Search

Begin New Search Political Geography United States of America Publication Year within 3 Years Publication Year within 1 Year

201. Food Defence: The Securitisation of the Food Supply

Author:
Elaine Leão Inácio de Melo Andrade, Gilberto Carvalho de Oliveira, and Otniel Freitas-Silva
Publication Date:
04-2025
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Contexto Internacional
Institution:
Institute of International Relations, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro
Abstract:
The notion of food defence emerged in the USA following the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, reflecting the idea that the food sector constitutes a critical infrastructure for national security and that the food system must be defended against intentional acts, motivated by political or ideological reasons, that could cause large-scale damage to public health or the economy. This study draws on primary documentary sources on food defence, including government guidelines, laws, norms and regulations issued mainly in the USA, as well as secondary bibliographic sources related to the topic, and draws on insights from securitisation theory in order to show that food defence discourses, norms, guidelines and practices connect to a process of social construction of threats and risks, linked to the frameworks of bioterrorism and biodefence, subjecting the food sector to a process of securitisation. Based on this analysis, we aim to contribute, firstly, by deepening the problematisation of food defence, adding to the debate a political and security dimension. Without this discussion, we argue it is not possible to understand, rigorously and accurately, food defence’s defining core and its specificities within the conceptual constellation of food protection. Secondly, by resorting to the food defence case, we hope to contribute empirically to illustrate an expanded version of securitisation, drawing attention to the importance of a more eclectic and integrated look at the discursive and non-discursive aspects and the different logics that operate in the social construction of security.
Topic:
Food Security, Bioterrorism, Biodefense, Securitization, and Protection
Political Geography:
United States of America and North America

202. ‘Maximum pressure’ sanctions on Venezuela help US adversaries, hurt Venezuelans

Author:
William Tobin
Publication Date:
01-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
The “maximum pressure” strategy employed from 2018 to 2022 against the illegitimate Nicolás Maduro regime in Venezuela did not serve US interests. Stringent oil sanctions imposed on Venezuela forced the retreat of Western oil firms from the country, principally benefitting adversaries. During the maximum pressure campaign, Venezuela’s oil production was rerouted to China at discounted prices, Iran supplied the diluent Venezuela required for oil production, and Russian investors became more critical amid a dearth on Western investment. A democratic transition remained elusive while repression and human rights violations continued. Venezuelans suffered, US adversaries expanded their influence, and Maduro remained. The current system of issuing specific licenses for Western oil producers to operate in Venezuela has yielded superior results. The benefits of this policy have been the following: Venezuelan oil exports have been diverted to friendly nations. Treasury has increased visibility on all oil-related transactions, decreasing the clandestine shipment of oil through shadow tanker fleets operated by the Chinese defense establishment, Iran, or PDVSA. Compensation to the regime is limited to taxes and royalties, which are required by Venezuelan law. The system has enabled the return or reemployment of qualified engineers and technicians to restore production from degraded oilfield infrastructure. The incoming US administration should prioritize inflicting more harm on the regime and its enablers than the Venezuelan people—or US interests. To do so, sanctions must be linked to clear objectives. An uncalibrated reapplication of maximum pressure would cede influence to China, Russia, and Iran, while doing little to loosen the regime’s grip on power. Instead, the existing system of specific licenses should be maintained and expanded. To punish Maduro, the administration should continue to target individuals who enable his illegitimate rule, adding to the 180 individuals already sanctioned by the Treasury. A targeted sanctions policy—not maximum pressure—is the only way to ensure that US actions to confront the Maduro regime impose their desired effect, and do not play into the hands of Beijing, Moscow, or Tehran.
Topic:
Markets, Governance, Sanctions, Geopolitics, Economy, and Energy
Political Geography:
South America, Latin America, Venezuela, and United States of America

203. Open-Source AI is a National Security Imperative

Author:
Mike Sexton
Publication Date:
01-2025
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Third Way
Abstract:
America’s footprint in artificial intelligence is prodigious, and it is hard to overstate how consequential this is for the American national interest if it further develops with the right balance between innovation and guardrails. Into this new technology are two divergent directions on the basic structure of the innovation: open-source or company controlled. ChatGPT is the latter model and was developed and licensed by OpenAI. Meta’s LLaMa is an example of open-source AI.1 In this paper, we explore the benefits and drawbacks of open-source AI and conclude that open-source can help balance the safety and security we want from AI with the innovation necessary to set the standard for the world. Both models are right for innovation, safety, and competition. The increasing sophistication of AI raises concerns about risk. One of the chief issues is open-source AI, which a user can run without the developer’s supervision. History shows us that the benefits of open-source software are real but diffuse and nebulous; meanwhile its greatest risks are tangible but mostly hypothetical. Encryption is an example of an open-source success. It is an open-source dual-use technology that vexes the US government. But accepting and adapting to it has been more farsighted than fighting it. Almost every smartphone in the world runs an American-made operating system thanks in large part to Android being open-source. We should not assume the development of open-source AI will necessarily follow the same trajectory. Open-source AI increases the likelihood that no single AI chatbot corners the consumer market and that America remains the innovation leader in AI.
Topic:
National Security, Artificial Intelligence, Science and Technology, ChatGPT, OpenAI, and Innovation
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

204. 10 Years of Observing US-Russia Relations (09/18/2025)

Author:
Timothy Frye, Samuel Greene, Nina Khrushcheva, Maria Snegovaya, Joshua Tucker, and Alexander Cooley
Publication Date:
09-2025
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
The Harriman Institute
Abstract:
Please join the New York University Jordan Center for the Advanced Study of Russia and Harriman Institute at Columbia University for the concluding event in the New York-Russia Public Policy series, held in person at NYU. This panel of four distinguished researchers and commentators on Russia will reflect on a decade of observing U.S.-Russia relations, how the two countries represent their relations and understand their interests, and the challenges inherent in communicating the many nuances of these relationships. Our panelists will also speculate on what we are likely to see in the next decade to come.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, National Security, Bilateral Relations, and Democracy
Political Geography:
Russia, Eurasia, North America, and United States of America

205. Hegemony and International Alignment

Author:
Fernando Broner, Alberto Martin, Josefin Meyer, Christoph Trebesch, and Jiaxian Zhou Wu
Publication Date:
05-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:
This article explores the interplay between economic hegemony and political alignment. Using theoretical and empirical insights from Broner et al. (2024), we posit that hegemonic states, such as the U.S., foster political alignment, which enhances globalization. We use UN voting data to proxy for international alignment and show that hegemons induce alignment. This data has shortcomings, however. UN voting only covers the post-WWII period, refers to a narrow set of issues, and displays little time variation. As for military alliances, they were not widely used before the mid-20th century. We propose an alternative measure of alignment based on international treaties.
Topic:
Globalization, International Trade and Finance, Political Economy, Treaties and Agreements, Hegemony, Multipolarity, and Geoeconomics
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

206. Minerals diplomacy as geoeconomic statecraft: Implications for resource security priorities in a rapidly changing world

Author:
Cordelia Buchanan Ponczek
Publication Date:
10-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
Critical raw materials (CRMs) and rare earth elements (REEs) are essential for defence, emerging technologies, and the energy transition. However, supply chains remain highly concentrated, with China dominating much of the refining and processing. Asymmetries and choke points highlight the need to control these resources. Minerals diplomacy has become a central tool for geoeconomic actors, including the US and the EU, to secure CRMs and REEs, often through deals with resource-holding third countries. This creates new partnerships while heightening competition to bind third-party countries, which, in turn, seek to assert their agency. Minerals diplomacy blends cooperative, coercive, and binding elements, as governments combine bargaining, leverage, and deals to maintain access to critical resources. States are also deploying creative solutions, such as recycling and reusing mining waste, to reduce external dependencies and enable more self-reliant systems, but this requires effective public-private cooperation. The intensifying contest for CRMs and REEs exposes governance gaps. Accounting for local perspectives, establishing stronger international oversight and global benchmarks, and ensuring equitable outcomes could ease competition, give third-party countries a greater voice, and serve as a tool of geoeconomic soft power.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Economy, Trade, Supply Chains, Minerals, Energy, and Geoeconomics
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Asia, and United States of America

207. The geoeconomic turn in the Americas: The Dominican Republic at the centre of Washington’s return

Author:
Lauri Tähtinen
Publication Date:
09-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
The tide is turning rapidly as the United States shifts its response to China’s industrial rise, with Washington returning to the Western Hemisphere in search of not only new trade relationships but also industrial, foreign, and security policies. This shift reflects a geoeconomic turn in the Americas, where economic actors – from drug cartels to critical supply-chain partners – are increasingly treated as security concerns, blurring the line between commerce and security. The Dominican Republic is positioning itself as a partner in both the joint development of the Americas and US security. Its growing alignment with the United States reflects global shifts elsewhere, such as in Finland’s relationship with Washington. The Dominican Republic’s sustained economic growth and its location between the US territory of Puerto Rico and the region’s security challenges place it at the centre of Washington’s attempt to re-engineer hemispheric value chains and security partnerships.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Economic Growth, Trade, Supply Chains, and Geoeconomics
Political Geography:
Latin America, North America, and United States of America

208. Global development in crisis: Responding to America’s retreat

Author:
Sarah S. Stroup
Publication Date:
10-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
A definitive shift in both resources and rhetoric has upended the global development sector. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the policies of the new US administration, although many European states had already started reducing foreign aid budgets earlier. Beyond its vicious rhetoric and wrecking-ball approach, the Trump administration’s arguments echo three long-standing critiques that development professionals have made themselves. Development experts in the US and Europe argue that development goals have become too broad, aid has failed to reach local actors, and the sector is too technocratic and removed from the concerns of Northern publics. A renewed focus on poverty reduction, combined with power-sharing abroad and public engagement at home, may provide answers to these critiques. Achieving development outcomes may require focusing less on providing direct assistance and more on reducing the harms created by Western states in other arenas, including trade and finance.
Topic:
Development, Foreign Aid, and Budget
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

209. Jordan and the October 7th War: Between National Interests and Palestinian Solidarity

Author:
Ronen Yitzhak
Publication Date:
03-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies
Abstract:
In the latest issue of Tel Aviv Notes, Ronen Yitzhak examines the effects of the October 7 war on the politics and stability of Jordan.
Topic:
Politics, Bilateral Relations, October 7, and 2023 Gaza War
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Jordan, and United States of America

210. Safeguarding U.S. interests in a Ukraine war settlement

Author:
Jennifer Kavanagh
Publication Date:
02-2025
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Defense Priorities
Abstract:
The United States should pursue a peace deal in Ukraine that serves America’s best interests, even when these diverge from its European partners. The primary U.S. objective should be to achieve a “lasting peace” that endures over the long term. A final settlement of the Ukraine war should address five key issues: territory; ceasefire terms; arrangements for Ukraine’s future security; stabilizing relationships between Russia and NATO and Russia and the United States; and mutual assurances between Russia and Ukraine. Full resolution of all five dimensions would not be required to end a “hot war,” however. Issues of territory will be determined on the battlefield, and any ceasefire should be maintained with a demilitarized zone and some combination of a neutral, international monitoring force and remote and autonomous technologies, lke drones and sensors. Offering Ukraine a binding security commitment is not in U.S. interests, whether through NATO or otherwise. Instead, the best option is “armed neutrality,” which would leave Ukraine without external guarantees but help it build a credible, self-sufficient deterrent—with Europe leading the provision of military aid. Mutual security assurances between Ukraine and Russia, including restrictions on locations of forces and weapons, can reduce the risk of renewed conflict. The Trump administration should use willingness to talk about the future U.S. role in Europe’s security as a bargaining chip to get Russia to make necessary concessions. The United States gives up little by discussing these issues of high political value to Russia. Some changes in U.S. posture in Europe may also advance U.S. efforts to shift defense burdens to allies and partners.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, Strategic Interests, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America

211. Grand strategy: The limits of military force

Author:
Christopher McCallion
Publication Date:
03-2025
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Defense Priorities
Abstract:
Since the Cold War, the United States has engaged in a number of military conflicts abroad, yet despite its preponderant military power, it has been unable to translate force into political success, especially when it comes to nation-building. In the absence of another great power to constrain it, the United States initiated regime change wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, but by the same token it lacked an external imperative to devote the resources needed to achieve its ambitious nation-building goals. As costs and casualties mounted, public opinion soured. Policymakers thought U.S. technological superiority would keep casualties in these conflicts low and the attractiveness of liberal values would make nation-building easier. They underestimated how much coercive power would be needed on the ground to maintain order and the popular consent necessary for legitimate governments to emerge. Later attempts to intervene abroad with limited or no boots on the ground, as in Libya and Syria, were similarly unsuccessful, leaving vacuums of power, failed states, and long-term civil wars. Policymakers need to become more sober about the limits of military power. The United States’ abundant security means that it would benefit from more diplomacy and deal-making with adversaries, rather than threatening to overthrow or sanction their regimes.
Topic:
Security, Cold War, Regime Change, Grand Strategy, and Armed Conflict
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

212. Achieving burden-sharing: Retrenchment vs. conditionality

Author:
Brian Blankenship
Publication Date:
01-2025
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Defense Priorities
Abstract:
Observers and practitioners are frequently frustrated at the level of defense burden-sharing in U.S. alliances—alliance members’ contributions to collective defense objectives—and particularly at allies’ low level of investment in their own defense. This paper compares two approaches to soliciting burden-sharing in U.S. alliances: retrenchment and conditionality. Retrenchment refers to reductions in the amount or timing of wartime assistance the United States will provide to allies, including troop withdrawals. Conditionality, in turn, relies on threats to abandon allies unless they increase their defense efforts and does not necessarily entail reducing protection. Retrenchment may offer the greatest chance of success, particularly in cases where allies doubt the credibility of the United States’ threats to abandon them. Conditionality is likely to be nearly as effective as retrenchment in many other cases, particularly those in which allies take the U.S. threat of abandonment seriously and there is a compelling external threat. Retrenchment and conditionality can be complementary strategies. Retrenchment is effective in cases where conditionality is likely to fail, while conditionality is effective in cases where the United States might be unwilling to retrench due to fears that a revisionist power might seek regional hegemony. Burden-sharing is not without its downsides, including allies potentially desiring nuclear weapons. These risks might be greater if the United States retrenches but may not materialize in practice and are not necessarily insurmountable.
Topic:
NATO, Alliance, Defense Spending, and Burden Sharing
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

213. On Limited Nuclear Use in the Western Pacific

Author:
Mike Sweeney
Publication Date:
08-2025
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Defense Priorities
Abstract:
Introduction Would China or the United States use nuclear weapons in a conflict over Taiwan? If so, what would that look like in practice? This paper examines that dark prospect. It unfolds as a series of queries designed to highlight the key factors that could influence limited nuclear use in a war in the Western Pacific. Firm answers to these questions are not always forthcoming. The exact decision-making calculations related to nuclear employment—from both the Chinese and U.S. side—are impossible to state definitively in advance of the actual moment when such weapons might be utilized. Rather, the paper’s intent is to provide the reader insight into the issues that come into play when debating nuclear use in a Taiwan contingency. The goal is less hard answers and more a basis for further conversation. Examining nuclear use in the Western Pacific obviously should not be conflated with endorsing it. But avoiding nuclear employment in practice might hinge, in part, on better understanding the circumstances where it could come into play in advance. At a minimum, realistic examinations of nuclear use in the Western Pacific can further raise awareness of the escalation risks in any conflict over Taiwan.
Topic:
Nuclear Weapons, Weapons, Armed Conflict, Escalation, and Firms
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, Asia-Pacific, and United States of America

214. Target Taiwan: Limits of allied support

Author:
Lyle Goldstein
Publication Date:
10-2025
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Defense Priorities
Abstract:
The United States is counting on its allies for assistance in defending Taiwan, but alliances are hardly a cure-all for Taiwan’s defense. Australia has fought alongside America in every war for the last century, but there is little reason to think Canberra’s participation in a Taiwan scenario would make a serious difference, even taking into account the much-heralded AUKUS deal of 2021. South Korea is a powerful U.S. ally, and India is a growing and important partner, but neither is likely to meaningfully participate in a prospective Taiwan war. While certain East Asian countries, such as the Philippines, can offer access to advantageous locations, they will add no genuine military capability. Nor will European forces be involved at any more than a symbolic level. Japan is far and away the most important of America’s allies with respect to Taiwan, and Tokyo has been pushing hard for Washington to more fully embrace Taiwan’s defense. However, it’s unlikely Tokyo is ready to pull its weight in a war with China over Taiwan. Instead, Japan would likely opt for a middle way, refraining from dispatching military forces while allowing U.S. forces to use its bases.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Partnerships, Alliance, and AUKUS
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, Asia, South Korea, Philippines, and United States of America

215. The New Geopolitics and South Asia’s Trade Architecture – What Next?

Author:
Ganeshan Wignaraja, Amit Bhandari, and Aliasger Bootwalla
Publication Date:
05-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations
Abstract:
Geopolitics is increasingly intertwined with the economic destiny of South Asia. Even before the U.S. tariffs were rolled out, growing polycrises had hit the global economy, which has been struggling since the pandemic. South Asia seems a relatively bright spark of regional trade and growth. This paper analyses South Asia’s trade architecture in the backdrop of a sluggish world economy in the 2020s, and makes recommendations for closer regional economic integration.
Topic:
Economics, Geopolitics, Economic Growth, Tariffs, and Trade
Political Geography:
South Asia and United States of America

216. Hague Summit Series: Recalibrating Relations with Russia

Author:
Katarzyna Zysk
Publication Date:
06-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
At their 2024 Summit in Washington, NATO leaders reiterated that Russia “remains the most significant and direct threat” and that “the possibility of an attack against Allies’ sovereignty and territorial integrity” could not be excluded. They committed to reassess and overhaul NATO’s strategy and policy towards Russia in the light of the radically altered security environment.[1] In the run-up to the Hague Summit, debates have intensified over whether to declare the 1997 NATO–Russia Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security (NRFA) void.[2] Russia’s blatant violations of the act, including repeated acts of military aggression, extensive nuclear coercion and escalation in the grey-zone, large-scale military build-up, and, in particular, its brutal war against Ukraine have made the document increasingly untenable as a foundation for mutual relations. Moscow has openly declared itself at war with the west for years, yet it has simultaneously exploited the reassurance measures embedded in the document to undermine NATO’s security and cohesion.
Topic:
International Relations, Defense Policy, NATO, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and United States of America

217. Hague Summit Series: NATO-Ukraine

Author:
Tony Lawrence
Publication Date:
06-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
Russia's war in Ukraine shows few signs of ending. Across Europe, there is a widely held view that the outcome of the war will be critically important to determining the continent's future security: Ukraine must prevail. This view, however, does not appear to be shared by the second Trump administration which, after a brief attempt to negotiate a (unjust) solution, seems unable to deliver on the president's campaign promise to bring peace, in particular if this involves being tough on Russia. Differences between the US and most European Allies regarding both the conditions for ending the war and Ukraine's longer-term integration into Euro-Atlantic security structures present one of the greatest dangers to the transatlantic relationship in the years ahead. More immediately, uncertainty about how to handle these differences presents the greatest risk that NATO's forthcoming summit in The Hague will not be seen as a success.
Topic:
NATO, European Union, Peace, Armed Conflict, Military Aid, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, Ukraine, and United States of America

218. Hague Summit Series: The Central Issue. Defence Spending

Author:
Felix Gasper
Publication Date:
06-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
In 2014, the NATO Allies agreed that within a decade, they would spend at least 2% of their GDP on defence. Following Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and war in the Donbas, and its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the European Allies have focused more on strengthening their military posture. Donald Trump's insistence that Europe should take larger responsibility for its own security and the doubts he has sown regarding America’s commitment to its NATO obligations have strengthened European resolve and emphasised the need for the continent to foster greater military independence, including from the US. Trump’s vigorous return to these ideas at the start of his second term will make defence spending, in particular the Secretary General’s proposal for a new NATO target, the key agenda item for The Hague Summit.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, NATO, and Defense Spending
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

219. Hague Summit Series: Trump and the Rebalancing of NATO

Author:
Joshua C. Huminski
Publication Date:
06-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
The perception that the US has turned its back on or is in the process of separating from Europe and continental defence and security is certainly understandable. Naturally, there is a focus on the noise of President Donald Trump’s rhetoric rather than the signal of his policy intentions. While there remains and will remain significant transatlanticism at nearly every level of government, Congress, and across the ecosystem of policy institutions and industry, there is a growing appreciation of the drivers of the president’s policies within these circles. In many ways, the Trump agenda towards NATO is a practical recognition of new realities, and more a long overdue re-balancing of the transatlantic relationship to reflect the administration’s geostrategic worldview and domestic priorities.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, European Union, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
Europe and United States of America

220. Small Drones, Big Problems: Managing the Unmanned Threat to the Homeland

Author:
Aaron Stein
Publication Date:
09-2025
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI)
Abstract:
Drones are everywhere. From the battlefields of Ukraine to the suburbs of New Jersey, it has become increasingly common to find small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS) in the sky. In the United States, there are now over one million lawfully registered sUAS platforms. The proliferation of sUAS in the civilian population has created a flood of reporting to law enforcement agencies across a variety of scenarios. Quite often, a civilian hobbyist simply flies their sUAS “too close to the sun” and encroaches upon restricted airspace around either civilian or military critical infrastructure. However, there have also been cases of foreign actors operating sUAS in an attempt to reconnoiter specific targets or locations. There are now so many sUAS incidents occurring that it makes for an easily exploitable environment for malign activities by state or non-state actors. Making things even more dangerous, our research shows that quite often, no one knows who to call when a sUAS incident occurs. While officially the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has primacy over sUAS incidents, our research (and the FAA’s own database) shows that local law enforcement is often contacted after sUAS incidents, and cases are often closed as soon as they are opened, without confirmed reporting to the FAA. As a result, Department of Defense (DoD) entities charged with homeland defense, such as US Northern Command (NORTHCOM), are often left without knowledge of sUAS incidents, and cannot observe and monitor trends adequately to support development of adequate countermeasures. They also do not have the authorities to counteract the threat, even when sUAS activity upends military training exercises. To mitigate this threat, the US government should consider: Establishing a Joint Interagency Task Force (JIATF). Maintaining a single, consolidated reporting database for any sUAS activity over critical infrastructure on an unclassified network. Mandating NORTHCOM to lead DoD efforts within this new JIATF and work with Congress on updated legislation to codify proper authorities for US agencies and the military to thwart UAS intrusions.
Topic:
Weapons, Drones, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV), Warfare, and National Security
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America