We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. This website uses cookies. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence (if different), and our use of cookies as described in our Cookie Policy.
Back in 2016, presidential candidate Donald Trump presented his vision for an "America First" foreign policy, which symbolized a radical departure from the US' longtime approach to international politics and diplomacy.
In electing Donald Trump, a political outsider, to the top job, American voters essentially gave him a mandate to follow through on these promises. So, has he?
Trade
"A continuing rape of our country."
On the 2016 campaign trail, candidate Trump said that the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) — a 12 country trade deal pushed by the Obama administration — would "rape" America's economy by imperiling the manufacturing sector, closing factories, and taking more jobs overseas.
<p>While President Trump swiftly delivered on his promise to quit the TPP, it's clear that Trump's signature move has not had its desired effect. </p>
<p>Trump's protectionist policies — including an ongoing trade war with China — have in fact caused manufacturing factories to <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/16/trump-manufacturing-jobs-record-415588" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">shutter</a> in many US cities, resulting in the loss of thousands of <a href="https://www.epi.org/publication/reshoring-manufacturing-jobs/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">manufacturing jobs</a>. In the crucial swing state of <a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MIMFG" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Michigan</a>, for example, there were 10,200 fewer manufacturing workers in February 2020 than the previous year. Nearly 1,800 factories — many in important swing states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and Wisconsin — were forced to shut their doors between 2016 to 2018 as automation ramped up.</p>
<p>To be sure, the pandemic-induced recession has pummeled America's economy across the board, but a recent report by the <a href="https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecopro.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Bureau of Labor Statistics </a>concludes that even<em> before</em> the health crisis, US manufacturing was on track to lose nearly 450,000 jobs by 2029, the most of any sector. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, the US trade deficit, an indicator Donald Trump repeatedly cited in the lead-up to the 2016 election to justify <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-36185012" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">provoking China</a>, has ballooned under his watch: in August of this year, the US' <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/06/goods-trade-deficit-august-record-high-426739" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">overall trade deficit </a>was $67.1 billion, the highest on record since 2006. In addition, US exports to China continue to fall behind the benchmark set under the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-china-details-factbox/whats-in-the-u-s-china-phase-1-trade-deal-idUSKBN1ZE2IF" target="_blank">"phase one"</a> trade deal signed by Beijing and Washington earlier this year. </p><p><strong>Foreign conflicts and troop withdrawals</strong><br/></p>
<p><em><strong>"I will never send our finest into battle unless necessary...The world must know that we do not go abroad in search of enemies."</strong></em></p><p>When candidate Trump announced his bid for the White House, withdrawing troops from conflicts in far-flung places around the world — particularly in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan — quickly emerged as a<a href="https://www.vox.com/world/2017/8/25/16185936/trump-america-first-afghanistan-war-troops-iraq-generals" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"> key campaign promise.</a> And polling shows that this pledge resonated deeply with a <a href="https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/us_military/most_agree_with_trump_s_withdrawal_from_endless_wars" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">war-weary</a> American public. </p>
<p>Has Trump delivered? Somewhat. In 2017, he sent an <a href="https://theintercept.com/2017/08/21/donald-trump-afghanistan-us-get-out/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">additional</a> 3,000 troops to war-torn Afghanistan. Today, there are still 8,600 American soldiers there, though President Trump recently tweeted that he hopes to withdraw <em>all </em>US troops from Afghanistan by Christmas, a pre-election <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-tweet-us-troops-afghanistan-christmas-taliban-negotiations" target="_blank">forecast </a>that reportedly delighted the Taliban and caught the Pentagon completely<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/15/us/politics/trump-troop-withdrawals.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"> off-guard</a>.</p>
<p>In Syria and Iraq, meanwhile, President Trump followed through on his campaign promise to "beat ISIS" by continuing the Obama administration's<a href="https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/12/14/remarks-president-military-campaign-destroy-isil" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"> military campaign </a>against the militant group. This was followed by the hasty <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/most-u-s-troops-withdraw-others-move-syria-help-guard-n1076691" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">withdrawal </a>of around 700 US troops from northern Syria in 2019, which many observers said would <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/21/world/middleeast/us-withdrawal-syria-iraq.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">endanger</a> America's Kurdish allies, causing the US Defense Secretary to resign in protest.</p>
<p><strong>Treaties</strong> </p><p><em><strong>"[I will] dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran."</strong></em></p>
<p>From the outset, candidate Trump made clear that the Obama-era Iran nuclear deal would have a short shelf life under his administration, calling it "the worst deal ever negotiated." And in 2018, President Trump <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44045957" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">followed through</a> by walking away from the accord that was negotiated with American allies including France and Germany, and slapping fresh sanctions on Iran. On the face of it, it was a promise kept. </p>
<p>Similarly, having long referred to climate change as a "hoax," candidate Trump vowed to walk away from the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/04/climate/trump-paris-agreement-climate.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Paris Climate Accords,</a> signed by 200 countries, which he said would stifle American economic growth. Again, President Trump made good on a longtime pledge — but the official exit only occurs on November 4, a day after the US election, and Joe Biden has <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/joe-biden-announces-2-trillion-climate-plan-vows-to-rejoin-paris-deal/articleshow/76977673.cms" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">vowed </a>to rejoin should he win. </p>
<p><strong>Love him or hate him, </strong>when it comes to foreign policy Donald Trump is a... politician. While he has failed to deliver on some campaign promises, in many instances, President Trump has done exactly what American voters sent him to Washington to do.</p>
More
Show less
In an op-ed titled "Iran Arms Embargo Reckoning," the Wall Street Journal editorial board argues that ending the UN arms embargo on Iran was a major flaw of the 2015 nuclear deal and questions whether Biden could do anything to contain Iran at this point. Ian Bremmer and Eurasia Group's Henry Rome take out the Red Pen to explain why this discussion misrepresents the importance of the embargo and the consequences for its expiration.
So, the US presidential election is now just days away, and today's selection is focusing on a specific aspect of foreign policy that will certainly change depending on who wins in the presidential contest—namely America's approach to Iran.
You've heard me talk before about the many similarities between Trump and Biden on some international policies, like on China or on Afghanistan. But Iran is definitely not one of those. Trump hated the JCPOA, the 2015 Iranian nuclear deal, put together under the Obama administration, and he walked away from it unilaterally. Joe Biden, if he were to become president, would try to bring it back.
<p>
But this article focuses on one specific aspect of the deal—it was a concession made to Iran in exchange for the promise of curbing Iran's nuclear ambitions. There was a long-standing UN embargo that prevented Iran from buying conventional weapons like tanks and missiles and exporting arms. As a tradeoff in the 2015 agreement, that embargo was set to end—and it did—just a few days ago.
</p><p>
The Wall Street Journal is not happy about that one bit and the piece calls this concession a flaw of the Obama deal. It also questions whether Biden could do anything to contain Iran at this point.
</p><p>
So, let's get out the Red Pen.
</p><p>
The Wall Street Journal is not happy about that one bit and the piece calls this concession a flaw of the Obama deal. It also questions whether Biden could do anything to contain Iran at this point.
</p><p>
So, let's get out the Red Pen.
</p><p>
Number one, the Trump administration sought an extension of the embargo this past summer which was blocked in the United Nations Security Council by China and Russia. The Wall Street Journal writes that the countries that abstained in that vote—including the UK, Germany and France, "stayed silent despite Iran's history of promoting terror in Europe."
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://www.gzeromedia.com/media-library/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU2MjExNC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxOTYxNTkxN30.s-lsAUOjI04lR18FHJd06PFs7YVdChcdFggbEsC-HGA/image.png?width=980" id="82c5d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="e732aa3cf966e774a55ea27189890c45" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="US ignored real efforts by Europe to find a compromise." />
</p><p>
Actually, the United States ignored real efforts by Europe to find a compromise on the arms embargo this summer. Like proposing a temporary extension of the ban on Iranian weapons imports and tightening restrictions on Iranian exports. They suggested that the United States under the Trump administration stuck to an all-or-nothing stance and blew the Europeans off. So, no, America didn't get its way. But also, there was no real negotiating done here. Not even an effort.<br/>
</p><p>
Next, on the issue of the snapped-back sanctions themselves, the Wall Street Journal says, "this is another case when the United Nations is more obstacle than ally to US interests."
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://www.gzeromedia.com/media-library/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU2MjEzOC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzMDc1MDMxMX0.4IcoMlJFg6G4iEHBvQXa_3xefGrVW_fyiubcpU3oiPE/image.png?width=980" id="bb112" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="b23f8ab1bb601795f86eca13d98f0a25" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="Trump disagrees with Obama's policy. That's a US problem, not UN." />
</p><p>
That's just not the case at all. The thing is that the Obama administration created the snap back mechanism in this case—it was a bargaining chip, something the American's gave to get the Iranian's into the deal. So, the Trump administration's issue here is a legitimate grievance but what the Obama administration, not about the United Nations at all.<br/>
</p><p>
And finally, the editorial board asks, "How is Mr. Biden going to contain Iran's regional imperialism and support for terrorism without an arms embargo?"
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://www.gzeromedia.com/media-library/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU2MjE0MC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1MDQ0ODU3N30.d2mOyve91GfjOy8RKud-joptKaKBCuaILZBVW1v0Vos/image.png?width=980" id="9fb50" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="c47dfc5dcf8b2f56e9bad4dcc8ad2890" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="Biden wants real negotiations. It'll be hard, but he has a shot." />
</p><p>
Well, one thing here is Iran is not going to go on a tank and fighter jet spending spree like it's Black Friday at Costco, because Tehran doesn't have the cash and they also don't want more sanctions right now—and neither do Iran's allies China and Russia. Let's keep in mind, the Iranian economy is in parlous condition right now. In part because of mishandling coronavirus, but in part because the United States has pushed much tougher sanctions against Iran.<br/>
</p><p>
So, I mean, the ability of the Iranians to go and spend a lot on the military now is significantly less than it was when the Iranian deal was struck with the Obama administration. To the broader point of getting back to an acceptable nuclear deal—far more important than conventional arms—sure, it's going to be messy. Not at all convinced that it is going to happen. But Biden will have international support. Remember, the United States left the nuclear deal unilaterally. Every one of America's allies that were confederates in getting the deal done, opposed that from happening. And they've got a better shot at getting back than the United States does right now.
</p><p>
I'd also say on that introductory point about this concession being a flaw of the 2015 agreement: Deals involve tradeoffs. They are about bargaining. Keeping Iran away from a nuclear bomb was the goal, pushing that capacity off for a decade or more, and was considered a higher priority than the arms embargo at the time.
</p><p>
Different people can have different judgements on that one, but it is how diplomacy works.
</p>
More
Show less
It almost didn't happen — but here we are again. President Donald Trump and his Democratic challenger Joe Biden face off tonight in the final presidential debate of the 2020 US election campaign.
<p>While it will be hard to top the chaos of the first debate — when Trump repeatedly interrupted Biden and the vibe was closer to bar brawl than policy discussion — tonight's encounter will surely be an interesting duel. For one thing, new rules allow the candidates' mics to be muted. How often will that happen? </p><p>Aside from the theatrics, a few things to keep an eye on: Will Biden finally unveil his position on packing the Supreme Court or get a tough question about his son Hunter's controversial dealings in Ukraine? Will Trump have to explain why he has a bank account in China? And of course: will the fly that landed on Vice President Mike Pence's head during the vice-presidential debate make an appearance?</p><p>And amid all of that: BINGO! Yes, you can make it a competition with your fellow politics nerd friends by printing out GZERO Media's updated debate bingo cards. There are four different cards so that each player can have a unique board. Every time one of the candidates says one of these words or terms, X it on your card. First player to get five across wins. And if you really want to jazz it up, you can mark each of your words by taking a swig of your drink, or doing five burpees, or donating to your favorite charity or political candidate. Whatever your game is, you can play it with our bingo cards.</p><p>Enjoy.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image image-crop-custom">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://www.gzeromedia.com/media-library/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU0NjMzMi9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NjEzODE1NX0.hGQFk8l-QmYMe6mY4NJxcXAchn3WydoIzTBQbjaanJw/image.png?width=1000&coordinates=0%2C0%2C0%2C0&height=1000" id="bf0c3" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="c8428b5b9aa604a9e1b00ff9532d5f05" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="Debate Bingo Round 2 Card 1 - US Presidential Debate 2020" />
</p><p class="pdf-loader"><a href="https://roar-assets-auto.rbl.ms/documents/7330/GZERO Debate Bingo Round 2 Card 1.pdf" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="4647225d915e147ad3df809e3951a74d">Download Debate Bingo Card 1</a></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image image-crop-custom">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://www.gzeromedia.com/media-library/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU0NjM2Ni9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyODEzMjI5NX0.bCQ82KggU3iAw8BwHm_SaxuQRhKfNzztA3HdVViguTg/image.png?width=1000&coordinates=0%2C0%2C0%2C0&height=1000" id="efa22" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="efa972987853aada02cd92ee7d54907e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="Debate Bingo Round 2 Card 2 - US Presidential Debate 2020" />
</p><p class="pdf-loader"><a href="https://roar-assets-auto.rbl.ms/documents/7331/GZERO Debate Bingo Round 2 Card 2.pdf" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="e1d9daca377953435097d864b5991789">Download Debate Bingo Card 2</a></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://www.gzeromedia.com/media-library/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU0NjM3NC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwODY1MjI1M30.fH3Exui0YQt1rO8Dka6NTc5lz2jcMJHPEeLrP0zsQzY/image.png?width=980" id="af20f" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="f001675ec99f2db17240d7c1a6bf6e17" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="Debate Bingo Round 2 Card 3 - US Presidential Debate 2020" />
</p><p class="pdf-loader"><a href="https://roar-assets-auto.rbl.ms/documents/7332/GZERO Debate Bingo Round 2 Card 3.pdf" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="72267ca499da6fff24dbccf582dac87f">Download Debate Bingo Card 3</a></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://www.gzeromedia.com/media-library/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU0NjM3OC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1ODYwODQ3Nn0.mvIN-ex8IBc2nw8YNrH5aEtpq07KJEuwqJEOPiRT44s/image.png?width=980" id="99b5b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="d0c91f9149b66e6f3171c6fbc6b50b08" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="Debate Bingo Round 2 Card 4 - US Presidential Debate 2020" />
</p><p class="pdf-loader"><a href="https://roar-assets-auto.rbl.ms/documents/7334/GZERO Debate Bingo Round 2 Card 4.pdf" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="648f64db767a3bf2b2b31cdadc7dc90c">Download Debate Bingo Card 4</a></p><p><em>Remember there's more going on in the world than just the US election, so subscribe to <a href="https://www.gzeromedia.com/subscribe">Signal</a>, our newsletter on global politics, and watch our weekly show <a href="https://www.gzeromedia.com/gzero-world-with-ian-bremmer/">GZERO World with Ian Bremmer</a> right here and on public television.</em></p>
More
Show less
Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, US President George W. Bush demanded that Afghanistan's Taliban government surrender Osama bin Laden and end support for al-Qaeda. The Taliban refused.
On October 7, US bombs began falling on Taliban forces. NATO allies quickly pledged support for the US, and US boots hit the ground in Afghanistan two weeks later.
Thus began a war, now the longest in US history, that has killed more than 3,500 coalition soldiers and 110,000 Afghans. It has cost the American taxpayer nearly $3 trillion. US allies have also made human and material sacrifices.
<p>Though the Taliban government quickly crumbled, its fighters kept fighting. A Taliban insurgency continues, and its forces are now believed to control <a href="https://www.rferl.org/a/taliban-government-islamic-state-who-controls-what-in-afghanistan-/30644646.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">nearly 20 percent of Afghan territory</a>. Almost half of Afghan land is "contested."</p><p>The Taliban is militarily <a href="https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/taliban-afghanistan" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">stronger today</a> than at any time since the start of the war, and there are now US soldiers serving in Afghanistan who were <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/u-s-taliban-set-to-sign-peace-deal-saturday" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">not yet born</a> on September 11, 2001.</p><p><strong>The dilemma remains</strong></p><p>A large-scale US effort to defeat the Taliban everywhere in Afghanistan would prove costlier than the American public, and therefore any US president, is willing to bear.<br></p><ul class="ee-ul"><li>The US-backed Afghan government still depends on coalition troops and US air support to keep the Taliban at bay.</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"><li>All sides know that US and NATO forces will leave one day.</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"> <li>Washington can extract promises from the Taliban, but not much else. Once US-led coalition forces leave, there will be nothing to prevent a civil war that kills many innocent people, because there is no consensus within Afghanistan today on how the country should be governed, and none of the warring factions will have an incentive to lay down their weapons.</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"><li>And if the Taliban emerges from a new civil war victorious, there's little to prevent its leaders from again sheltering terrorists.</li></ul><p><strong><span></span>There is a plan to end the war. </strong>Taliban leaders signed <a href="https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Agreement-For-Bringing-Peace-to-Afghanistan-02.29.20.pdf" target="_blank">a deal</a> with coalition forces in February 2020 that committed them to halt attacks on coalition forces and Afghan civilians, and to cut all ties with terrorist groups. In return, the US and NATO promised to remove the last of their troops by May 2021.</p><p>Taliban forces have not killed an American soldier since then, but its troops <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-and-taliban-agree-reset-on-afghanistan-peace-deal-marred-by-spiralling-carnage-2020-10-15/" target="_blank">continue to carry out attacks</a> on Afghan cities and towns to try to extend their control of territory. Direct Taliban negotiations with the Afghan government have shown progress but <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-54600781" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">no concrete results</a>.</p><p>To leave in seven months, US forces will have to accelerate the pace of packing up. That's a signal for the Taliban that they are free to seize more ground, bolstering their bargaining power and giving them new incentives to wait the Americans out.</p><p>When foreign troops leave, Afghanistan is probably headed for civil war. That's what happened when Mikhail Gorbachev withdrew Soviet troops in 1989. The bloodbath is likely to be repeated, because there are still many well-armed factions in Afghanistan, and because Pakistan, India, Russia, Iran and other outside powers will back their own proxies. None of these countries wants a vacuum of power in Afghanistan.</p><p><strong>Lessons?</strong> The Taliban enabled the deadliest foreign attack on US soil in more than 200 years, and the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan enjoyed <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/9994/public-opinion-war-afghanistan.aspx" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">overwhelming US public support</a>. Osama bin Laden was killed in May 2011, and al-Qaeda is no longer a single coherent fighting force.</p><p>A <a href="https://www.voanews.com/usa/majority-americans-support-trumps-deal-taliban-end-afghan-war" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">poll</a> taken last month found that two-thirds of Americans supported President Trump's February 2020 deal with the Taliban to end the war. Fewer than 10 percent oppose the idea. But the war hasn't prevented the likelihood of large-scale bloodshed inside that country, and Afghanistan may again become a haven for well-organized terrorists.</p><p><span></span>So, what lessons should future US leaders draw from the American experience in Afghanistan? </p>
More
Show less
Today In 60 Seconds
GZEROMEDIA
Subscribe to GZERO Media's Newsletter: Signal
