Cyberwar: Analysis Through Theoretical Axis.

The Internet is the great equalizer of the planet. We may now connect with individuals all over the world for cultural, informational, and ideological exchange thanks to the Internet, which is the impetus behind globalization and modernity. The use of computer technology to disrupt a state's or organization's activities is known as cyberwar. It is a deliberate attack on information systems for strategic or military goals. It is commonly used to attack adversary computer systems to damage or disrupt national security systems, notably digital infrastructure. According to Clarke and Knake, cyberwar is “Actions by a nation-state to penetrate another nation's computers or networks for the goal of causing damage or disruption," because of the rising usage of the Internet, sophisticated assaults performed by foreign governments or anyone within the country can impair government databases. This high level of vulnerability and uncertainty has created a new security issue for all countries in the world which is ‘Virtual Defense’. Cyberwarfare aims to disrupt state network systems and crucial digital infrastructures that are fundamental to human existence. Cyberwarfare is a new type of conflict.

This phenomenon introduces new and distinct processes, characters, and units that are not found in traditional kinetic warfare. Many theories of international relations focus on war but ignore cyber warfare. As cyber war is an aspect of international relations, it's vital to look at how theories of international relations understand and analyze it.

Realists have a very pessimistic view of international relations.  Basic realist conceptualizations survive even in today's globally connected, highly technological society: the concept of a state-centric and "anarchic" international system; strategic notions of hegemony, the balance of power, and so on. Realists think that states are the highest authority. As a result, there is no guarantee that one country will not attack another. Fear and uncertainty motivate states to increase their military, economic, and other capabilities (Offensive Realism). On the other hand, defensive realists claim that if governments obtain too much power, the international system will punish them, and other states will try to balance them out. Because cyberspace now has no governing body, each state stands alone or with allies (wh can not be trusted) and tries to strengthen its cyber capabilities. These states create defenses as they fear any kind of breakthrough from others that can be a direct threat to their security. A neorealist James Adams pointed out that the leading edge to IT has made the United States the most vulnerable to cyberattacks. The US faced a cyberattack in 1998 where a group of hackers with sophisticated cyber tools hacked the government databases and other agencies. This attack was believed to have originated from Russia but whether it was by a state-sponsored attacker or not remains unclear. Similar to this another attack was aimed at the Iranian nuclear facility and it was later determined that no such attack is possible without the support of a nation-state. Since these attacks remain anonymous, the realist believes that there will be a breakdown of international connectivity and institutions due to fear of such attacks. They also claim that no nation is willing to enter into an arms race due to the ‘logic of deterrence’. The hostile countries will utilize their resources to develop a cyber weapon for asymmetrical advantage.

Liberalism is concerned with how collaboration may be used to foster peace and stability among nations and other actors. Liberals believe that conflict is most likely to break out between military and undemocratic governments seeking to further their interests and authority. The majority of cyber-attacks by democratic governments are directed at states with opposing ideologies, such as Syria, China, Russia, and Iraq, all of which have been targeted by the US as part of a kinetic war strategy. Liberals, like realists, think that the international system is anarchic and that overcoming it is difficult. Liberalists emphasize that governments cannot alone control and secure cyberspace. They, unlike realists, believe that it is important to include non-state actors (as they emphasize the plurality of actors) in the context of cyberterrorism as in cyberspace anyone can pose a threat. Despite various financial and technological resources, some non-state actors like corporations, terrorist organizations, and individuals with a certain knowledge of IT can cause harm. Also, it is hard for a state to pre anticipate a cyber attack and be ready for it or prevent an enemy. Importance of cooperation to mitigate the threat of cyberattacks. These security challenges, according to neoliberalists, can be handled by establishing international institutions. Liberalists, however, do not provide any information about how these institutions will run effectively in the case of cybersecurity.

Constructivism emphasizes more on symbolic meanings and their meaning and claims that international relations are a social construct. Unlike Realists and liberalists, it sees anarchy as socially constructed and not a given state. They believe that cyberspace and war are constructed through the advances in information technology therefore, it does not determine the outcome. They also focus on the construction of identities and believe that it cannot be presumed, and its formation is a social process, and cyber attackers are often identified as enemies but in cases where they are not enemies, it becomes cyber espionage. According to constructivist theorists, Governments, other states, and non-state entities must modify their interactions to suit the Internet age, which is unlike anything we've ever seen before. Constructivists believe that technology is what various states and non–state actors make of it, and it is ‘politically neutral. Constructivists have also undertaken studies on Cyber – communities and the social construction of cyber threats.

As we know, cyberterrorism or cyber warfare is a major threat to all states. Realists' claim of not trusting other states' assurance is right, but they do not include the threats from non–state actors. In order to ensure balance in the anarchic international system, there is a need for stable defensive or offensive weapons. As liberals believe that institutions can promote cooperation, but no such institution exists, thus there is no stoppage to cyberwar. The constructivists claim that cyber peace can be secured through the interaction of the elites in order to understand different identities and interests.

References:

1. Eriksson, J., & Giacomello, G. (2006). The Information Revolution, Security, and International Relations: (IR) relevant Theory? International Political Science Review, 27(3), 221-244. https://myweb.rollins.edu/tlairson/pek/inforevintrela.pdf

2. Clarke, R. A., & Knake, R. (2010). Cyber War: The Next Threat to National Security and What to Do About It: HarperCollins.

3.     Petallides, Constantine J. "Cyber Terrorism and IR Theory: Realism, Liberalism, and Constructivism in the New Security Threat." Inquiries Journal/Student Pulse 4.03 (2012).  http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/articles/627/

4. Moravcsik, Andrew. 1997. “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics.” International Organization 51 (4): 513–53. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081897550447.