Strategic Intelligence Summary for 01 March 2018

Strategic Intelligence contains intelligence reporting on the state of global security and instability, geostrategic issues affecting the United States, pre-war indicators, and assessments on the current risk of war. This report is available each week for Strategic Intelligence subscribers.


In this Strategic Intelligence Summary: (4,908 words)

  • ISIS followers planning WMD attacks on U.S.
  • Venezuela’s economic nightmare is now impacting its neighbors
  • Pakistan placed on ‘Grey List’ for financing terrorism; real economic challenges ahead
  • Israel, U.S. conduct successful Arrow 3 test
  • Japan will buy more F-35A’s
  • Russia tested new Su-57 stealth fighter over Syria
  • U.S. Navy to speed up destroyer production
  • Iran proliferating cruise missiles in violation of sanctions
  • NATO-Russia: It’s official: Cold War II is underway — will it turn hot?
  • Middle East: Israel, Iran move closer to war
  • North Korea: As Olympics ends, new period of threats, danger rise with North Korea
  • U.S.-China: As China puts increased pressure on Taiwan, Trump has a decision to make
  • U.S., Mexico put off talks again

In Focus: Many analysts have downplayed suggestions that a new “Cold War” has begun between the U.S. and Russia, but that appears to be the case after all — and there are new fears that this Cold War, like the last one, could turn hot. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s claim this morning that his military now possesses an ICBM capable of hitting a target anywhere in the world (which is also capable of evading U.S. missile defenses) was a stark message to the United States, and I’ll have more on that in the coming weeks. Meantime, we can start expecting new tensions on the Korean peninsula once again as the Olympics end since neither the U.S. nor the North Korean leader has changed fundamental positions. Also, Israel and Iran now appear to be on a collision course thanks in large part to Iran increasing its influence and strengthening its position in Syria. And we expect rising political tensions between the U.S. and Mexico as talks between the leaders of both countries fail again.

As always, thank you for subscribing and enjoy this week’s Strategic Intelligence Summary. — JD


Priority Intelligence Requirements:

PIR1: What are the new indicators of disruptive events that could cause global or regional instability?

PIR2: What are the latest military and security developments exhibited by the U.S. and their peer and near-peer adversaries?

PIR3: What is the current situation report and risk of war in each of the four flashpoints? (North Korea, China, Russia, Iran/Israel/Middle East)

PIR4: What is the current security situation along the U.S.-Mexico border and south of the border?


PIR1: What are the new indicators of disruptive events that could cause global or regional instability?

ISIS followers planning WMD attacks on U.S.

U.S. intelligence officials say they are hearing “chatter” that ISIS followers in the Middle East may be planning possible chemical attacks in the U.S. involving chlorine and other “simple” weapons of mass destruction. Intelligence officials said that ISIS followers are discussing how to engineer deadly chlorine and other chemical attacks that have been carried out successfully in Syria inside the U.S. While there is no specific plot that has yet been uncovered, intelligence officials note that there is definitely motivation among followers to launch such attacks. “We are working on a real world threat related to ISIS in the WMD [weapons of mass destruction] space that is really an export of something happening in the Middle East that is causing us to devote thousands of dollars in very near-term funding,” Homeland Security official Col. Lonnie Carlson said, speaking at the National Defense Industry Association’s Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict conference in Crystal City, Va., this week. “We’re putting capabilities out in the field right now to counter this threat that 6 months ago, we probably never would have thought of happening. I can’t get into the details right now. It’ll come out shortly,” added the officer, who is director of strategy, plans and policy in DHS’s Counter WMD office. The White House has had “principal committee- level meetings with senior cabinet officials” on the issue. “The bottom line is…the threat is real.” [source]

Venezuela’s economic nightmare is impacting its neighbors

Society continues to break down in Venezuela as the country’s economic woes under its socialist government continue to worsen. Last year inflation rose beyond 2,600 percent; that has only exacerbated food and medicinal shortages. As conditions worsen and the Nicolas Maduro government continues to double down on its socialist economic policies and authoritarianism, more Venezuelans flee. In the last half of 2017, some 210,000 Venezuelans migrated to Colombia; numbers of migrants from the oil-rich country are rising in other countries as well, such as Brazil where the influx has overwhelmed services available in border cities and towns. So many are now coming to Brazil that the military is establishing small camps and field hospitals to accommodate them. Some Venezuelan women have turned to prostitution; others have sold their hair to wigmakers. [source] Analysis: Venezuela’s slow death continues. At some point there will be a reckoning, most likely in the form of a coup. That will come once Venezuela’s neighbors clamp down on their borders to stem the tide of migration, which is already creating tension among their own citizenry. Maduro will only be able to export his problems for so long; already Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos is considering tightening borders and deportations.  

Pakistan placed on ‘Grey List’ for financing terrorism; real economic challenges ahead

The government of Pakistan has been placed on a terrorism financing watchlist by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). Actual placement on the so-called “grey list” won’t happen until June and the country’s inclusion is not being publicly acknowledged in a meaningful way, but observers say it definitely will happen. The Wilson Center notes: “Pakistani financial journalist Khurram Husain, who understands FATF well, put it … this way: FATF has passed a motion to grey list Pakistan. The motion identifies deficiencies in Pakistani efforts to combat terrorist financing. ‘As per FATF procedures,’ he said, ‘an action plan will be developed by Pakistan and FATF to address the deficiencies identified in the motion.’” The plan is to be presented at the FATF in June; if approved, Pakistan heads to the list. And it sounds as if that is a certainty. “There is nothing Pakistan can do between now and then to prevent the grey listing,” Husain said. “But it is possible to take early steps to ensure that the period of being greylisted is short.” The listing is good and bad news for Islamabad. Being placed on the list means Pakistan will face real and significant economic challenge. The center noted further, “Key economic players — potential foreign investors, banks operating in Pakistan — may think twice about engaging with a nation deemed to not be doing enough to crack down on terrorist financing. After being placed on the list from 2012-2015, Pakistan did not suffer a great deal of economic hardship. However, it will likely be different this time, say analysts. [source] Analysis: While the Pakistani government will likely take some measures to get itself de-listed, with elections coming officials won’t want to be seen selling out wholesale to American pressure. Still, agreement with the listing — and by agreement, I mean not actually voicing opposition to it — by other countries that are traditional Pakistani allies may be their way of sending a message that they are weary of terrorism and displeased with countries that continue to fund it. The Saudis are a country in the epicenter of global terrorism and the Chinese have increasing fears of being targeted by groups like ISIS; and Europe has become a frequent target for terrorism.


PIR2: What are the latest military and security developments exhibited by the U.S. and their peer and near-peer adversaries? 

Israel, U.S. conduct successful Arrow 3 test

Per a U.S. Department of Defense release dated 19 February: “Today at 2:30 a.m. Israeli time, the Missile Defense Agency and the Israel Missile Defense Organization successfully completed a flight test of the Arrow 3 weapons system that is designed to defend against ballistic missiles outside of the atmosphere. The test was conducted at a test site in central Israel and was led by Israel Aerospace Industries, in collaboration with the Israeli air force. The Missile Defense Agency, as system co-developer, supported the test. The Arrow 3 weapons system is a major part of Israel’s multilayered defense array. This array is based on four layers; Iron Dome and David’s Sling, and the Arrow 2 and Arrow 3 systems. The success of this test is a major milestone in the operational capabilities of Israel and its ability to defend itself against current and future threats in the region. Arrow 3 interceptors were delivered to the Israeli air force in January 2017 for operational use.” [source] Analysis: Israel’s in-depth missile defense system is believed to be one of the best, if not the best, in the world. But then again it has to be, doesn’t it? Israel is surrounded by enemies and increasingly even the militant proxies of Iran are more heavily armed — with missiles. The joint development with the U.S. helps the Israelis not only develop cutting edge missile defense technology but at something far less than full-price.

Japan will buy more F-35A’s

The Japanese government is considering the purchase of an additional 20 F-35A fighters in addition to the 42 it has already agreed to purchase (and build in Japan). The decision was made after Japanese defense officials and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe further evaluated the country’s military needs moving forward. Sources told British media that the additional fighters will cost Japan about $100 million apiece, a savings of $30 million over assembling them in-country and buying them pre-built in the U.S. In addition, as previous reports have noted, Japan is considering purchases of the VTOL F-35B, which can fly from remote bases and the Japanese navy’s Izumo-class helicopter carriers. The first Japanese F-35 entered service within the past week; the first squadrons will be based at Misawa Air Base in northern Japan. The first F-35s will replace the Japan Air Self Defense Force’s aged F-4 Phantoms; later the JADF will begin phasing out some of the 200 aging F-15s that form the backbone of its fighter/interceptor fleet. [source]

Russia tested new Su-57 stealth fighter over Syria

The Russian air force has chosen the relatively low threat environment of Syria to test its new Su-57 stealth aircraft. In recent days unverified video showed a pair of Su-57s being escorted by conventional Su-35 fighter jets and four Su-25 strike aircraft. The single-seat stealthy aircraft with twin engines were reportedly videoed near Russia’s Khmeimim Air Base near the southeastern city of Latakia, along the Mediterranean Sea coast. The planes reportedly utilize state-of-the-art stealth technology to avoid radar detection; they were developed to counter the F-22 and are nicknamed the “F-22 killer.” Voice of America, which is working to verify the footage, added that if the mission was real, “it would mark a significant addition to Moscow’s firepower in a theater of war that now features a dizzying array of competing forces and increased military involvement by outside sponsors.” [source] Analysis: Subsequent satellite imagery confirmed that Russia did indeed deploy Su-57 fighters to Syria. At least two have been confirmed to be in Syria in mid-February. Russian personnel parked them between a pair of other fighters in a tight formation most likely to mask their presence. [source] See the satellite photo here [source]. It makes sense that Russia would test the plane in Syria, given the low percentage that the planes flaws, whatever they may be, would be discovered there. Russian media sources claim the plane’s deployment in Syria is a ‘message to the U.S.’ that the F-22 is not the dominate aircraft we claim it is. The Russian plane has a top speed of 1,516 mph; a range of 3,418 miles; and a unit cost of between $50-100 million per copy. And so far, the Russian defense ministry isn’t buying huge numbers of the aircraft; one report noted that the Russian defense ministry is only ordering 12 fighters initially as further testing is completed. [source] The plane is expected to replace existing Russian air force stocks of MiG-29s and Su-27s over the next 10 years. Numbers-wise, we don’t see the Su-57 as a huge threat to the F-22 yet; while some analysts believe the F-22 production line was cut short, the Air Force bought and fielded 187 of them.

U.S. Navy to speed up destroyer production

The U.S. Navy’s budget proposal calls for the addition of extra destroyers to production plans for this year and next, which — if approved — would quicken the growth of the fleet. The proposal speeds production of Arleigh Burke-class DDG 521 destroyers in 2019 right as the Navy begins construction of its new, next-gen Flight III destroyer later this year. Production would increase from two ships this year to three next year is part of the service’s drive to expand to 355 ships, called for by President Trump. “The newest destroyers represent technically advanced warships able to fire new weapons, better detect enemy attacks and prepare for a highly contested future maritime threat environment,” said one report. [source] Analysis: The Navy will likely have difficulty not only building additional ships because the service lacks the infrastructure but also in manning the additional vessels. The service has asked for eight more ships and 4,000 more sailors in the current budget. [source

Iran proliferating cruise missiles in violation of sanctions

The U.S. intelligence community, in its new Worldwide Threat Assessment, warned that Iran continues to “enable” attacks by Houthi rebels in Yemen against the United States’ Arab allies in the Gulf via proliferation of cruise and ballistic missiles. Iran has the largest ballistic missile inventory in the Middle East; the country is believed to be supplying an indigenously-produced variant of the Russian Kh-55 cruise missile, the Soumar, to the Houthis. [source] Analysis: The Trump administration placed new sanctions on Iran last year; the ‘nuclear deal’ signed with Obama administration bars Iran from selling conventional arms for five years from the start of the agreement’s implementation, but the elite Revolutionary Guards force has been smuggling them to Iranian proxies — in Yemen, Syria, and Lebanon.


PIR3: What is the current situation report and risk of war in each of the four? (North Korea, China, Russia, Iran/Israel/Middle East)

NATO-Russia:

It’s official: Cold War II is underway — will it turn hot?

Many analysts have stated that the U.S. and Russia have entered a new “Cold War” period. The first Cold War lasted four decades and threatened to become a “hot” war at various points during that period; this new period promises to be no less volatile.

Russia is no longer a superpower, per se, but it is a nuclear-armed nation of 145 million people with plenty of geopolitical clout. Moscow holds a veto at the UN Security Council and still possesses enough military strength and political capital to influence events and neighbors. What’s more, President Putin has committed to reclaiming portions of the former Soviet Union while embarking on a years-long military modernization program.

Many believed that after the first Cold War ended a new era of strategic partnership and cooperation with the U.S. and the West would be ushered in. For a time that relationship existed but eventually Russian leaders began looking askance at the relationship as the U.S. offered little in terms of economic support as Russia attempted to move toward a market economy in the post-Communist 1990s, while supporting eastward expansion of NATO — which, by definition and design, treated Russia as a competitor and would-be enemy rather than a partner.

Then again, Putin gets his share of the blame. An old KGB hand, he has always viewed the U.S.-led global order with suspicion and as a threat to his leadership.

In recent years, Russia has become much more aggressive militarily, fighting a brief war in Georgia, seizing Crimea and becoming involved in the Ukrainian civil war. Russia also employed brutal military force in Syria to prop up the government of Bashar al-Assad, whom the U.S. opposed.

And, of course, there is the issue of Russian “meddling” in the most recent U.S. presidential election, though that is nothing new.

Outlook: What’s needed most is what is least likely to happen at this point: A real U.S.-Russia reset. Already both nations are involved in Cold War-like proxy battles — in Syria, in the Balkans, the Black Sea, the Mediterranean Sea, and the Korea Peninsula. 

Liberal foreign policy analysts believe the answer is more diplomacy with Russia and that’s never a bad idea. But realists believe the answer lies with more confrontation with Russia short of war: A U.S. military buildup, retribution for cyber attacks, sanctions for election interference, and a reinvigorated NATO. 

The realists seem to have a better grasp of the situation. In recent weeks reports have surfaced that U.S. and U.S.-led forces in Syria caused a great number of deaths and casualties among a Russian mercenary force that everyone knows was sent to attack the American position on purpose — by Putin — to test U.S. resolve in the war-torn country. Putin now understands that Trump won’t bend to his will, but that won’t stop him from testing U.S. resolve and the limits of U.S. power and influence elsewhere. 

Russia is a revisionist power. Putin seeks to disrupt the U.S.-led global order and put Russia back in the game. That will increase, not decrease, chances that Cold War II becomes hot at some point as it already has in Syria.

Middle East: 

Israel, Iran move closer to war

As the Syrian civil war draws to a close and with ISIS all but defeated, many believed that there would finally be peace in the Middle East. But that’s looking less likely as time goes on.

Though he is becoming embroiled in a domestic political scandal, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu nevertheless remains committed to defending his country if need be against the Islamic republic and its proxies.

“We will act if necessary not just against Iran’s proxies but against Iran itself,” he told the Munich Security Conference over the weekend. “Israel will not allow the regime to put a noose of terror around our neck.”

He reinforced his commitment to his country’s security by holding up what he described as a piece from an Iranian drone that the Israeli military shot down and destroyed after it entered Israeli airspace. Jerusalem responded with a large number of airstrikes against Syrian and Iranian positions inside Syria, losing its first jet — an F-16 — in decades in the attacks.

The threat from Iran rises as Tehran moves to shore up its positions in Syria, while also widening its influence with the Syrian regime. But as it does so, other threats loom large, including the security threat posed by Iranian proxy Hezbollah; Iran has transferred hundreds of thousands of missiles, some with precision guidance technology, to the group headquartered in Lebanon over the past several years.

Netanyahu has also pledged — repeatedly — to never allow Iran to mass forces or proxies on Israel’s border. [source]

Outlook: How Netanyahu emerges from his alleged corruption scandal is still up in the air but there are already Israeli political figures from his party angling for his job should he be forced to step down. Let’s hope that none of this detracts from his ability to be an effective leader on the world (and regional) stage because Israel is facing a serious and growing threat to its security that it cannot afford to ignore.

The two countries seem to be on a collision course, and with Iran’s expanding presence inside Syria — at Tiyas air base; Al Shayrat airfield, at the Kiswah base and in a compound near the Damascus Airport — along with its arming of proxies in and around Syria, the situation is akin to a ticking time bomb that could explode into a raging regional conflict at the slightest miscalculation. 

Israeli officials and Israeli enemies both say any new conflict between the two countries would likely result in the mobilization of Iran’s expanding group of militant proxies in multiple countries, or what Tehran calls its “axis of resistance.”

“If there is a war, it will be regional,” said Kamel Wazne, the founder of the Center for American Strategic Studies, in Beirut, who studies the policies of the United States and Iran in the Middle East. “Any confrontation will be with the whole resistance front against Israel and its backers.”

“The ultimate goal is, in the case of another war, to make Syria a new front between Israel, Hezbollah and Iran,” said Amir Toumaj, a research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies who studies Iran. “They are making that not just a goal, but a reality.”

“Israel will face not only quantity, but the threat to vulnerable strategic sites,” said Yaakov Amidror, a former Israeli national security adviser and now a fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategic Studies. Referring to the combination of more precise weapons and a new front, he added: “Each one is problematic; together, they are devastating.” 

“What’s particularly concerning is that this network of proxies is becoming more and more capable as Iran seeds more and more” of its “destructive weapons into these networks,” Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, Trump’s national security adviser, said at a security conference in Munich on Saturday. “So the time is now, we think, to act against Iran.” [source]

Meanwhile, Iranian leaders, who have been prepping for this moment for years, know they will get one shot at Israel and that’s it. When all the pieces are in place, that’s when the war will come, and the Iranians will hit the Jewish state with everything they’ve got. Whether it will be enough will largely depend on the role the U.S. will play in Israel’s defense.

North Korea:

As the Olympics end, a new period of threats and danger rise with North Korea

The Winter Olympics in PyeongChang, South Korea, have ended and with them a brief period of stability on the peninsula.

South Korea is looking to take advantage of the calm to open a new dialogue with Pyongyang and would like the United States to be part of that effort. Chinese media is reporting that the North is “willing to have talks” with the U.S., according to South Korea’s administration. This, after an hour-long meeting between South Korean President Moon Jae-in and North Korea’s chief representative, Kim Yong-chol, in Pyeongchang, on the sidelines on the Games.

“President Moon pointed out the urgency to hold dialogue between North Korea and the US in order to fundamentally the resolve the issues on the Korean Peninsula and to improve inter-Korean relations,” the Blue House said. “The North Korean delegation said that North Korea is willing to have talks with the US and the North agrees that inter-Korean relations and North Korea-US relations should advance together.” [source]

The Trump administration has also signaled a willingness to begin new dialogue, but the White House has never backed off its initial objective, which is denying North Korea a nuclear weapons capability.

At the same time, the North has never signaled a willingness to abandon its nuclear weapons program. So essentially, nothing has changed.

That being said, new assessments of the North’s missile capabilities have lead some experts to deduce that Pyongyang does indeed possess the capability to hit the continental United States with a missile; it’s still not clear whether the North Koreans can put a nuclear warhead on such missiles. Last November’s test of a Hwasong-15 convinced many that the North possesses an ICBM with a range of between 7,500-8,300 miles, depending on various estimates — enough to reach the U.S.

Outlook: Jeffrey Lewis of the Middlebury Institute of International Studies has spent years analyzing open-source information regarding North Korea’s missile and nuclear programs. And while he and his team do not have anything like the kind of monitoring capabilities of the U.S. intelligence community, he made a telling observation recently.

He said only a “time machine” could stop North Korea from developing the ability to strike America with a nuclear weapon. “There is no country that’s been able to build an intercontinental ballistic missile that hasn’t been able to figure out the rest of it.” What’s more, he thinks a preemptive military strike at this point is useless because Pyongyang’s development has progressed too far. [source]

Lewis believes that the only viable option is to accept a nuclear-armed North Korea and work to reduce tensions on the peninsula. But the Trump administration is wholeheartedly against that.

National Security Advisor Gen. H.R. McMaster has said recently that the U.S. “can’t tolerate the risk” of a nuclear-armed Pyongyang. “Accept and deter is unacceptable,” he added.

So denuclearization remains the Trump administration’s objective. As long as that is the case and there is no normalization of relations with Pyongyang — the ‘offer’ of talks is to buy time — then we expect to see new tensions in the region in the coming months.

South China Sea:

As China puts increased pressure on Taiwan, Trump has a decision to make

The Chinese government is increasing its diplomatic and military pressure on Taiwan in an effort to force the democratic enclave to rejoin the mainland voluntarily.

The added pressure comes as President Tsai Ing-wen and her independence-leaning Democratic Progressive Party took over the country’s leadership after winning the 2016 elections — which ended an eight-year period of better relations with the mainland.

The ruling Communist Party has never trusted Tsai’s stated commitment to the status quo. As such, the mainland has pursued a number of tactics aimed at further isolating Taiwan diplomatically.

One of them is to increase Chinese military pressure. This is being done through intimidation, mostly — flying Chinese air force fighters and nuclear-capable bombers close Taiwan’s airspace; sending Chinese warships into the Taiwan Strait; allowing use of the M503 civil flight route connecting Shanghai to Hong Kong, which is 4.2 nautical miles from Taiwan’s airspace and puts Chinese airlines  at risk of crossing paths with Taiwanese flights; and so on.

In the end, “China’s previous effort to win the hearts and minds of the Taiwanese people has ceded to a campaign of bald coercion and only hardened Taipei’s resolve to resist Beijing’s game of military brinkmanship and diplomatic bullying.” [source]

Outlook: Understand that Taiwan’s “better relations” over that eight-year period occurred for a couple of reasons: 1) Taiwan’s government was touting independence; and 2) relations were predicated on conditions favorable to China. That all ended when Tsai won the presidency.

The additional pressure is putting the Trump administration in a hard position: Does Washington shore up its security agreements with Taiwan or seek to ‘weaken’ them in a diplomatic sense by deferring to Chinese foreign policy?

Don’t assume this is being done by mistake. Beijing is well aware of Washington’s security commitment to Taipei — just as the U.S. is aware that China is the preeminent rising power in Asia, that China holds a considerable amount of U.S. debt, and that as the globe’s second-largest economy China wields much power in terms of economic clout. Taiwan is an economic powerhouse too, but at around $550 billion annually, nowhere near China’s estimated $11.2 trillion.

“The People’s Republic of China (PRC) can be expected to increase reliance on coercive persuasion and accelerate its isolation of Taiwan internationally. Reflecting a Cold War mentality, Beijing’s intransigence in acknowledging Taiwan’s political legitimacy remains one of the most significant obstacles to regional peace and stability,” said Mark Stokes, Executive Director, Project 2049 Institute.

The Trump administration has a decision to make and China is forcing the president’s hand intentionally.


PIR4: What is the current security situation along the U.S.-Mexico border and south of the border?

U.S., Mexico put off talks again

President Trump was supposed to meet with Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto in the coming days at the White House, but the meeting was postponed for a second time in a year over continued disagreements about the border wall and who will pay for it. Some American media reported that Trump and Nieto had a “tense” phone conversation as Trump insisted on discussing the wall — a signature campaign pledge — while Nieto wanted to move on to other topics. The bottom line is this: Trump can’t come off a signature campaign pledge (though he’s continuing to push for funding from Congress for the wall) and Nieto’s political future would go down in flames if he were to ever agree to pay for it; Mexico holds national elections in July and the issue of the wall has sparked a rise in nationalist sentiments in the country. [source] Analysis: This is the preeminent defining issue short-and-long term in U.S.-Mexico relations — more so even than NAFTA and trade. The Mexican people utterly resent the idea of a wall separating both countries, but a majority of Americans living in border states and a large plurality of Americans elsewhere resent the flagrant disregard for U.S. immigration laws and are keen to end the chain migration that is swelling the ranks of non-citizens — not to mention the costs associated with their healthcare, education, and providing civil services. Whether or not the wall actually gets built is irrelevant at this point in terms of U.S.-Mexico geopolitics; the next Mexican leader is likely to be a Left-wing version of Trump and relations will only sour from there. But as they sour, Trump’s view — shoring up border security with the wall — is liable to get more popular than it already is.

Jon E. Dougherty is a political, foreign policy and national security analyst and reporter with nearly 30 years of experience in both fields. A U.S. Army veteran of Operation Enduring Freedom, he holds BA in Political Science from Ashford University and an MA in National Security Studies/Intelligence Analysis from American Military University.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Name *