[Free to read upon sharing contact details] As the build-up and response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has clearly demonstrated, the US, EU, UK, and many other countries use sanctions as both a reactive and proactive tool in foreign policy. Whether used as deterrent to specific actions or in response to major geopolitical actions, the sanctions themselves have significant and widespread implications for business that increase legal, operational and reputational risks to business across the globe.

[Free to access upon setting up an account] It feels appropriate, a couple of months after the twentieth anniversary of 9/11, to pause and consider whether the world is more, or less, secure from terrorism than in the latter part of the previous century. We inhabit a world where traditional terrorist threats, which tended to be localised and focused on the destruction of property and killing servicemen, policemen and public figures, feel somewhat primitive. Our new world is populated by Jihadis and extremists who buy ‘one-way tickets’ on route to martyrdom and mass casualty events.

The development and adoption of artificial intelligence is accelerating significantly, but the big question now is how do we maximise its benefits while avoiding its biggest risks?

As Russia assembles both the means for conducting an attack on Ukraine and the excuses for doing so, its demands for avoiding a conflict are expanding rapidly. How the US, NATO, and the West respond to those demands and the overt military threats accompanying them will have far-reaching consequences for the future direction of Russia as a state, and consequently for the security of Europe.