BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//MP-IDSA - ECPv6.15.12.2//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://idsa.in
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for MP-IDSA
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Asia/Kolkata
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0530
TZOFFSETTO:+0530
TZNAME:IST
DTSTART:20190101T000000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20200312T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20200313T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T102412
CREATED:20231223T125414Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250324T231315Z
UID:62731-1583991000-1584077400@idsa.in
SUMMARY:21st Asian Security Conference: National Security and Defence Planning in an Era of Strategic Uncertainty (Postponed)
DESCRIPTION:Registration\n\n\nRegistration fees would be Rs 2000/- which will cover the  costs of two lunches\, conference papers etc. Please send cheque in name of  MP-IDSA\, New Delhi “to the following address along with your details as  Name\, Address\, Educational qualification\, Institutional affiliation etc. \n1. Assistant Director (Admin)\nThe Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses\n1\, Development Enclave\, (near USI)\nRao Tula Ram Marg\nNew Delhi 110 010 \nAccount Holder: Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses  (IDSA)\nA/C No: 10596550223\nName of Bank: State Bank of India (SBI)\nBranch Address: JNU\, Old Campus\, New Delhi – 110067\, INDIA\nSwift code: SBININBB548 \nAccount Holder: Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses  (IDSA)\nA/C No: 535602010004746\nName of Bank: Union Bank of India (UBI)\nBranch Address: Vasant Vihar Branch\, New Delhi – 110057\,  INDIA\nSwift code: UBIN0534463\n\n\n\n\nConcept Note\n\n\nIn  a rapidly changing world\, all known paradigms are experiencing stress. This  calls for a level of strategic readjustments at multiple levels. At the  broadest level\, the inadequacies of the post-World War II international  institutions — the United Nations and its Security Council in regard to peace  and security\, and the Bretton Woods financial institutions in regard to finance  and development — are showing up because of the complexities and uncertainties  characterising global politics and economy today. The old consensus is fraying  and a new consensus is yet to emerge. \nThe  flow of human resources and services are impeded by concerns over loss of jobs  and anti-immigrant sentiments. Technology\, the vital pillar of progress\, is  open to misuse. The world appears to be on the brink of an intense battle for  technological superiority in the age of artificial intelligence (AI) and  quantum computing. Power is fracturing along multiple axes\, be it economic\, military or on the technological fronts.  States and non-state actors have acquired the means and the skill sets required  to overcome asymmetry in the absolute power quotient. No single country is  capable of enforcing its writ on all issues at all times. Hedging and  multi-alignment are part of every country’s toolkit.  \nThere are several facets to this emerging uncertainty. Traditional  and non-traditional security threats such as economic and military competition\,  climate change\, piracy\, radical ideology\, cyber threats\, drug & human  trafficking\, and energy & food security have grown in magnitude. In  addition to these\, the spectre of terrorism\, especially cross-border terrorism\,  continues to challenge the peace and prosperity to national security. Besides\, the rapid advent of automation and AI in the Industry 4.0 is  not without its consequences for disruption in conventional global supply  chains. The changing nature of conflict and strategic uncertainties  faced by nations regionally have further accelerated Asia’s security outlooks. \nAgainst such a backdrop\, a number of variables impact the defence  planning process. Among these are the growing inter-linkages between  traditional and non-traditional security challenges\,  competing priorities for the national  budget in terms of defence versus development\, inter-service tussle for  resource allocation within the armed forces\, the requirements of speed as well  as transparency and probity in defence procurement\, the trade-off between human  resources and high-tech equipment\, and striking the right balance between the  longer-term objective of self-reliance through indigenisation and the urgent induction  of world class weapons and equipment to meet operational requirements. These  factors combine to make defence planning a dynamic process in which frequent  adjustments have to be made along the way. \nDefence  planning processes are further tested in an environment of strategic  uncertainty\, which — though not unique to our times — has acquired an unprecedented  scale and pace today. Countries and national security organisations have to  contend with dilemmas and make choices that can alter the very state of their  preparedness and effectiveness against threats and challenges. Outcomes of  defence planning processes depend on whether we make accurate assessments. A  misreading of strategic realities harbour the potential to completely alter the  direction of procurements\, training and defence planning. This can lead to  grave inadequacies in other future scenarios. \nTechnology  is\, undisputedly\, a major factor driving change in the context of issues that  have a bearing on defence and security. This is true not only for official  state organs but also in regard to private entities that increasingly are playing  a role in defence research and development (R&D)\, manufacturing and  procurement chains.  \nTechnological  behemoths — having an international presence — control and shape the direction  of technological research and its application. They not only steer the course  of technological advancement and research\, but control data representing the  new currency of power. The data that resides with these companies provides them  the opportunity to manipulate human behaviour and influence decision-making processes  in recipient states.   \nIn  conflict scenarios\, technology is likely to have an impact on factors with a  direct bearing on national decision-making processes. It will influence speed  and scope of information-gathering\, analysing it and synthesising derivatives  in real time basis\, including weapons platforms. These decisions could relate  to target striking\, emergency-based ammunition requests\, among others\, based on  real-time consumption patterns\, casualties or refugee movements. In other  words\, the role of technology in de-cluttering decision-making in an  increasingly complex operating environment will be far more important in the  future. If this characterises the current reality of technological advancement\,  how much more is it likely to manifest in future conflict scenarios and on  issues that impact national security? Even more importantly\, will its role bring  a transformative shift in warfighting as a strategic deterrent? This is a  question that remains critical for military planners\, particularly those  involved in the task of ensuring effective defence planning.  \nThese are merely some of the more realistic shifts that are evident in the evolving conflict scenario\, influenced by fast-evolving high-tech conditions. However\,  even as shifts take place both in the nature of conflict and the character of technological advancements\, planning procedures for doctrines\, capability-building and contingencies cannot be completely reinvented. They must remain anchored in proven procedures and processes to strengthen national security.  \nThe  21st edition of the Asian Security Conference (ASC) of the Institute  for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA) is aimed at debating the scope of  defence planning for countries and organisations in an era of acute regional  and global uncertainty. The conference aims to bring together a range of  experts\, scholars\, ex-policy makers\, industry leaders and strategic planners to  discuss the various facets of conflict\, warfare and conventional and  unconventional threats\, by high-lighting implications for defence planning in  an era of strategic uncertainty. The conference will examine the linkages  between national security\, defence planning and changing nature of conflict in  Asia and beyond.  \nThe  conference is tentatively divided into two days over eight sessions. The  details are as follows:  \nDay-1 \n  Inaugural Session \nSession- I:        NATIONAL SECURITY AND GEO-POLITICAL CALCULUS\nSession- II:       STRATEGY AND STRATEGIC UNCERTAINTY IN ASIA\nSession- III:      ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND NATIONAL SECURITY\nSession- IV:      NEIGHBOURHOOD CONFLICTS AND FOREIGN POLICY CHOICES  \nDay-2 \n  Special  Address \nSession- V:       CHANGING CHARACTER OF WAR & WARFARE\nSession- VI:      STRATEGIC TECHNOLOGIES\, DETERRENCE AND WAR-FIGHTING\nSession- VII:     DEFENCE PLANNING\, PROCUREMENT AND FISCAL MANAGEMENT\nSession- VIII:    DEFENCE INNOVATION AND ASIA’S DEFENCE INDUSTRIAL BASES\nVALEDICTORY ADDRESS  \n\n\n\n\nProgramme\n\n\nTentative Programme\n\n\n\n\nChairpersons\n\n\n\n\n\nDr. Arvind Gupta \n    Dr. Arvind Gupta is Director\, Vivekananda  International Foundation\, New Delhi. During 2014-17\, he was the Deputy National  Security Advisor and Secretary\, National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS).  During 2012-14\, he was Director-General\, Manohar Parrikar IDSA. He was Lal Bahadur Shastri Chair in Strategic and Defence  Studies\, at the Manohar  Parrikar IDSA during 2008-2011\, and the Managing Editor of Strategic Analysis\, Manohar Parrikar IDSA’s flagship academic  journal. A former diplomat\, he worked at the National Security Council  Secretariat as a Joint Secretary on deputation from the Ministry of External  Affairs during 1999-2007. He is an Honorary Professor in the Department of  Defence and National Security Studies\, Punjab University\, Chandigarh. His book\, How India Manages Its National Security\,  was published by Penguin India in 2018. He is the co-editor of the forthcoming  book India’s Foreign Policy: Surviving in  a Turbulent World\, which is being published by Sage Publications India Pvt  Ltd. in 2020. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAmb. Kanwal Sibal    \nAmb. Kanwal Sibal\, with 41 years of  experience in diplomacy\, is a former Foreign Secretary\, Government of India. He  has been Ambassador to Turkey\, Egypt\, France and Russia\, and Deputy Chief of  Mission in Washington DC (with rank of an Ambassador). He was a member of  India’s National Security Advisory Board from 2008 to 2010. He was President of  the Association of Indian Diplomats in 2011. He is on the Board of the New  York-based East-West Institute; member of the Executive Council of the  Vivekananda International Foundation; Adviser to the US-India Strategic  Partnership Forum; Chairman of the Forum of Strategic and Security Studies;  Editorial Consultant to The Indian  Defence Review and Foreign Affairs Editor of Force. He is a member of Leaders for Peace\, an international forum  established by former French Prime Minister Mr. Raffarin. He has written more  than 550 Op-Eds and other articles for major national newspapers and  periodicals on international affairs. He is frequently requested to speak on  foreign policy and strategic affairs by various institutions and participate in  TV debates. He was made a Grand Officier of the Ordre National du Merite by the  French President in 2004. In 2017\, he received the Padma Shri from the  President of India. In 2017\, he was decorated by the Russian Foreign Minister  for Contributions to International Cooperation. His book of poems Snowflakes of Time has been published by  Bloomsbury in 2016. \n\n\n\n\n\n\nAmb. (Dr.) T.C. A. Raghavan \nAmb. (Dr.) T.C.A. Raghavan is Director  General\, Indian Council of World Affairs (ICWA)\, New Delhi\, since July 24\,  2018. He retired from the Indian Foreign  Service in December 2015 after serving as India’s High Commissioner to Pakistan  (2013-15). He had earlier served as Deputy High Commissioner in Pakistan  (2003-2007) and High Commissioner to Singapore from 2009 to 2013. During his  last posting in New Delhi (2007-09) in the Ministry of External Affairs\, he was  Joint Secretary dealing with Pakistan\, Afghanistan and Iran. His areas of interest  are historical research\, strategic analysis and the diplomatic and intellectual  history of modern India. He is the author of History Men- Jadunath Sarkar\, G.S. Sardesai\, Raghubir Sinh and their  quest for India’s Past (Harper Collins\, 2020). He was awarded a PhD by the  Jawaharlal Nehru University\, New Delhi in 1992.  \n  \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nMaj. Gen. B. K. Sharma\, AVSM\, SM** and Bar (Retd.)\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSpeakers\n\n\n\n\n\nDr. Ajey Lele \n    A former Indian Air Force officer\, Gp. Capt. (Dr.) Ajey Lele is Senior Fellow at the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses\, New Delhi\, India. His areas of research include issues related to Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) and Strategic Technologies. He has few publications to his name. He started his professional career as an Indian Air Force Officer but took early retirement to pursue his academic interests. He holds a rank of Group Captain. \nTopic: Disruptive Technologies and Strategic Challenges   \nAbstract: Today\, data is recognized as a strategic  commodity and often referred to as the new oil.  The need to leverage the  potential of rapidly expanding data led to the evolution of unique techniques  and technologies for data storage\, analysis\, and visualization. If analyzed effectively\,  this data can assist in finding information that is efficient enough in  initiating a change in the patterns of how different models function.  Technologies like Additive Manufacturing\, Big Data Analytics\, Cloud Computing\,  Smart Factories and IoT (Internet of Things) are defining the fourth Industrial  Revolution (Industry 4.0). Such technologies have wider applicability in the  defence sector too. They actually have the potential to bring in disruptive  changes to the industry in general and the military industrial complex (MIS) in  particular. Today\, data is becoming cheaper\, more accessible and available to  bring about cost-effective structural changes in various processes across  sectors. \nThis  paper aims to understand the technology trajectory along with the future of the  data and disruptive technology-driven world. The paper also analyses the  potential of new technologies like Big Data\, IoT\, 3D Printing and others\, that  involve latching together isolated data flows coming from potentially every  nook and corner of the world. This development could have critical  implications\, specifically between those whose data are included and those  whose are excluded\, and between those who have access to the data and those who  do not. Alongside these developments\, the maturing of weapons technologies like  hypersonic weapons will change the dynamics of the modern-day  battlefield.  The future challenges and impact of these technologies are  reflected upon in the areas of climate change\, poverty\, population\,  geopolitics\, military\, warfare and global governance. The paper ends with a  discussion on the need for regulative bodies to get engaged in the optimum and  effective utilization of these dual-use technologies and control the misuse of  the same. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDr. Alex Vines    \nDr. Alex Vines OBE has been Director of the Africa Programme at Chatham  House since 2002 and became Managing Director for Risk\, Ethics and Resilience  in 2020. Previously\, at Chatham House\, he held roles as Director for Regional  Studies and International Security\, and Director for Area Studies and  International Law. He is also an Assistant Professor at Coventry University\,  and sits on the Editorial and Advisory Boards of the South African Journal  of International Affairs\, Africa Review (journal of the African Studies  Association of India)\, and the Journal of Southern African Studies. He  chaired the UN Panel of Experts on Côte d’Ivoire from 2005 to 2007 and was a  member of the UN Panel of Experts on Liberia from 2001 to 2003. He was also a  member of the Commonwealth Observer Group to Mozambique in 2019 (and Ghana in  2016) and worked for ONUMOZ in Mozambique and UNAVEM II in Angola. Dr. Vines was  awarded an OBE in 2008 and holds a PhD from Coventry University. \nTopic: Conflict and Human Security in Africa  \nAbstract: In 2013\, African leaders vowed “not to bequeath  the burden of conflicts to the next generation of Africans” and set a goal  of ending all African wars by 2020. This unrealistic goal has failed and this  paper will examine how conflicts are changing in Africa and what are the  international\, national and local responses. It will illustrate how traditional  UN peacekeeping models do not work when enforcement\, counter-terrorism or  trans-national operations are needed. In 2002\, the African Union (AU) launched  a new institutional framework\, the African Peace and Security Architecture  (APSA)\, but these have had to be adapted in recent years to include ad hoc  regional coalitions to address these new security challenges with limited  success. This paper will examine why the AU’s ambition to ‘Silence the Guns’ by  2020 was unrealistic\, and outline how peace making and peacebuilding in  Africa could become more successful. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nMr. Amit Cowshish\nMr. Amit Cowshish is a Consultant with the Manohar Parrikar Institute  for Defence Studies and Analyses and a former officer of the Indian Defence  Accounts Service. He served in various capacities in the Defence Accounts  Department\, Central Vigilance Commission and the Ministry of Defence during a career  spanning thirty-five years. He has experience in handling defence planning\,  budget\, procurement\, and other financial matters. He was involved in several  reviews of the procurement procedures and delegation of financial powers to the  service officers. He was the member-secretary of the Defence Expenditure Review  Committee set up in 2008 and a member of the committee constituted in 2016 for  raising a Defence Acquisition Organisation. He is associated with the exercise  presently underway in the Ministry to review the revenue and capital  procurement procedures. He is a Partner with Dua Associates\, Advocates and  Solicitors at New Delhi. \nTopic: Financial Management of Defence in India  \nAbstract: Financial management is all about securing adequate federal funding\, judicious  intra-organizational allocation and efficient utilization of finances for  achieving the organizational goals. On all these counts\, financial management  of defence poses a big challenge. Mismatch between the projected requirement of  funds and budget outlays is endemic. Obligatory expenses dictate intra-organizational  allocations\, and utilization of whatever funds are left for modernization and  other operational needs after accounting for such exigencies\, is impacted by  procedural complexities and tardy decision-making. The problem has persisted  largely because of the reluctance to come to terms with the reality that  defence funding cannot improve unless there is an exponential spike in the  government’s overall budget receipts\, excluding borrowings. Much is expected  from the Chief of Defence Staff and the Fifteenth Finance Commission which is  likely to recommend some innovative measures –hopefully acceptable to the States  –to augment the defence outlay. This may help to some extent in speeding up modernization\,  but may not provide a holistic solution if the problem of burgeoning manpower  costs –accounting for more than half of the total defence outlay for 2020-21–is  left unaddressed. Financial realism is the sine qua non for efficient  financial management of defence. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nDr. Andrew Scobell \nDr. Andrew Scobell holds the Bren Chair in Non-Western Strategic Thought  at the Krulak Center\, Marine Corps University. He is currently on a leave of  absence from the RAND Corporation where he has been a Senior Political  Scientist since 2010. Dr. Scobell is concurrently Adjunct Professor in the  Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. His  publications include: Chairman Xi Remakes the PLA (National Defense  University Press\, 2019)\, At the Dawn of Belt and Road (RAND\, 2018)\, PLA  Influence on China’s National Security Policymaking (Stanford University  Press\, 2015)\, China’s Search for Security (Columbia University Press\,  2012)\, and China’s Use of Military Force (Cambridge University Press\,  2003). Dr. Scobell earned a doctorate in political science from Columbia  University. \nTopic:  Front and Center? China’s Place in the U.S. National  Security Calculus and Defense Planning  \nAbstract:  Where  does China fit in the national security calculus and defense planning of the  United States in 2020? The administration of Donald J. Trump has identified  multiple threats to U.S. national security and set priorities for defense  planning. This paper examines China’s place in U.S. national security and  national defense \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nLt. Gen. Anil Ahuja (Retd.) \nLt. Gen. Anil Ahuja is a former  Deputy Chief of Integrated Defence Staff (Policy Planning and Force  Development) and Additional Director General Military Operations.  He commanded the Tezpur based 4 Corps and has  been the GOC of the Mountain Division in Bomdilla – Tawang (Kameng Sector)  along the Northern borders. He has been the co-chair of India-US DTTI  Inter-Agency Task Force (DIATF) for India – US defence cooperation and Member-Secretary  of the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) during 2014-2016. He has been the  Defence Attaché to Vietnam\, Cambodia\, Laos and a UN Military Observer in  Angola. He is a graduate of the National Defence College and hold an M.Phil in  Defence and Strategic Studies. A recipient of PVSM\, UYSM\, AVSM\, SM\, VSM &  Bar for distinguished service\, he is presently a Distinguished Fellow at the  Vivekananda International Foundation and an Adjunct Fellow at the Delhi Policy  Group. \nTopic: Defence Planning and Force Development with  Financial Prudence (or Within Financial Constraints)*  \n  Abstract: \n\nPlanning for defence and security of  a nation against all possible threats and challenges is the overriding  responsibility of every government\, despite competing socio-economic and  developmental priorities. In India\, the government spends nearly 15% funds at  its disposal on defence. Also\, for years now\, India has remained one of the  largest importers of global arms. Despite this the armed forces remain  inadequately equipped to meet the visualized security challenges and lament  the deficiency /“hollowness” in arms\, munitions and niche technology. This  phenomenon is not peculiar to India and is experienced by most other countries.  The process of defence planning and capability development with financial  prudence thus remains a perpetual challenge for most governments.\nSome of  the aspects that need to be considered to address this challenge are:\n\nVisualization  of security threats and mode of manifestation across different domains\, which  would be peculiar to each country. \nAllocation  of resources to meet these challenges – distribution of responsibilities  between Armed forces\, Paramilitary forces\, Police and other agencies. \nEvolution  of Security and Defence strategy and visualization of the pattern of operations  to combat likely challenges. \nForce  structuring and capability development requirements for multi-domain hybrid  warfare. Inter se weightage to be accorded would be country / region-specific. \nRoll on  defence budget planning for 10-20 years. \nAddressing  dilemmas of : size of armed forces to be maintained; terms of engagement of  soldiers (pay\, allowances\, perks & privileges\, pensions) with implications  on revenue expenditure; imports versus indigenization; alignments/strategic  partnerships/alignments versus strategic independence; competing demands for  conventional\, strategic and asymmetric threats and for land\, sea\, aerospace and  cyber domains. \nBuilding  `capacities to budget’ or `budgeting to build capacities’? \n\n\nLike there  are no set piece threats faced by nations\, similarly\, there are no template  solutions either. The methodology of financial allocation varies from mere  “apportioning” of yearly budgets to detailed Parliament-driven planning\, as  done in the yearly US “NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act)”. The aim of  this paper is to highlight the factors to be considered and to suggest some  pointers for defence planning within competing financial demands. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nVice-Admiral Anil Chopra\, PVSM\, AVSM (Retd.)\nVice-Admiral Anil Chopra is a  Distinguished Fellow at Gateway House\, Mumbai. Admiral Chopra has been writing  and speaking extensively both in India and abroad on diverse geopolitical and  maritime issues. He retired in 2015 from Indian Navy after four decades of  distinguished service. He had the unique distinction of having been the  Commander-in-Chief of both combatant commands of the Navy as well as having  been the Director General of the Indian Coast Guard. As Assistant Chief of  Naval Staff (Policy and Plans)\, and earlier as Principal Director Naval Plans\,  he was associated  with the formulation  of the Navy’s Long-Term Force Structure and Force-Mix\, and its Perspective and  Financial Planning. He was a member of the Defence Acquisition Council for  three years. Admiral Chopra was a Member of the National Security Advisory  Board from 2017-2019. He was also a member of the Shekatkar Committee in 2016  to examine measures to enhance the combat capability of the Indian Armed  Forces\, and rebalance the defence budget. \nTopic: Force  Level Planning for the Indian Navy  \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nMr. Apurv Kumar Mishra \nMr. Apurv Kumar Mishra is a Senior Research Fellow at India Foundation  (IF)\, where he leads initiatives related to foreign policy. He is a faculty of  law at Ashoka University and teaches courses on law at several institutions  including Gandhinagar National Law University\, Plaksha Tech Leaders’ Programme  and Vedica Scholars’ Programme. He is also the Editor-in-Chief of India Law Journal and leads the Anubhav  Lecture Series (ALS) at University of Chicago\, India Centre. He is a founding  member of the Robin Hood Army – a voluntary organization of young professionals  and students that works to get surplus food from restaurants across to less  fortunate people in 100+ cities across 12 countries. He has previously worked with  the Albright Stonebridge Group – a Washington-based strategic advisory firm and  the corporate law firm\, Amarchand & Mangaldas.  \nTopic: Security and Statecraft in the Age of GAFA (Google\,  Amazon\, Facebook and Apple)  \nAbstract: When Mark Zuckerberg launched his own book club in  2015\, the first book he recommended was The End of Power by Moises Naim.  A curious choice for the owner of Facebook because the book’s central claim is  that in the 21st century power is “easier to get\, harder to use\, and easier to  lose.” Traditional sources of power — government\, big companies\, religious  institutions and conventional media — are facing a severe challenge from smaller\,  agile competitors\, creating instability in international order and domestically  within countries.  \nA key factor prompting this fundamental  transition in the power structure of societies around the world is the  pervasive use of technology in our daily lives. Take the case of India. Even  though more than half of our population still does not have access to the  internet\, we are already the world’s second largest internet user base (behind  China)\, with average monthly data usage matching the levels of developed  countries. \nThe data we consume on the internet is  increasingly driving our choices in public and private life — from whom we vote  for\, products we buy\, news we read\, to the person we marry. Governments now  realize that this data generated by citizens is a vital national asset and  needs protection against possible misuse by our adversaries. Therefore\, a key  policy challenge for our government is to protect the sanctity of the process  by which Indians connected to the internet make their most important decisions. \nHowever\, technologists are often unable  (or unwilling) to anticipate the broader impact of their technological  creations on national security. On the other hand\, software\, hardware\,  platforms\, and networks are regulated by sometimes conflicting and overlapping  sets of laws and policies. This is complicated by the fact that our lawmakers  favour status-quo and are quite slow in adapting to fast-changing technological  interventions. \nWhat are the guiding  principles to create a regulatory framework for disruptive technologies that  balance both risk and benefit? How have our courts and legislators responded to  this challenge? The paper seeks to understand how Industry 4.0 is challenging  the conventional national security paradigm that has guided India’s strategic establishment  for the last three decades. It ends with a preliminary outline of a modified  approach to manage India’s national security in an age of accelerating rate of  social and technological change. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nProf. Darko Trifunovic\nProf. Darko Trifunovic is a founding member and Director of the  Institute for National and International Security. Dr. Trifunovic is an elected  guest professor at the Center of American Studies\, Fudan University\, –Shanghai\,  China. He is also a Senior Research Fellow with the rank of Associate Professor  at Fudan University’s Institute of BRI Strategy and International Security.  Additionally\, Dr. Trifunovic is Adjunct Professor and Coordinator for Research at  the Shanghai Academy of Social Science. Dr. Darko Trifunovic is also Senior  Research Fellow and Lecturer with the Faculty of Security Studies at the University  of Belgrade and Senior Adviser at the Research Institute for European and  American Studies\, Athens\, Greece. He is a specialist in Security Studies\,  Intelligence & Counter Intelligence Studies as well as Counter-Terrorism  and National and International Security Studies. He also served as the First  Secretary of Bosnia and Herzegovina at the United Nations. \nTopic: Hybrid War\, Technology and Intelligence  Sharing in National Security  \nAbstract: Every war is conflict but every conflict is  not a war. Hybrid operations involve a whole range of activities aimed at  achieving a state of information supremacy and attempting to shape the thought  of an attacked target in accordance with the attacker’s will and desires.  Hybrid or influence operation seeks to influence the opinions and attitudes of  the target audience (society\, state\, group)\, using the many benefits of  digital media and social networks to spread the data and information they want\,  to spread their influence and impose on their own attitudes on others. In these  processes\, methods are often used to extract information from the actual  context of the event and its placement in a fictional\, targeted\, counterfeit  temporal-spatial context\, to make it easier for the attacked public to better  accept the placement misinformation without doubting its veracity. Hybrid  operations\, which until recently have been known as special operations in armed  activities\, have evolved into a dominant form of hybrid threats. Hybrid  threats\, as a set of different manifestations of particular hybrid operations\,  entail directed and organized action towards an individual audience in order to  exploit (foster\, deepen) existing ones and create new vulnerabilities\, foster  feelings of division\, insecurity\, defeatism\, powerlessness\, hopelessness\,  ambiguity\, suspicion\, disruption and collapse of democratic structures and  processes\, attenuations and attempts to control the functioning of the defence system.  Together with asymmetrical way of warfare\, hybrid war become an effective  element of modern conflicts. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nGen. R. M. Daya Ratnayake\, WWV\, RWP\, RSP\, USP\, NDU\, PSC (Retd.)\nGen. R. M.  Daya Ratnayake (Retd.)  is currently the Chairman of the Sri Lanka  Ports Authority (SLPA) and was formerly the Commander of the Sri Lanka Army (2013-2015).  He was enlisted to the Regular Force of the Sri Lanka Army in 1980. General  Daya Ratnayake has held many command appointments and his role as the  Commissioner-General of Rehabilitation to rehabilitate 14\,500 more LTTE  ex-combatants has been widely acknowledged. His exceptionally unique qualities in  many daunting military operations have been well-recognized as a battlefield  veteran and he has been decorated with more than twenty-six gallantry and  service medals. Currently\, he is pursuing PhD at the General Sir John  Kotelawala Defence University\, Colombo. \nTopic: A Study on War\, Warfare and Warfighting: The Sri  Lankan Experience  \nAbstract: Sri Lanka’s experience in the final successful  military operation over the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)\, offers new  insight into warfare and war- fighting. The country’s military offensive ran  contrary to an internationally-led peace effort which was seen as the only hope  for ending the three decade-long armed conflict. However\, the State’s strategy  was to defeat LTTE militarily first and find a solution to the larger conflict  while addressing root causes to the conflict\, later.     \n  In the midst of several  alleged human rights violation charges levelled against the Government of Sri  Lanka and the military\, the world has missed the opportunity to analyze the island  nation’s armed conflict\, warfighting and warfare with known and invented  military concepts and methods. This paper is such an attempt\, and in that\, the  author redefines Sri Lanka’s armed conflict and explains the events of the  successful military offensive\, connecting age-old military concepts\, methods  and doctrines.   \n  This paper argues that  the Sri Lankan experience was an optimum application of military power with a  clear political strategy to resolve an armed conflict with a state-of-the-art  guerilla force. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nDr. Erica Marat\nDr. Erica Marat is an Associate  Professor and Chair at the Regional and Analytical Studies Department of the  College of International Security Affairs\, National Defense University\,  Washington\, D.C. Her research focuses on violence and mobilization\, security  institutions\, and mobilization in Eurasia\, India and Mexico. She has authored  three books\, including most recently\, The  Politics of Police Reform: Society against the State in Post-Soviet Countries (Oxford  University Press 2018).  \nTopic: Surveillance Technologies: Chinese and Russian  Chronicle in Central Asia \nAbstract: The recent spread of surveillance technologies in Central Asia shows how cities  and countries aspire to follow global trends for innovation in the name of  public safety and the rule of law. Authorities of all large cities have  installed facial-recognition cameras and CCTV systems under the aegis of  ‘smart’. But they are also susceptible to the whims of technological giants who  are working as part of their countries’ geopolitical ambitions.  State-controlled Chinese companies HikVision and Huawei and the Russian company\,  Vega dominate the supply side. Given the pervasive absence of legislative  oversight\, the countries looking to leapfrog into the digital future are  adopting a virtual authoritarianism that risks suppressing political dissent  and further marginalizes already disadvantaged groups. Inevitably\, with greater  dependence on foreign vendors\, the Central Asian countries are also becoming  part of global competition between China\, Russia and the West for data  collection for Artificial Intelligence (AI) purposes. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nProf. Feodor Voitolovsky\nProf. Feodor  Voitolovsky is Director of the Primakov National Research Institute of World  Economy and International Relations\, Russian Academy of Sciences (IMEMO). His  research interests include international security\, US foreign and security  policy\, Russia-US relations\, US-China relations\, US policy in North-East Asia\, Transatlantic  relations\, NATO\, global political prognostics\, global governance and  international institutions. He also holds other positions such as Professor at  the Department of Political Science\, MGIMO University (of the Russian Ministry  of Foreign Affairs)\, head of IMEMO’s teaching and research department at the Far  East Federal University (Vladivostok)\, Editorial Board member of the journal World Economy and International Relations and Editorial Board member of the Global Development annual series at the IMEMO.  Prof. Voitolovsky has published a monograph and co-authored and co-edited  twenty collective monographs. He is also an author of more than 70 articles in  journals devoted to international politics and chapters in books including  “Global System on the Brink: Pathways Toward a New Normal” (2016)\, “Global Perestroika:  Transformations of the World Order” (2015)\, “Misbalances of Pacific Asia”  (2015) and others.\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nDr. Hanbyeol Sohn \nDr. Hanbyeol Sohn is currently an Assistant Professor in  the Department of Military Strategy at the Korea National Defense University  (KNDU). He graduated from Seoul National University and received a doctorate in  military studies from KNDU. From 2002\, Professor Sohn held both commander and  staff positions in the field and served as an acting officer in the Strategic  Planning Division\, ROK Joint Chiefs of Staff. He also conducted research for  the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) and Korea Research  Institute for National Security (KRINS). His research areas include the ROK-US  Alliance\, non-proliferation policy and nuclear strategy\, and Northeast Asian  security. \nTopic:  Defence Innovation and South Korea’s Evolving  Military Outlook in Asia  \nAbstract:  In a rapidly changing security environment on the Korean Peninsula\, South  Korea is pursuing “Defense Reform 2.0.” Its objective is to build an  innovative\, creative\, ‘elite and advanced strong force\,’ and it suggests four innovations  – military structure\, defence management\, military culture\, and defence industry.  Many people preparing for future wars emphasize the “Future of War\,”  in terms of\, the emerging military technology changes the face of war. But they  must also grapple with the question of “War of the Future”\, which is  a continuation of politics by other means. Since the “state-war-technology”  triangle has an interdependent nature\, the Military-Technical Revolution (MTR)\,  Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA)\, and Revolution in Security Affairs (RSA) have  a synergic interaction. Therefore\, South Korea’s Defense Reform 2.0 will  determine its success depending on whether military technology\, military  strategy and defence innovation can develop together. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nDr. Ikboljon Qoraboyev\nDr. Ikboljon Qoraboyev is an  Associate Professor of International Relations at the Higher School of  Economics of M. Narikbayev KAZGUU in Nur-sultan\, Kazakhstan. Dr Qoraboyev  received his PhD in International Law from the University of Toulouse. His  research spans across International Law\, International Relations and  Comparative Regionalism Studies. His research interests include regionalism in  Eurasia\, Belt and Road Initiative from the perspective of comparative  regionalism\, great power interactions in Central Asia\, international law in  domestic legal systems\, and understanding of sovereignty in Central Asia. \nTopic: Rise of China and global security dynamics:  Implications for Central Asia  \nAbstract: This paper will elaborate on implications of  the rise of China for the Central Asian region. China’s rise as great power is  one of the biggest tests and opportunities for global governance. At the same  time\, it poses one of the most important challenges to international security.  For Central Asians\, it is important to acquire a comprehensive understanding of  China’s rise from the perspective of global security dynamics. This paper will begin  by providing a summary of the decades-long IR debate on China’s rise as a great  power. It will then proceed with analyzing the major contemporary challenges to  international order and global security posed by the China factor. It will  conclude by highlighting how the consequences of these major international  shifts may unfold in Central Asia. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nMr. Jean-Christophe Noël\nMr. Jean-Christophe Noël is Associated  Research Fellow at IFRI’s Security Studies Center in Paris. He is a former  French Air Force officer. After pursuing a career as a fighter pilot\, he held  various staff positions\, dealing with doctrinal or prospective matters. He was  also the Deputy Chief of Staff of the French Air Force\, Chief of Staff from  2006 to 2009\, a Military Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International  Studies in 2009-2010 in Washington DC\, and had been in charge of  politico-military affairs at the Policy Planning Staff of the Ministry of  Foreign Affairs from 2012 to 2017. He currently teaches at Sciences Po Paris.  He graduated from the French Air Force Academy\, Sciences Po Paris and the  French Ecole de Guerre. \nTopic: Will AI revolutionize Warfare? \nAbstract: Although the development of Artificial  Intelligence (AI) is still in its early stages\, it has already had an impact on  the armed forces. In time\, AI will be able to take into account more  wide-ranging and diverse data in order to develop a tactical situation.  Besides\, the execution speed of the algorithms that can process and immediately  enhance the data received\, will dictate the execution rate of certain tasks. \nThe progress of AI could lead to a  true military revolution\, where a new form of automation could gain ground. The  soldier of the future could for example\, be the shepherd of a flock of  specialized robots. A change in the relationship between humans and war could  also happen. By abandoning a part of their security to algorithms\, the citizens  of the future could banish war from their horizon and give a very wide-ranging  and dangerous autonomy to the institutions responsible for defence. The most  pessimistic forecasters envisage apocalyptic scenarios\, but the worst is by no  means inevitable. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nDr. Jeffrey Becker\nDr. Jeffrey Becker directs the  Indo-Pacific Security Affairs Program at CNA. His research focuses on Chinese  politics and Chinese foreign policy and security issues\, including China’s  military diplomacy\, US-China military engagement\, and the security implications  of China’s expanding global presence in the Middle East and the Indian Ocean.  Dr. Becker’s recent CNA publications include China’s Presence in the Middle East and Western Indian Ocean: Beyond  Belt and Road and China’s Military  Support Facility in Djibouti: The Economic and Security Dimensions of China’s  First Overseas Base. His peer-reviewed writings have appeared in the Naval War College Review\, the Journal of Chinese Political Science\,  and Comparative Political Studies. He  has also published articles in East Asia  Forum\, The National Interest and The Diplomat.  From 2014-2018\, Dr. Becker supported the US Navy with China’s participation in  the multilateral “Rim of the Pacific” exercise. As part of these efforts\, he  has worked alongside US and Chinese exercise planners\, and has spent time at  sea aboard multiple Chinese navy warships. \nTopic: Revision and Continuity in America’s Approach to  the Indo-Pacific  \nAbstract: The US Department of Defense Indo-Pacific  Strategy Report describes the Indo-Pacific as the Department’s “priority  theatre” and “the single most consequential region for America’s future.”   \n  This renewed focus  on the Indo-Pacific comes at a time when the United States and others\,  including regional powers such as India\, seek to manage a range of different  and complex security challenges that threaten to undermine continued stability  and economic growth in the region. From the perspective of the United States\,  inter-state rivalry – most notably growing competition with China – remains a  primary concern. Additionally\, however\, non-traditional threats\, including  terrorism and the rise of extremist ideology\, demand attention from both the  United States and US partners and allies.  \n  This paper seeks  to provide an insight into the current US approach to the region. In doing so\,  it seeks to examine how the US conception of the Indo-Pacific region has  changed over time\, how US security policy towards the region has evolved\, what  forces are driving that evolution\, and what that means for the United States\,  US partners and allies\, and the region more broadly. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nMs. Kwek Ai Wei\nMs. Kwek Ai Wei is the Special  Functions Officer to the Deputy Minister of Defence of Malaysia. In this role\,  she advises the Deputy Minister on policy matters\, and was involved in the  drafting of the first Malaysian Defence White Paper. Prior to this\, she has worked  in various policy advisory and governmental affairs roles for international organizations\,  including the United Nations Development Programme and the International  Committee of the Red Cross\, and in the diplomatic corps. She holds a Masters in  International Studies and Diplomacy from SOAS\, University of London\, and was an  alumni of the Young Southeast Asian Leaders’ Initiative (YSEALI) Professional  Fellow Program instituted by the US Department of State. \nTopic: Defence Planning and Maritime Disputes in  Southeast Asia  \nAbstract: Several Southeast Asian nations have published  their Defence White Papers in recent years. Malaysia published its inaugural Defence  White Paper in 2019. Vietnam published its fourth Defence White Paper in 2019  while Brunei\, Philippines and Indonesia published theirs in 2011\, 2012 and 2015  respectively.  \nThese White Papers  were drafted amidst intensifying US-China strategic competition\, geopolitical  uncertainties and the increasing challenge of non-traditional security threats  in the region. As maritime nations\, these states share similar interests and  security challenges in the maritime domain\, including territorial maritime  disputes with other littoral states\, while also facing a varying degree of  inland security threats. As small states\, a looming Chinese influence\, coupled  with US-China competition at the global level\, has caused anxiety that the  region\, particularly the South China Sea\, which might become a theatre of  conflict between the great powers.  \nThis paper will  discuss the common themes expounded in these Defence White Papers and how the  Southeast Asian states perceive their security environment. It will also  explore the use of Defence White Paper as planning tools to spur defence reforms  and force restructuring\, taking into consideration the difference in domestic  and political dynamics of each states. Further\, the paper aims to demonstrate  the responses devised by these states in securing their defence interests\, both  as individual states but also collectively as ASEAN member states. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nDr. Lai Thai Binh\nDr. Lai Thai Binh is Deputy  Director-General\, Institute for East Sea Studies\, Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam  since December 2019. He has served as a Vietnam-U.S. Relations Desk Officer  (2003)\, Deputy Director (2006)\, Director of the North America Division (2007)\,  Director of American Research Division (2009)\, Assistant Director-General (2009-  2012) and Deputy Director-General (2013-2016) in the Americas Department\,  Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Vietnam and was posted as the Deputy  Consul-General of Vietnam in Houston\, Texas (2016-2019). Dr. Binh earned his  first Bachelors degree in International Economics from the Hanoi Foreign Trade  University\, a second Bachelors degree in Law from the Hanoi National  University\, a Post-Graduate Diploma in International Management from  International Management Institute in New Delhi (India)\, a Master of  International Public Policy degree from SAIS\, Johns Hopkins (Washington DC) and  a PhD in International Relations from the Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam. \nTopic: Maritime Planning in Vietnam’s National  Security Calculus  \nAbstract: The sea plays an extremely important role in  the development and security of Vietnam. In the context that the regional and  international situation continues to unpredictably fluctuate\, Vietnam pays more  attention to maritime planning and focuses on major principles that will guide  the maritime development for the next 10-20 years. Vietnam’s maritime planning  is focused on the following factors: (i) Ensuring maritime economic security in  the direction of rapidly developing tourism and marine services\, maritime  economy\, oil and gas exploitation and maritime mineral resources\, marine and  industrial aquaculture and exploitation\, coastal industries\, renewable energy  and new maritime industries; (ii) Developing residential communities in  association with regional development and ensure safety and security for  fishermen; (iii) Strengthening the capacity of the armed and law enforcement  forces to be ready to deal with traditional and non-traditional maritime  security threats; persistently building an environment of peace\, stability and  legal order at sea; strengthening and expanding foreign relations and contributing  to the joint efforts of the international community towards the conservation  and sustainable use of seas and oceans.  \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nDr. Laxman Kumar Behera\nDr. Laxman Kumar Behera is Research Fellow at the Manohar  Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses. As a member of the  Institute’s Defence Economics and Industry Centre\, Dr. Behera specialises on  issues related to Arms Procurement\, Defence Offsets\, Defence Industry\, Military  Spending\, and Defence Cooperation. He was closely associated with two  high-level Committees set up by the Ministry of Defence on Defence Acquisition  and Defence Expenditure. He was a Consultant to the Task Force on Self-Reliance  and Defence Modernization constituted by the National Security Council  Secretariat (NSCS)\, Government of India. Dr. Behera was the Chief Coordinator  and Member of two study teams constituted by the Ministry of Defence to examine  the Impact of Offsets on the Indian Defence Industrial Base\, and Defence  Acquisition: International Best Practices. As part of his responsibilities Dr  Behera undertakes policy relevant research besides providing regular inputs to  the Ministry of Defence and other ministries and departments of the Government  of India.  \nTopic: ‘Make in India’ and the  Changing Profile of Indian Defence Industry  \nAbstract: The ‘Make in India’ programme\,  launched by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in September 2014\, has been a guiding  force for the Ministry of Defence to usher in many defence industrial reforms.  Within a short span of five-and-a-half years\, numerous reform measures have  been implemented that were hitherto unheard of. These measures include  simplification of industrial licensing\, increase in FDI cap\, articulation of  defence export promotion measures\, opening of trial and testing facilities for  use by the private sector\, a level-playing field for the domestic private  companies\, articulation of an indigenization policy to be followed by the  state-owned production entities and reform of the state-owned production  entities. The government has also simplified its procurement procedures to  provide greater opportunity to domestic industry to participate in mega  contracts including that of fighters\, submarines\, helicopters and tanks. While  all these measures have been taken to strengthen India’s defence production as  a whole\, an inherent undercurrent of the policy reform has been greater  participation of the Indian private sector\, which is perceived to be the future  of India’s arms production. The paper examines the impact of all the policy  reform measures on domestic defence production with special focus on the Indian  private sector\, to assess its contribution to India’s self-reliance  efforts.   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nDr. Malcolm Davis \nDr. Malcolm Davis joined the Australian  Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) as a Senior Analyst in Defence Strategy and  Capability\, in January 2016. Prior to this he was a Post-Doctoral Research  Fellow in China-Western Relations at Bond University Queensland\, from March  2012 to January 2016\, and he currently retains an Honorary Assistant Professor’s  position in the faculty there. He has worked with the Department of Defense\,  both in Navy Headquarters in the Strategy and Force Structure area\, and with the  Strategic Policy Division in the Strategic Policy Guidance sections from  November 2007 to March 2012. Prior to this appointment he was a Lecturer in  Defence Studies with Kings College London at the Joint Services Command and  Staff College in Shrivenham\, UK\, from June 2000 to October 2007. He holds a PhD  in Strategic Studies from the University of Hull as well as two Masters degrees  in Strategic Studies\, including one from the Australian National University’s  Strategic and Defence Studies Centre. \nTopic: Artificial  Intelligence\, National Security and Modern Warfare: An Australian Perspective  \nAbstract: The development of Australia’s future defence  capability faces a looming inflection point in military affairs. The balance of  advantage in future warfare may be determined by which side can more quickly  identify and exploit disruptive innovation\, both in terms of capability development  prior to war\, as well as in actual military operations during wartime.   \nAn emphasis on  slow\, large\, and expensive acquisition projects based around traditional  platforms – warships\, submarines\, armoured fighting vehicles and manned combat  aircraft – may prove inadequate in a future where Artificial Intelligence (AI)\,  unmanned autonomous systems\, and other new types of military capability are  shaping future military innovation cycles.  \nThis paper  examines how the Australian defence and national security community is dealing  with this emerging challenge. It explores the potential application of AI and  battlespace robotics\, hypersonics and space capability for the Australian  Defence Force (ADF) in the 2020s and beyond. It considers how their introduction  might transform our approach to military operations in a multi-domain  operational environment. It also considers how these technologies\, and more  broadly\, the fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) in defence acquisition\, can  ensure Australia can maintain competitive advantage against the rapid pace and  scope of military technological change.  \n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nDr. Manoj Joshi  \nDr. Manoj Joshi is a Distinguished Fellow at the Observer Research  Foundation\, New Delhi. A professional journalist\, he is currently a columnist  for several Indian newspapers and a commentator on TV. He has had a long-term  interest in national security matters. In recent years\, he has focused on the  rise of China and his most recent academic publications have been on China’s  technology challenge\, its military modernization\, the South China Sea dispute\,  the Doklam Crisis and the Belt and Road Initiative and the Wuhan Summit. In  2011\, he was a member of the Task Force on National Security chaired by Mr  Naresh Chandra to propose reforms in the national security system. He was also  involved in the drafting of a Strategic Defence Review as a member of India’s  National Security Council’s Advisory Board. He has co-edited a book on the US  and South Asia and authored two books on Kashmir. He holds a PhD from the  School of International Studies (SIS)\, Jawaharlal Nehru University\, New Delhi.     \nTopic: Strategic Uncertainty in India’s Neighbourhood  \nAbstract: There is a great deal of flux across the world. Old paradigms are shifting\,  without new ones in sight. The country that shaped the world order in the wake  of World War II\, the US\, now decries the order and is set on demolishing it. As  a result\, the international institutions it shaped — the UN\, the World Trade Organization\,  or the Climate Change Conferences — are being buffeted by contrary winds.  \nThe US has decided that it is in strategic  competition with China and is seeking to upend the global trading order which  it says has unfairly exploited them. Technology has emerged as the centre point  of this contest. Military and economic competition did characterize the old  order\, but in the past decade we have seen facets of this change in terms of  climate change\, piracy\, the use of non-state actors to push state policy\, cyber  threats\, energy and food security and anti-immigrant sentiments. At the beginning  of this year\, the outbreak of coronavirus has brought to the fore the enormous  challenge of pandemics. Countries must therefore gear up to newer challenges  and adjust their defence strategies to cope with them.  \nWhat is the scenario in India’s neighbourhood?  First and foremost is the rise of China and its growing footprint in the South  Asian and Indian Ocean Region (SA-IOR). In terms of resources\, both financial  and military\, India has to compete with Beijing. China’s ties with Pakistan  have been solidified and its footprint in Nepal and Myanmar is growing. The  victory of the Rajapakses in Sri Lanka means that at a minimum\, Beijing faces a  positive environment. In the Maldives\, pro-India forces have prevailed\, but for  how long is the question. The short issue here is that India lacks a  relationship that has institutional depth that can overcome periodic changes in  the leaderships of the countries; it is dependent on who wins an election in  these countries.  \nNo matter how one looks at it\, the issues  of SA-IOR cannot be limited to the region. They are intrinsically connected  with
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/21st-asian-security-conference-national-security-and-defence-planning-in-an-era-of-strategic-uncertainty-postponed
CATEGORIES:Asian Security Conference,CONFERENCES
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://idsa.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/no_photo-200x150-2.jpg
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR