and other mechanisms. These efforts have been instrumental in transferring best practices in environmental governance, helping China develop towards an effective and predictable environmental regulatory system, encouraging the growth of a vibrant community of environmental advocates and officials, and moving towards a more level playing field for U.S. businesses.
In recent years, the Chinese government has made efforts to address environmental quality that have included the enactment of new laws on air pollution, water pollution, and contaminated sites, and provisions strengthening enforcement. While PM2.5 levels have declined significantly, much work remains to get air quality protective of public health, and formidable water pollution and soil contamination problems remain.
Top U.S. government environmental lawyers will join John Pendergrass, Vice President of ELI, and Jennifer Turner, Director of the Woodrow Wilson Center’s China Environment Forum to compare their recent experiences, and to discuss Chinese environmental law developments, new approaches to enforcement, and the effects of Chinese environmental laws on U.S. companies.
Panelists:
- Jeffrey Clark, Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD), Department of Justice
- Matt Leopold, General Counsel, Environmental Protection Agency
- Jon Brightbill, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD), Department of Justice
Moderator:
- John Pendergrass, Vice President, Programs and Publications, Environmental Law Institute
- Jennifer L. Turner, Director, China Environment Forum & Manager, Global Choke Point Initiative
Ukraine’s Parliamentary Elections | July 29, 2019 | 12:30 AM – 2:00 PM | The Atlantic Council | 1030 15th St NW, 12th Floor, Washington, DC 20005 | Register Here
The July 2019 parliamentary elections are a pivotal event in Ukraine’s history as the people voted to elect a new parliament, which will form a new government. Running with a strong anti-corruption message, then political outsider Volodymyr Zelenskyy won a crushing victory in April’s presidential elections and again in the Rada elections, where exit polls show his party securing around 43 percent of the vote, a historic result and the most decisive of its kind in Ukraine since 1991. With an outright majority in the Rada a possibility, Zelenskyy may now have the mandate he needs to implement his anti-corruption program.
Panelists:
- Adrian Karatnycky, Senior Fellow & Co-Director of
the Ukraine in Europe Initiative, Eurasia Center, Atlantic Council - Ambassador John Herbst, Director, Eurasia Center, Atlantic Council
- Dr. Anders Åslund, Senior Fellow, Eurasia Center, Atlantic Council
Moderator:
- Melinda Haring, Editor, UkraineAlert, Atlantic Council
Hong Kong and the Indo-Pacific Political Economy with former U.S. Consul GeneralKurt Tong | July 30, 2019 | 4:00 PM – 5:00 PM | CSIS Headquarters, 2nd Floor | 1616 Rhode Island Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036 | Register Here
Kurt Tong, former U.S. Consul General to Hong Kong and Macau, has returned to the United States following a three-year tour and has retired from the Foreign Service. He will join us at CSIS to discuss Hong Kong’s relationship with China and comment on the future direction of American economic policy in the region.
Speakers:
Introduction
- Matthew P. Goodman, Senior Vice President and Simon Chair in Political Economy, CSIS
Keynote Address
- Amb. Kurt Tong, U.S. Consul General to Hong Kong and Macau
Armchair Discussion
- Amb. Kurt Tong, U.S. Consul General to Hong Kong and Macau
- Scott Kennedy, Senior Adviser, Freeman Chair in China Studies and Director, Project on Chinese Business and Political Economy, CSIS
Assessing Space Security: Threat and Response | July 31, 2019 | 2:00 PM – 3:30 PM | Brookings Institution | Falk Auditorium, 1775 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036 | Register Here
It is a dynamic and fast-moving time with regard to the security of the outer space environment. In March 2018, India conducted a successful anti-satellite test. Russia and China continue to advance their anti-satellite weapons capabilities by developing various technologies, from laser weapons to ground-based anti-satellite systems. In response to this increasingly contested environment, President Donald Trump proposed the creation of a U.S. Space Force in 2018. The idea was not without controversy. While some experts lauded the decision, others advocated instead for a Space Command. A year in, that debate continues.
On July 31, the Foreign Policy program at Brookings will host a discussion on the evolving threats to space security and how the United States and the international community can most effectively respond to these challenges. Brookings Senior Fellow for Security and Strategy Frank Rose will be joined by an expert panel including Todd Harrison; Mallory Stewart; and Madelyn Creedon. Brookings Senior Fellow Michael O’Hanlon will moderate the discussion as well as share his thoughts on the issues.
Panelists:
- Madelyn R. Creedon, Former Principal Deputy Administrator – National Nuclear Security Administration, Nonresident Senior Fellow-the Brookings Institution
- Todd Harrison, Director, Defense Budget Analysis, Director, Aerospace Security Project and Senior Fellow, International Security Program – CSIS
- Frank A. Rose, Senior Fellow, Security and Strategy – Foreign Policy
- Mallory Stewart, Principal Technical Staff – Sandia National Laboratory Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance – U.S. Department of State
Moderator:
- Michael E. O’Hanlon, Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Director of Research – Foreign Policy, The Sydney Stein, Jr. Chair
The New Battle for the Atlantic | July 31,
The North Atlantic has historically played a critical role in the great power conflicts of the 20th Century, serving as a strategic bridge between the United States and Europe during both World Wars and the Cold War. For this reason, sea power has long been a core element of NATO’s deterrence posture. However, as the world enters the ‘maritime century’ – a period transformed by trade and communication across the world’s oceans – emerging technologies and a rapidly changing global political landscape have begun to reshape the maritime security environment in the North Atlantic.
The reemergence of great power competition is forcing NATO to reinvest in capabilities for the maritime domain, where it has historically held a razor thin advantage. Faced with mounting tensions between Russia and the Alliance and an increasingly sophisticated Russian navy, the United States and NATO must rebuild and adapt their strategy and capabilities to secure the strategic link between the United States and Europe in the increasingly contested North Atlantic region.
Magnus Nordenman, a noted expert on NATO and security in Northern Europe and the former director of the Transatlantic Security Initiative at the Atlantic Council, will join us to discuss these important issues, which are also highlighted in his recent book, The New Battle for the Atlantic: Emerging Naval Competition with Russia in the Far North.
Are Sanctions Working? | July 31, 2019 | 9:00 AM – 11:45 AM | CSIS Headquarters, 2nd Floor | 1616 Rhode Island Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036 | Register Here
The CSIS Energy & National Security Program is pleased to invite you to Are Sanctions Working?, a conference examining the state of U.S. sanctions―what is different, what is and is not working, and implications for U.S. foreign policy, the global economy, and the energy sector.
The United States has employed sanctions as a foreign policy mechanism for decades. In recent years, the United States has developed a new generation of more targeted, more agile economic sanctions. It has become increasingly reliant on these new tools, and its ambitions for their impact have increased.
Whether more robust sanctions regimes have won any clear victories is a matter of debate. In the last three years, U.S.-imposed unilateral and secondary sanctions regimes have sought to influence North Korea, Russia, Iran, and Venezuela. But countries that have been subject to sanctions for years have found ways to adjust to U.S. moves.
This conference will review the efficacy of the new style of U.S. sanctions, understand what is contributing to their success or failure, and gauge their future. Speakers will also explore how sustained use of sanctions is impacting one universally important sector: the energy sector.
Speakers:
- John J. Hamre, CSIS President and CEO
- Sarah Ladislaw, Senior Vice President; Director and Senior Fellow, Energy and National Security Program
- Heather A. Conley, Senior Vice President for Europe, Eurasia, and The Arctic; and Director Europe Program
- Matthew P. Goodman, Senior Vice President; Simon Chair in Political Economy and Senior Advisor for Asian Economics
- Jon B. Alterman, Senior Vice President, Zbigniew Brzezinski Chair in Global Security and Geostrategy, and Director Middle East Program
- Stephanie Segal, Deputy Director and Senior Fellow, Simon Chair in Political Economy
- Kevin Book, Senior Associate (Non-resident), Energy and National Security Program
- Jeffrey Mankoff, Deputy Director and Senior Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Program
- Moises Rendon, Director, The Future of Venezuela Initiative and Fellow, Americas Program
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Little by little is too little
On July 8 the United States Institute of Peace hosted a panel discussion titled “The North Korea Sanctions Regime a Year After Singapore.” The panel featured Dan Wertz, Program Manager at the National Committee on North Korea, Joshua Stanton, a DC-based lawyer who played a significant role in North Korea sanctions, Stephanie Kleine-Ahlbrandt, a member of the UN Panel of Experts (Resolution 1874) dealing with North Korea, and Elizabeth Rosenberg, Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security. Frank Aum, former Senior Advisor for North Korea at the Defense Department, moderated the discussion.
Stanton views the history of US leadership on North Korea issues as many “instant gratification policies” instead of better thought out and more effective long-term policies. North Korea is highly dependent on access to US financial systems because of the status of the dollar. Since many North Korean transactions have to go through US banks, financial sanctions blocking transactions and freezing North Korean accounts can be highly effective.
Stanton believes the conversation on sanctions relief is coming about two years too early. More pressure on the Kim regime is needed so that he has a diplomatic incentive to work with the US. Even small sanctions relief is enough for North Korea to catch a breather and continue the status quo. The argument that North Korea can’t survive without nuclear weapons and therefore won’t give them up is ahistorical, according to Stanton, because North Korea has survived for decades without nuclear weapons and can continue to do so. The threat to North Korea is mainly internal.
On possible sanctions relief, Stanton clarifies that Congress has set strict rules dependent not only on issues such as nuclear disarmament and denuclearization but also contingent on human rights, human trafficking, and other issues. The current direction in congress is towards stricter rules for sanctions relief, with the goal of complete, verifiable and undisputed denuclearization of North Korea. The US has to work together with its allies to set up financial sanctions that pressure Pyongyang while at the same time allowing transactions for non-military purposes that benefit the North Korean people. Humanitarian aid should be given to North Korea regardless of political or military actions since it benefits the poor and starving civilians, a point all the panelists agreed on.
Kleine-Ahlbrandt notes that the goal of the UN sanctions regime is to persuade North Korea to dismantle its nuclear and missile programs and prevent the proliferation of WMDs. Sanctions shouldn’t be the objective, which is to catalyze what she calls “effective dialogue.” At the same time the negative impact of sanctions on the economy and civilian population of North Korea should be limited. The UN sanctions regime is broad, but member states have insufficiently implemented the sanctions and evasion tactics by North Korean entities and individuals have undermined compliance. North Korea currently has full access to the international financial system through complicit foreign nationals, a network of agents, and cyberattacks aimed at financial institutions.
Wertz views the sanctions as having a threefold purpose: signaling to North Korea that provocative actions such as missile tests come at a cost, constraining progress on WMDs and other military capabilities, and coercing North Korea through sanctions pressure to make concessions and abandon the nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. Coercion is difficult because translating economic pressure to political actions is difficult. UN sanctions, which are focused on the missile and nuclear programs, can be modified if political consensus is reached within the UNSC on whether North Korea’s behavior warrants relief.
US sanctions are trickier since they are premised on a broad range of topics from WMDs to human rights, cyber-attacks, currency counterfeiting and more. The executive branch has some leeway on how it administers individual sanctions or waives them on a case by case basis, but to lift sanctions as a whole the White House has to certify to Congress that North Korea has made significant progress on several of the issues listed. This divergence of US and UN sanctions could potentially lead to a clash if North Korea abandons its nuclear program but doesn’t improve on human rights or other issues.
Wertz suggests that a program of phased sanctions relief in return for meaningful concessions on the nuclear program could be in the US interest down the road and lists five principles for sanctions relief:
- Any trade of sanctions relief for North Korean nuclear concessions should be premised on the ultimate goal of denuclearization but should also make sense on its own terms.
- The US should start with the sanctions that have the least direct connection to the nuclear program and can be most easily adjusted and snapped back.
- The US shouldn’t ease up on measures intended to deny hard currency to North Korea until it can guarantee the money won’t be funneled to military programs.
- Sanctions relief should be structured in a way that pushes North Korea towards an open economy and minimal respect for labor rights.
- If sanctions relief goes forward the United States and allies should continue to enforce sanctions that haven’t been lifted, but not expand the scope of sanctions.
Rosenberg suggests the lack of compliance with sanctions is in part because many individuals or companies don’t understand or know about the rules. Awareness and compliance protocols in industries other than finance are rare. Before sanctions are removed, Rosenberg says it is valuable to think about what unwinding sanctions could look like. Sanctions shouldn’t be lifted as an incentive; behavioral change has to happen before sanctions are lifted because they are in place for specific concerns. Instead more work should be put into establishing communication and cultural as well as diplomatic exchanges as incentives, none of which require sanctions relief.
Rosenberg also warns that a “little-by-little” approach to removing sanctions in exchange for limited progress doesn’t work. North Korea’s track record of cheating on sanctions means incremental change might create a façade behind which North Korea can do as it pleases. The only politically viable way ahead for the US is major sanctions relief after North Korea makes major and verified progress on denuclearization.
Here is the video of the event:
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace picks April 12-17
- Iraq Under Abadi: Bridging Sectarian Divides in the Face of ISIS | Monday, April 13th | 9:00- 10:15 AM | American Enterprise Institute | REGISTER TO ATTEND | At the request of Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, US warplanes began airstrikes against ISIS positions in Tikrit on March 25. But ISIS isn’t the only challenge standing in the way of a stable, unified, democratic Iraq. How should the United States approach Iranian influence in Iraq? Can Iraq ever achieve a true power-sharing democracy in spite of the sectarian divides between Kurds, Sunnis, and Shi’ites? A day before Abadi meets with President Obama in Washington, join a panel discussion on the future of America’s strategic partnership in Iraq. Speakers include: Brian Katulis, Center for American Progress, Denise Natali, National Defense University and Douglas Ollivant, New America Foundation and Mantid International.
- The Iran Nuclear Deal | Monday, April 13th 2015 | 11:00-1:30 PM | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace | REGISTER TO ATTEND| What are the short and long-term obstacles to finalizing and sustaining a nuclear deal with Iran, and how would a U.S.-Iran nuclear detente impact ongoing conflicts and long-standing alliances in the Middle East? The two panels will focus on the future of the deal, and the regional implications of the deal. Speakers include: Jessica Tuchman Mathews, George Perkovich, Karim Sadjadpour, Yezid Sayigh, Frederic Wehrey, Ali Vaez, and David Sanger
- ISIS: The State of Terror| Tuesday, April 14th| 12:00-1:15 PM| New America | REGISTER TO ATTEND | In 2014, ISIS shocked the world with their brutality and the speed with which they took a large swath of Iraqi and Syrian territory. One year later, most countries, including the United States, are still trying to figure out what is driving this group and how best they can be defeated. J.M. Berger, an investigative journalist and non-resident fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Project on U.S. Relations with the Islamic World, brings a uniquely qualified perspective to the analysis of the challenges posed by ISIS’s rise. In ISIS: State of Terror, Berger and Jessica Stern, a lecturer on terrorism at Harvard University, draw upon intelligence sources, law enforcement officials, and their own groundbreaking research to explain the genesis, evolution, and implications of the Islamic State—and how we can fight it. The authors analyze the tools ISIS fighters use both to frighten innocent citizens and lure new soldiers—including the “ghoulish pornography” of their pro-jihadi videos, the seductive appeal of “jihadic chic,” and its startlingly effective social media expertise.
- Setting the Stage for Peace in Syria | Tuesday, April 14th | 12:00-1:30 PM | The Atlantic Council | REGISTER TO ATTEND | After four years of conflict, the prospect of a stable Syria continues to be bleak, with a diplomatic solution nowhere in sight and military steps lacking in international support. In their report titled, Setting the Stage for Peace in Syria: The Case for a Syrian National Stabilization Force, authors Hof, Kodmani, and White present a new way forward – one that takes President Obama’s train and equip program to the next level forging a Syrian ground force which could constitute the core of the future Syrian Army.. How can this force change the dynamics of the conflict on the ground and how can the international community help build it? What other elements need to be in place to make this force an effective part of a broader resolution of the conflict? Speakers include: Ambassador Frederic C. Hof Senior Fellow, Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East, Atlantic Council, Bassma Kodmani Executive Director The Arab Reform Initiative, and Jeffrey White Defense Fellow The Washington Institute
- The Iran Nuclear Negotiations: Critical Issues | Thursday, April 16 | 12:00-1:00 PM |The Heritage Foundation | REGISTER TO ATTEND | The nuclear negotiations between Iran and the P5 plus 1 have entered a crucial phase ahead of the March 30 deadline for a framework agreement. examine some of the key issues involved in the negotiations and assess some of the pitfalls that must be avoided if an acceptable agreement is to be reached by the June 30th deadline for a final agreement. Speakers include, Fred Fleitz Senior Vice President for Policy and Programs, Center for Security Policy, Greg Jones Senior Researcher, Nonproliferation Policy Education Center and Henry Sokolski. Executive Director, Nonproliferation Policy Education Center.
- Geopolitics of Energy Security in the Eastern Mediterranean | Wednesday, April 15 | 12:00-5:oo PM| American Security Project | REGISTER TO ATTEND| A half day conference examining the energy security challenges faced in the Eastern Mediterranean. Over the course of three panel discussions, the event will first examine the geopolitical importance of the region, focusing on the recent discovery of major natural gas fields in Israel.The next panel will look at the challenges of promoting energy cooperation throughout the Eastern Mediterranean, and will attempt to offer prescriptions for increasing energy security. The final panel will discuss the potential role that the US can play in the region in terms of investment opportunities and regional cooperation.
- Assessing U.S. Sanctions: Impact, Effectiveness, Consequences | Thursday, April 16 | 8:45- 3:30 PM |Woodrow Wilson Center | REGISTER TO ATTEND | The unfolding crisis in Ukraine has the United States and its European allies struggling to find a way to respond to Russia’s actions and continuing violation of Ukrainian sovereignty. To date, that response is centered on calibrated but escalating sanctions against Russia. Once again, American reliance on sanctions as an essential foreign policy tool is on display. Past and current examples of sanctions, including Iran, South Africa, Cuba and others will provide important context for understanding the role that sanctions play in American statecraft.
- Honeypots and Sticky Fingers: The Electronic Trap to Reveal Iran’s Illicit Cyber Network | Friday, April 17 | 2:00-5:00 PM | American Enterprise Institute | REGISTER TO ATTEND | The West has severely underestimated Iran’s cyberwarfare capabilities. Despite sanctions, the Islamic Republic has managed to build a sophisticated information technology (IT) infrastructure, and new intelligence indicates that the Iranian regime may be maintaining front companies in the West to obtain cyber technology. How can the United States and its allies enhance their security and combat Iran in cyberspace?. General Keith Alexander, former commander of US Cyber Command and former director of the National Security Agency, will deliver a keynote address.
RSS - Posts
