However, in 2018, things began to go the wrong direction when US President Donald Trump called the agreement a ‘bad deal’ and pulled the US out of the JCPOA. The latter, initialed by the seven contracting parties in July 2015, was the product of 20 months of hard negotiations based on the “Roadmap Agreement” between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

In a nutshell, under the JCPOA, Iran agreed to eliminate its stockpile of medium-enriched uranium, cut its stockpile of low-enriched uranium by 98 per cent, and reduce by about two-thirds the number of its gas centrifuges for 13 years. Till 2030, Iran would have to enrich uranium only up to 3.67 per cent. Tehran also agreed not to build any new heavy-water facilities for the next 15 years. Uranium-enrichment activities would have to be limited to a single facility using first-generation centrifuges for ten years. Other facilities would also be converted to avoid proliferation risks. The IAEA was granted access to the Iranian nuclear sights – predominantly at the Fordow underground facility – in order to verify compliance with the deal. Trump announced the US withdrawal on May 8, 2018. By November of the same year, US sanctions came back into effect designed to force Iran to dramatically change its policies, including its support for militant groups in the region and its development of ballistic missiles.

The unravelling of the JCPOA continued in the next couple of years: the world saw Iran violating several parts of the deal. Worst still, confrontation reached a peak towards the end of last year (November 27) with the assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, Iran’s chief nuclear scientist, allegedly by Israel. Iran’s parliament retorted by authorising Hassan Rouhani, Iran’s president, to produce and store at least 120 kilogrammes of 20 per cent-enriched uranium per year: half the amount considered necessary for a single nuclear bomb. In a conciliatory tone, however, Javad Zarif, the Iranian foreign minister, stressed that Iran’s violations of the deal are fully reversible, should the US rejoin the JCPOA deal. In this connection, Julia Frifield, US Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs, advised, at the time of the conclusion of the deal, that the JCPOA is not a treaty or an executive agreement and is not a signed document. The JCPOA reflects political commitments between Iran, the P5+1, and the EU, she stressed. In this respect, political commitments seem to be good enough for president-elect Joe Biden who committed to rejoin the deal, if Tehran backsteps to ‘strict compliance’.

For the time being, tensions in the Persian Gulf are rising: the same day Tehran announced resumption of its uranium enrichment programme (January 4, 2021) Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) seized a South Korean oil tanker for allegedly polluting the Gulf with chemicals. The South Korean-flagged MT Hankuk Chemi oil tanker carrying 7,200 of oil chemical products was stormed by the IRGC as it was navigating the Strait of Hormuz.

However, Iranian regime news agencies suggest the real reason behind the oil tanker seizure is the wish to negotiate with the South Koreans the release of eight billion USD of Iranian money frozen in Seoul accounts in compliance to the US imposed sanctions regime. According to Tehran Times, Iran needs those funds to procure supplies of covid-19 vaccines, a reasonable claim with reference to the current worldwide humanitarian crisis, one has to admit. At any rate, concentration of naval forces continues to build up. Washington ordered US aircraft carrier Nimitz to stay put in the Gulf – reversing an earlier order to sail home. In addition, the South Koreans dispatched a destroyer to the region. Seoul, however, added it does not intend to use force, while bilateral negotiations with Iran are under way.

Traditionally, the leading positions in the field of “cyber war” are occupied by the United States, China, Russia and Israel. However, recently there are new strong players namely Iran, India and North Korea.

Becoming increasingly aware of the advantages of “cyber influence”, Pyongyang considers it as an important element of its national policy “Songun” (“Army in the first place”) along with the Missile Programme. The North Korean leadership pays considerable attention to the training of specialists in the field of computer technology, and creates attractive conditions for their subsequent job placement. The most promising candidates are sent to study in specialized educational institutions of China and Iran. According to experts on the issues of information security, the modern “cyber army” of North Korea is characterized by high professionalism and bellicosity. Chris Inglis, former Deputy Director of the US National Security Agency (NSA) called the cyber programme of Pyongyang “one of the most effective on the planet, because it allows to achieve the goals at minimal cost.”

Despite the absence of direct evidence, the media and intelligence agencies are now ascribing a large number of resonant “cyber-attacks” to North Korean hackers. In analyzing these incidents, it is possible to distinguish the main goals of Pyongyang in the “cyber space”. First of all, the numerous implementations in the network of financial institutions are a source of income for the sanction-stricken country.

In addition, North Korean hackers make a significant contribution to the development of the national military-industrial complex by stealing military technology. Another important area of activity of specialists from the DPRK is the collection of personal information about individuals, personnel of the armed forces and the plans of the military and political leadership of its main opponents, that is to say the United States and South Korea. The recent attacks made by using the WannaCry virus have shown that Pyongyang has the ability to disable the civil and possibly the military infrastructure. Special emphasis is given to strengthening the image of the state and its leader. According to the FBI, this was the reason for hacking the servers of the Sony Pictures film studio.

It should be noted that the DPRK’s activities in “cyber space” reflect asymmetries and the ability to mask its actions. The first feature is based on the isolation of the state from the Internet, which allows to reduce significantly the likelihood of retaliatory “cyber strike”. Thus, according to the British newspaper The Guardian, the attempt to use the Stuxnet virus to attack the units of the DPRK’s nuclear complex in May 2015 ended in failure. In turn, the disguise is implemented through access to the global network from the territory of other countries. The American edition of “Business Insider”, citing experts on “cyber security” and intelligence reports, claims that a significant part of North Korean hackers are deployed in the Chinese hotel “Chilbosan”, in Shenyang city. The company Recorder Future, specializing in the field of information security, notes that North Korean experts also have access to the Internet from the territory or through servers originating in India, Malaysia, New Zealand, Nepal, Kenya, Mozambique and Indonesia. In addition, Pyongyang often resorts to the so-called “operations under another’s flag”. In particular, attacks are disguised as actions of Russian or Chinese hackers. The effectiveness of this approach is achieved through the fact that these countries are traditionally considered by the West as the main threats in the “cyber space”.

It is extremely difficult to assess the real potential of the “cyber army” of the DPRK. Suffices to say that intelligence services and analysts of IT companies do not have a clear idea of its composition, size and management system. At different periods of time, the data on personnel varied from fifty to 17,000 employees. This most relevant piece of information was published in the New York Times. Referring to the assessment of the US and British intelligence services, the report cites that the Korean People’s Army (KPA) has more than 6,000 hackers. At the same time, most of them are outside the country.

However, regardless of the number of specialized structures of the DPRK, the North Korean “cyber threat” is real and causes all sorts of fears around the world. Analysts of the largest IT companies, specialists in the field of information security and anti-virus protection, representatives of intelligence and defence agencies of the United States and European countries agree on the view that Pyongyang significantly increased its potential of in the field of information influence. They also converge in the assessment that there is a low degree of protection against such attacks. According to Robert Silvers, former employee of the Ministry of Homeland Security of the United States: while the world focuses on the nuclear programme of Kim Jong-Un, the North Korean leader develops the potential of weapons capable of inflicting significant damage to the US “without a single rocket launch”.

Now, the specialists are left to wonder what will be the next target of DPRK’s “cyber armу”. Despite some “warming of relations” between Pyongyang and Seoul, it is still untimely to talk about the readiness of the North Korean government to finally make peace with its southern neighbor. At the same time, there is no confidence in the sincerity of Washington’s statements regarding US support for the process of de-escalation of tensions on the Korean Peninsula. Therefore, we are set to expect that North Korean ‘experts’ continue to look for vulnerabilities in the network infrastructures of their opponents. McAfee, the US developer of anti – virus software spread an alarming message. According to its data, hackers from North Korea carried out the hacking attempts on the databases of the organizers of the Winter Olympics in South Korea’s Pyeongchang. It is not known whether this was a gathering of information or a preparation for the disabling of Olympic infrastructure facilities. In any case, one should admit the truth of Robert Silvers’ words: the world fails to notice the real threat behind the imaginary “nuclear deterrent “.

However, according to many experts and analysts, it is unlikely that the current dialogue can cardinally change the situation on the Korean peninsula. The United States are an important participant in this process. Their position will largely influence on how far South Korea’s President Mun Zhe Ying will go with his peace-making intentions. During the election campaign, he announced his plans to normalize relations with North Korea. However under pressure from White House, he could do little.

Moreover, certain analysts believe Trump′s administration intentionally refuses to search for compromise. Instead, Washington accuses North Korea and flexes its muscles escalating tension in the Asian-Pacific region.

Evidently, “nuclear bludgeon” in the hands of odious North Korean leader Kim Jong Un threatens international stability. At the same time, as paradoxical as it may sound, Washington’s policy provoked Pyongyang to develop its own nuclear weapon program. The historical record speaks for itself: the American leadership uses military force to topple objectionable regimes in total neglect of international law. In reality, the tragic examples of Yugoslavia, Iraq and Libya motivated the North Korean ruling elite to resort to the development of nuclear weapons as a unique way of deterrence.

Pasqual Bonifas, Director of the French Institute for International and Strategic Studies is of the above opinion. To the French analyst’s mind, Kim Jong Un is apprehensive of the destiny of Saddam Hussein as well as of that of Muammar Qaddafi.

Certain sober Western politicians point to sensible pragmatism. The call for the necessity of dialogue with Pyongyang comes not just from countries not so friendly to the US but importantly from the camp of very devoted allies of Washington. In particular, Zigmund Gabriel, the German Minister of Foreign Affairs warned President Donald Trump against warlike declarations aimed at North Korea.

“The European experience should not be underestimated. We are like somnambulists entered First World War because the governments of the countries of conflict had refused dialogue. The war began as people neglected diplomacy. At present, war rhetoric is becoming more critical. This is alarming. I am much worried about Trump′s words that the US military is ready to solve the North Korean problem with fire and fury”, Gabriel emphasized.

However that may be, to organize the Olympiad in Pyeong Chang in these conditions can be really dangerous. The Austrian Head of the Olympic Committee and the French Minister of Sport warned that their teams would refuse to take part in the Olympic Games if the host country could not guarantee safety for their delegations. Everyone can understand the West European sport officials: competing in conditions of furious fight of nuclear powers is not such a bright perspective. The International Olympic Committee with its head Thomas Bach looks like a stillborn organization unable to say anything reasonable.

As top leaders fail make decisions consolidating peace in the region, ordinary citizens have been in panic. According to the South Korean Ministry of Sport, no more than half of Olympiad Games’ tickets have been sold so far: the lowest index in the history of the modern Olympic movement. Diplomatic representations of most European nations “recommended insistently” their citizens to refrain from going to Pyeong Chang. South Korean officials are alarmed as the Olympiad budget will not be compensated.

If high rank officials from the International Olympic Committee have no courage to correct their own mistakes, the Olympiad in Pyeong Chang would hit hard the Olympic movement’s reputation. Competing with no spectators is the worst that young sportsmen and sportswomen can expect. Reason calls for the relocation of the forthcoming Winter Olympic Games to another country.

Few years ago, Germany as well as France launched their candidacy to organize the 2018 Winter Olympiad. These two countries could became “reserve field” for the Olympic movement. These European countries’ developed social, sport and transport infrastructure allows for the XXIII Winter Olympic Games to be held on high standards.