Jean-Marie Guéhenno, Olivia Grinberg & Jason Healey
The Russian NotPetya cyberattack of 2017 not only wiped 10 percent of all computers in Ukraine—where it was targeted—but also indiscriminately cascaded around the world, causing approximately $10 billion in damage. Another Russian attack, just one hour before their troops rolled across the Ukrainian border in 2022, disrupted the Viasat satellite communication network, taking offline “more than 5,800 wind turbines belonging to the German energy company Enercon” and internet service in France, the Czech Republic, and the United Kingdom.
These cases illustrate that disruptive cyber campaigns are spilling out of conflict zones to affect everyone, even those far from the fighting. Would-be cyber peacekeepers have no effective way to protect civilians in these situations, unlike in traditional conflict. To deal with the nature of cyber conflict, the world needs a new, multistakeholder model for cyber peace.
In traditional, physical wars, only multilateral institutions like the United Nations have the legitimacy to organize peacemaking and peacekeeping missions, and only states have the military capability to conduct these operations. Military forces contributed by states have the needed guns (and bulldozers) to limit the impact to civilians, keep the war from affecting neighbors, or separate combatants.
No comments:
Post a Comment