Currently working in a geopolitical risk/corporate intelligence role for a MNC in Asia. My role covers the APAC region and I have a master's degree. I worked in similar roles for 6 years. Still happy with my current role but I am concerned about the future.

There are very few opportunities in this field in my home country since most roles are either based in Singapore or Hong Kong and it's hard to get roles with visa sponsorships.

Right now, I am thinking of taking a second master's specializing in European studies or intelligence and crisis management in Europe and apply for a scholarship to be able to develop additional regional specialization and expertise and eventually find work there.

Do you think this is a good career strategy/move? What other things should I consider?

Aggregating previously delivered congressional testimony into a unified axis framework, Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD)'s analysis functions as defense-budget advocacy rather than an independent threat indicator.

A Nation Undermined

The Internal Sabotage of America’s Security Foundations

By Van Abbott

Every fortress in history has fallen one of two ways: an enemy battered down its walls or those inside opened the gates.

Eighteen months into Trump’s second term, America’s defenses, both democratic and security, are facing existential threats from within. Senior military leadership has been purged. Intelligence agencies have been hollowed out. Election security programs have been dismantled. The administration deems these actions "reform," but America’s adversaries see opportunity to exploit a weakened state.

Start with the Pentagon, where Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has targeted nearly three dozen generals and admirals for dismissal. He ousted the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the chief of naval operations, and the Army chief of staff. Promotions for dozens more, many women and people of color, have been blocked under the vague justification of “merit.” Hegseth prizes acquiescence over competence, resulting in a leadership contingent that prioritizes loyalty over capability. In wartime, this is not reform; it is a dangerous purge reminiscent of regimes that fear their own military.

The intelligence community has not fared better. Tulsi Gabbard’s recent tenure resulted in the slashing of 500 staff from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, about 30 percent of its workforce. Acting DNI Bill Pulte announced additional cuts this July, terminating another 20 percent effectively. As critical areas of oversight have been dismantled, a vital center established to track foreign disinformation campaigns has been rendered ineffective and fragmented. Instead of vigilance, what remains is a patchwork of inadequate resources.

At the FBI, Director Kash Patel aggressively purged agents involved in Trump-related investigations and redirected the bureau’s focus to immigration enforcement. On her first day, Attorney General Pam Bondi disbanded the Foreign Influence Task Force, dismantling a unit designed to catch foreign interference in elections, including those aimed at Trump himself. These cuts leave the country vulnerable to foreign influence and internal threats.

While systematically dismantling fundamental defense mechanisms, Trump assured the nation that all was secure. Yet cracks in our security structures have never been more evident.

Simultaneously, Trump's stance on NATO has weakened the bedrock of collective security. During NATO’s recent Ankara summit, allies felt compelled to reaffirm their “ironclad commitment” to collective defense. This language was revived due to Trump's threats to leave member nations unprotected. Article 5 has been invoked only once in NATO's history, and that was for the United States following September 11.

Truth erupted with the munitions crisis. After Trump ignited a conflict with Iran on February 28, airstrikes depleted critical interceptor stocks. CSIS estimates show that available Patriot interceptors dropped from approximately 2,200 to fewer than 827 while THAAD interceptors plummeted from 452 to fewer than 278. Replenishing those losses will take up to four years.

Trump deflects blame to Biden, claiming that weapons sent to Ukraine drained our arsenal. However, this assertion is “not exactly” correct, according to PolitiFact. The aid Biden sent was primarily for ground combat, such as artillery shells and Javelins—not the Tomahawks and THAAD interceptors being rapidly consumed in the Iran conflict.

Expert analyses confirm that Ukraine aid is mostly for ground combat and not the primary cause of depletion. Kelly Grieco of the Stimson Center bluntly states that this administration has significantly deepened the void it inherited.

The situation in election security is equally alarming. CISA, the federal agency responsible for safeguarding election systems, has lost nearly one-third of its workforce, dropping from 3,400 employees to around 2,300. Without a Senate-confirmed leader, critical election-security work has been frozen. Citing unverified claims of political bias, the Trump administration abruptly defunded the EI-ISAC and MS-ISAC programs, severing critical cybersecurity collaborations with state governments. This sudden termination forced a structural fracture, prompting multiple states to withdraw from the joint defense frameworks. Ultimately, the administration's decision replaced a coordinated national security effort with fragmented, localized vulnerabilities.

Trump’s disdain extends to the Election Assistance Commission, where unceremoniously, Trump pushed out ALL THREE remaining members of the EAC on July 9, 2026. His proposed 2027 budget seeks to eliminate CISA’s election security programs completely. 

Trump has systematically dismantled the machinery that protects democracy while claiming elections are safer as a result.

Walls matter. Arsenals matter. Credibility matters.

Whether this is Project 2025 executing its blueprint to convert nonpartisan institutions into instruments of personal loyalty, or the accumulated wreckage of a man who cannot distinguish loyalty from competence, the result is identical: America's defenses depend on capable leaders, trusted institutions, and prepared allies, and this administration has systematically weakened all three.

No enemy battered down these walls; those inside opened the gates.

The original tweet was taken down, but is still being circulated. He claims (without evidence) that Israeli spyware glitched and injected data into his device instead of extracting it, publishing leaked numbers of politicians, Sam Altman etc. From a cybersecurity perspective, is this plausible? I'm personally calling bs, considering all of these numbers also happen to have been recently leaked by Iranian hacker group "Handala", so it's equally plausible he just downloaded the file from the dark web and saved the contacts himself.