<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Topic:technological dominance &#8212; Global Security Review %</title>
	<atom:link href="https://globalsecurityreview.com/subject/technological-dominance/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://globalsecurityreview.com/subject/technological-dominance/</link>
	<description>A division of the National Institute for Deterrence Studies (NIDS)</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2026 12:45:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>Redefining Espionage: The Unseen War for Technological Dominance</title>
		<link>https://globalsecurityreview.com/redefining-espionage-the-unseen-war-for-technological-dominance/</link>
					<comments>https://globalsecurityreview.com/redefining-espionage-the-unseen-war-for-technological-dominance/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joshua Thibert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2026 12:13:13 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[AI & Deterrence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Archive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Emerging Threats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategic Adversaries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[adaptive cyberattacks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anomaly detection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Artemis II]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[artificial intelligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[automated espionage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[big data analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[counter-disinformation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[counterintelligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[critical infrastructure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cyber operations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deepfakes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democratic institutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disinformation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disruptive technologies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic competitiveness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic espionage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[espionage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foreign intelligence entities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Generative AI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global power shift]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gray zone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Great Power Competition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[information domain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[insider threat mitigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[predictive analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security competition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supply-chain vulnerabilities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[surveillance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[technological arms race]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[technological dominance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[threat mitigation. ​]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://globalsecurityreview.com/?p=32482</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Published: March 24, 2026 The international system is undergoing a profound global power shift characterized by the resurgence of great power competition and a broad diffusion of technical capabilities. This environment is intensifying security competition across all domains. Concurrently, the proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) and other disruptive technologies has fundamentally transformed espionage and defense. [&#8230;]</p>
<p><a href="https://globalsecurityreview.com/redefining-espionage-the-unseen-war-for-technological-dominance/">Redefining Espionage: The Unseen War for Technological Dominance</a> was originally published on <a href="https://globalsecurityreview.com">Global Security Review</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Published: March 24, 2026</em></p>
<p>The international system is undergoing a profound global power shift characterized by the resurgence of great power competition and a broad diffusion of technical capabilities. This environment is intensifying security competition across all domains. Concurrently, the proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) and other disruptive technologies has fundamentally transformed espionage and defense. The traditional <a href="https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2025/10/30/artificial_intelligence_and_the_future_of_espionage_1144178.html">landscape</a> of counterintelligence (CI) is obsolete and requires rapid, systemic overhaul to address the increasingly amplified, technologically enabled threats posed by state and non-state actors.</p>
<p>Specifically, the shift to great power technological competition has expanded CI&#8217;s mandate from protecting military secrets to securing critical infrastructure, intellectual property (IP), and the integrity of the information domain. The dual-use nature of AI functions as both in support of <a href="https://www.hstoday.us/subject-matter-areas/cybersecurity/ai-driven-espionage-campaign-marks-new-phase-in-cybersecurity-researchers-say/">automated espionage</a> and a critical mechanism for preemptively anticipating and mitigating threats. The failure of the United States to strategically integrate AI into CI methodologies will result in the systemic erosion of national technological and economic advantage.</p>
<p><strong>The Expanded Mandate of Modern Counterintelligence</strong></p>
<p>CI functions to protect a nation’s secrets, personnel, and systems from foreign intelligence entities (FIEs). Yet today, CI must also confront a threat matrix dramatically enlarged in scope, sophistication, and velocity. The current geopolitical climate has necessitated a significant expansion of the traditional CI mission. In the context of great power competition, the most significant threat has shifted from the theft of classified military and diplomatic secrets to the large-scale acquisition of IP, trade secrets, and technological data, as highlighted in the recently released <a href="https://www.odni.gov/index.php/newsroom/reports-publications/reports-publications-2026/4141-2026-annual-threat-assessment">Annual Threat Assessment</a>.</p>
<p>FIEs are aggressively targeting the private sector, academia, and research institutions, the very engines of national innovation through sophisticated economic espionage. Their strategic goal is not merely to obtain information, but to erode a nation&#8217;s competitive advantage and accelerate the adversary&#8217;s technological timetable, thereby shifting the global balance of power. CI must establish robust protective mechanisms that extend deep into the non-governmental technology and research ecosystem.</p>
<p>The dissolution of a clear distinction between peacetime competition and active conflict has resulted in a continuous state of confrontation known as the &#8216;gray zone&#8217;. This strategic domain is characterized by persistent, non-lethal, yet tactically damaging activities designed to achieve political objectives without triggering traditional military responses. CI must now defend against a spectrum of subtle subversion, including large-scale cyber operations, persistent penetration of networks for reconnaissance and preparatory measures, and covert attempts to manipulate political discourse and decision-making.</p>
<p>The globalization of commerce and technology has created intricate, interconnected supply chains. These networks present significant CI risks, as adversaries seek to compromise the integrity, trustworthiness, and authenticity of products and services. By inserting &#8220;backdoors&#8221; or creating exploitable &#8220;choke points&#8221; at various nodes, adversaries establish capabilities for future exploitation. CI efforts are essential to conduct comprehensive due diligence and risk mitigation, securing these complex networks against both hardware and software compromise.</p>
<p><strong>Artificial Intelligence: The Dual-Use Catalyst</strong></p>
<p>AI and emerging technologies are not merely <em>targets</em> of modern espionage; they are simultaneously the most potent tools and the most necessary defenses in the counterintelligence battleground. This dual-use dynamic creates a challenging “AI vs. AI” scenario that demands immediate, radical adaptation. Adversaries are leveraging AI to dramatically enhance the speed, scale, and sophistication of their intelligence operations:</p>
<p><u>Automated Espionage and Big Data Analysis</u>: AI-powered tools can automate and scale the processing, translation, and analysis of vast, heterogeneous datasets (Big Data), vastly increasing the volume and velocity of intelligence collection from both open-source intelligence and classified sources.</p>
<p><u>Adaptive Cyberattacks</u>: Machine learning (ML) algorithms enable the development of more elusive and adaptive cyber threats. This includes automated exploitation of vulnerabilities, dynamic creation of polymorphic malware, and rapid penetration of defenses, operating at speeds that effectively outpace traditional, human-centric cybersecurity responses.</p>
<p><u>Generative AI for Influence</u>: Generative AI can create highly realistic deepfakes (synthetic videos and audio) and synthetic narratives at scale. This facilitates sophisticated disinformation and propaganda campaigns to manipulate public opinion and conduct advanced social engineering, severely compromising the ability of institutions to discern truth from falsehood.</p>
<p>Three interconnected factors fundamentally redefine the scope of CI responsibility: target expansion, the blurring of conflict lines, and supply chain vulnerabilities. To effectively counter these technologically enabled threats, CI must aggressively embrace and integrate these same technologies, transforming them into proactive defensive tools:</p>
<p><u>Threat Anticipation and Predictive Analysis</u>: AI can process and analyze massive amounts of threat data, identifying subtle, non-obvious patterns, trends, and anomalies. This capability allows CI to transition from merely reacting to threats toward predictive modeling, allowing one to forecast adversary actions before they materialize and enabling preemptive defense.</p>
<p><u>Enhanced Surveillance and Anomaly Detection</u>: ML algorithms are crucial for the detection of subtle anomalies in network traffic, user behavior, and physical security systems that a human operator would miss. AI-driven monitoring provides real-time, large-scale pattern-of-life analysis that significantly exceeds human cognitive capacity.</p>
<p><u>Counter-Disinformation and Integrity Checks</u>: CI requires AI-driven tools to effectively identify, analyze, and flag AI-generated propaganda, deepfakes, and synthetic media. Systems designed for content provenance and authenticity verification are essential to safeguard the <a href="https://ash.harvard.edu/articles/weaponized-ai-a-new-era-of-threats/">integrity</a> of the information domain and maintain public trust.</p>
<p><u>Insider Threat Mitigation</u>: Defensively, AI can monitor internal networks to flag anomalous user behaviors such as unusual data access attempts, large data transfers, or deviations in an employee&#8217;s digital pattern-of-life. As such they assist in identifying potential insider threats before significant compromise occurs.</p>
<p><strong>The Strategic Imperative</strong></p>
<p>The shift of global powers and the proliferation of disruptive technologies have thrust counterintelligence into an even more important aspect of national security. The stakes of this technological arms race transcend traditional security concerns, encompassing the integrity of a nation’s innovative ecosystem, its economic competitiveness, and the resilience of its democratic institutions.</p>
<p>CI must rapidly evolve its strategies to prioritize the defense of economic and technological assets, and it must integrate AI as a foundational defensive technology to achieve predictive, scalable threat mitigation. Failure to aggressively master and deploy AI defenses against technologically augmented adversaries risks the systemic erosion of national advantage in a world where technological leadership is increasingly synonymous with global power. The future success of great power competition hinges directly on the adaptive capacity and technological sophistication of CI’s function.</p>
<p><em>Joshua Thibert is a Senior Analyst at the </em><a href="https://thinkdeterrence.com/"><em>National Institute for Deterrence Studies (NIDS)</em></a><em> with over 30 years of comprehensive expertise. His background encompasses roles as a former counterintelligence special agent within the Department of Defense and as a practitioner in compliance, security, and insider risk management in the private sector. His extensive academic and practitioner experience spans strategic intelligence, multiple domains within defense and strategic studies, and critical infrastructure protection. The views of the author are his own.</em></p>
<p><a href="http://globalsecurityreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Redefining-Espionage_-AI-Global-Power-Shifts-and-the-Unseen-War-for-Technological-Dominance.pdf"><img decoding="async" class="alignnone wp-image-32091" src="http://globalsecurityreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/2026-Download-Button.png" alt="" width="187" height="52" srcset="https://globalsecurityreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/2026-Download-Button.png 450w, https://globalsecurityreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/2026-Download-Button-300x83.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 187px) 100vw, 187px" /></a></p>
<p><a href="https://globalsecurityreview.com/redefining-espionage-the-unseen-war-for-technological-dominance/">Redefining Espionage: The Unseen War for Technological Dominance</a> was originally published on <a href="https://globalsecurityreview.com">Global Security Review</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://globalsecurityreview.com/redefining-espionage-the-unseen-war-for-technological-dominance/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cyber Deterrence in the Age of Semiconductors</title>
		<link>https://globalsecurityreview.com/cyber-deterrence-in-the-age-of-semiconductors/</link>
					<comments>https://globalsecurityreview.com/cyber-deterrence-in-the-age-of-semiconductors/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Adam B. Harris]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:14:04 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Archive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Emerging Threats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategic Adversaries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[advanced military systems]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI-driven capabilities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ASML]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[autonomous systems]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CHIPS and Science Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[computational power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cyber deterrence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cyber operations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cyber power ​]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cybersecurity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EUV lithography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[export control agreements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[geopolitical implications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Samsung]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[self-sufficiency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[semiconductor production]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[semiconductors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supply chains]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[technological dominance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TSMC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://globalsecurityreview.com/?p=29790</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Cyberspace is the new battleground for nations vying for global dominance. At the heart of this competition lies the semiconductor industry—a linchpin of modern technology. It is essential for computing, artificial intelligence (AI), and advanced military systems. Understanding the dynamics of semiconductor production and supply chains provides critical insights into how cyber deterrence strategies are [&#8230;]</p>
<p><a href="https://globalsecurityreview.com/cyber-deterrence-in-the-age-of-semiconductors/">Cyber Deterrence in the Age of Semiconductors</a> was originally published on <a href="https://globalsecurityreview.com">Global Security Review</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cyberspace is the new battleground for nations vying for global dominance. At the heart of this competition lies the semiconductor industry—a linchpin of modern technology. It is essential for computing, artificial intelligence (AI), and advanced military systems. Understanding the dynamics of semiconductor production and supply chains provides critical insights into how <a href="https://www.nscai.gov">cyber deterrence</a> <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Chip-War-Worlds-Critical-Technology/dp/1982172002/ref=sr_1_1?adgrpid=1345803941920094&amp;dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.uZ9ZRB76rItSPS7yHDYWcc-xZcojzNYrJ0-OYYYSccyIhSlGOuuPAHl4yb0e807AJWv0_FgKfklqcgU_4g6BWJLrHnNmUyA5sfU7wwSJ4DyT5pKb4gUyyhpo-B2RjR3YU6zy8JSXVgAPz9KRk3KPNlpRBjVcd7tLMBHGWZ76oETTvRZxNFvK9KLzzASrFeloDsCMzqFg-Td2uF44wkEOrp0_UduKn5U6-dcunC3wt7w.HIHHJUK3RRPPOPhVIlE-DlaejFHJXI5tdG9sWnEXPdc&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;hvadid=84113027101607&amp;hvbmt=bb&amp;hvdev=c&amp;hvlocphy=92059&amp;hvnetw=o&amp;hvqmt=b&amp;hvtargid=kwd-84113788445936%3Aloc-190&amp;hydadcr=7692_13583980&amp;keywords=the+chip+war+book&amp;msclkid=4d7dc6ba7c991c73e5b1a1da4ae0ffc8&amp;qid=1734358652&amp;sr=8-1">strategies are formulated and executed</a>.</p>
<p><strong>Semiconductors: The Backbone of Cyber Power</strong></p>
<p>Semiconductors enable the computing power that drives everything from commercial applications to military operations. Advanced chips are critical for AI, autonomous systems, and national security infrastructure. As nations race to secure technological dominance, control over <a href="https://www.semiconductors.org">semiconductor production</a> becomes a central element of cyber deterrence.</p>
<p>The production of semiconductors is extraordinarily complex and relies on a global supply chain. No single country is self-sufficient in this domain. Manufacturing processes demand rare metals, precision tools, and expertise spanning Japan, the Netherlands, South Korea, Taiwan, and the United States. Companies like TSMC (Taiwan), Intel (United States), and Samsung (South Korea) dominate the field, with <a href="https://geekvibesnation.com/tsmcs-role-in-shaping-the-global-semiconductor-landscape-trends-and-innovations-for-2025/#:~:text=In%20this%20article%2C%20we%E2%80%99ll%20delve%20into%20TSMC%E2%80%99s%20leadership%2C,this%20company%20remains%20indispensable%20in%20the%20semiconductor%20industry.">TSMC leading</a> in advanced chip production. Advanced Semiconductor Materials Lithography (ASML), a Dutch company, monopolizes the production of extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography machines, critical for fabricating cutting-edge chips.</p>
<p><strong>The Strategic Importance of Semiconductors</strong></p>
<p>Semiconductors are more than just a commercial product—they are a strategic resource that nations leverage to project power in cyberspace. The United States has long recognized the importance of staying ahead in chip technology, <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/4346">aiming to maintain at least a two-generation lead</a> over adversaries like China. This lead is not just about technological superiority but is also about cyber deterrence.</p>
<p>Cyber deterrence relies on the ability to defend, retaliate, or disrupt an adversary’s cyber capabilities. Advanced semiconductors provide the <a href="https://www.semiconductors.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/81018_SIA_AI_white_paper_-_FINAL_08092018_with_all_member_edits_with_logo3-1.pdf">computational power necessary for AI-driven</a> cybersecurity systems, intelligence gathering, and offensive cyber operations. For example, autonomous systems in modern warfare require sophisticated chips to function effectively. If a nation lacks access to such technology, its cyber capabilities are significantly weakened.</p>
<p><strong>China’s Vulnerability and Response</strong></p>
<p>China, despite being the second-largest economy and a global manufacturing powerhouse, has a surprising weakness in the semiconductor supply chain. It spends more on importing chips than oil and relies heavily on foreign suppliers, including its geopolitical rivals. This dependency creates a <a href="https://www.csis-cips.org/blog/chinas-pursuit-of-semiconductor">critical vulnerability</a> in its cyber and AI ambitions.</p>
<p>Recognizing this weakness, China launched massive initiatives to achieve self-sufficiency in semiconductor production. However, the barriers to entry are steep. Manufacturing cutting-edge chips requires material purity at a level of 99.99999 percent, and even a minor defect can render a chip unusable. The <a href="https://www.wita.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/220802_Reinsch_Semiconductors.pdf">complexity of the global supply chain</a> further complicates China’s efforts. For instance, ASML’s EUV lithography machines, essential for advanced chip production, are legally restricted from being sold to China under export control agreements led by the United States.</p>
<p>China’s strategy focuses on targeting chokepoints in the supply chain while ramping up domestic production of less advanced chips. Success in this endeavor would significantly alter the balance of power in cyberspace, enabling China to compete more effectively in AI and cyber operations. However, for now, its reliance on foreign technology remains a significant deterrent.</p>
<p><strong>US Strategy: Strengthening Deterrence Through Dominance</strong></p>
<p>The United States took proactive steps to secure its dominance in semiconductor technology as part of its cyber deterrence strategy. Legislation like the 2022 CHIPS and Science Act provides billions in subsidies to bolster domestic chip production. The US also <a href="https://c24215cec6c97b637db6-9c0895f07c3474f6636f95b6bf3db172.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/content/metro-innovation-districts/~/media/programs/metro/images/innovation/innovationdistricts2.pdf">works to integrate</a> government, industry, and academia to address challenges in manpower, education, and research and development.</p>
<p>The American approach to cyber deterrence is twofold. First, it seeks to maintain its technological edge by investing in leading-edge chips while ensuring a robust supply of legacy nodes for essential systems. Second, it actively restricts access to critical technologies for adversaries. For instance, since 2018, the export of EUV lithography machines to China has been prohibited, a move aimed at stalling China’s progress in advanced semiconductor manufacturing.</p>
<p>This strategy aligns with the broader geopolitical framework, where supply chain control becomes a tool for exerting influence. By leveraging its dominance in semiconductors, the US can deny adversaries the tools they need to compete in AI-driven cyber capabilities, thereby strengthening its cyber deterrence posture.</p>
<p><strong>The Role of AI and Advanced Chips in Cyber Deterrence</strong></p>
<p>AI is a cornerstone of cyber operations, from defensive systems that identify and mitigate threats to offensive tools that exploit vulnerabilities in adversarial networks. The power of AI is directly tied to the availability of advanced chips, which enable greater computational efficiency and data processing.</p>
<p>In the AI arms race, semiconductors are the critical enabler. Nations with access to advanced chips can train larger models, process more data, and deploy more sophisticated algorithms. Conversely, those lacking access are at a significant disadvantage. This dynamic emphasizes the importance of securing semiconductor supply chains as part of national cyber deterrence strategies.</p>
<p><strong>Geopolitics and the Future of Cyber Deterrence</strong></p>
<p>The geopolitical implications of semiconductor dominance extend beyond cyber operations. Control over the chip supply chain influences alliances, trade policies, and even the balance of power in global governance. Governments increasingly push nations and companies to choose sides, creating a polarized landscape.</p>
<p>The US and its allies currently hold a strong position, but the race is far from over. As China invests heavily in self-sufficiency, the stakes in the semiconductor arms race continue to rise. The future of cyber deterrence will depend on the ability of nations to secure their supply chains, innovate in chip technology, and adapt to the rapidly evolving landscape of AI and cybersecurity.</p>
<p><strong>Conclusion</strong></p>
<p>Semiconductors are not just a technological marvel—they are a strategic weapon in the cyber domain. As nations compete for supremacy, control over chip production and supply chains will play a pivotal role in shaping cyber deterrence strategies. The US, with its technological edge and integrated approach, aims to maintain its dominance, while China’s efforts to overcome its vulnerabilities will redefine the global order. In this high-stakes competition, the invisible hand of the market is guided by the visible hand of governments, ensuring that semiconductors remain at the heart of cyber power.</p>
<p><em>Adam Harris, PhD, is a career cyber professional who both practices the profession and teaches at the university level. The views expressed are his own.    </em></p>
<p><a href="http://globalsecurityreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Cyber-Deterrence-in-the-Age-of-Semiconductors.pdf"><img decoding="async" class="alignnone wp-image-29601 size-medium" src="http://globalsecurityreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/2025-Download-Button-300x83.png" alt="Download here." width="300" height="83" srcset="https://globalsecurityreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/2025-Download-Button-300x83.png 300w, https://globalsecurityreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/2025-Download-Button.png 450w" sizes="(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px" /></a></p>
<p><a href="https://globalsecurityreview.com/cyber-deterrence-in-the-age-of-semiconductors/">Cyber Deterrence in the Age of Semiconductors</a> was originally published on <a href="https://globalsecurityreview.com">Global Security Review</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://globalsecurityreview.com/cyber-deterrence-in-the-age-of-semiconductors/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
