3/26/2023 0 Comments Subversion org![]() Unsurprisingly, considering the scale of the Internet, cyber operations enable a greater scale of intrusion compared to traditional subversion. However, greater strategic impact also brings greater operational challenges, thus raising the risk of failure.Įxamining the feasibility of implementing these strategies through cyber operations produces surprises. I sort these strategies according to their ascending potential to shift the balance of power. Overthrow attempts to replace a regime with one aligned with the subverter’s interests by mobilizing and supporting opposition groups. Erosion strives to undermine an adversary’s sources of strength by eroding public trust, exacerbating societal tensions and sabotaging institutions and infrastructure. Manipulation aims to manipulate government policy, either through exploitation of government or influential political organizations, or indirectly by swaying public opinion. Here intelligence scholarship on subversion promises key insights for strategic analysis and evaluation.īuilding on this literature, this article identifies strategies of subversion, evaluates their efficacy and examines their feasibility in cyber conflict. Strategic thought must focus not only on what is theoretically possible, however, but also on what is practically feasible. Footnote 10 Prevailing expectations about a new strategic space focus on the promise, neglecting the constraints. Footnote 9 In particular, recent work highlights the mechanism of exploitation cyber operations rely upon reveals their nature as instruments of subversion – which offers great strategic promise but provides limited value in practice due to significant operational constraints. Rather than a new space of competition, a growing body of research shows cyber conflict has key parallels to intelligence contests. However, I argue that just like cyberwar theorists misjudged the operational characteristics and strategic value of cyber operations, current theories of conflict short of war risk building on similarly flawed assumptions. Footnote 8 This is a welcome theoretical and strategic innovation. Footnote 7 The United States Cyber Command has adopted the key tenets of this strategy. Footnote 6 Conversely, through persistent engagement of such offenders, defenders can deny these gains and impose friction. Footnote 5 Persistence in the offense, it predicts, allows actors to achieve cumulative gains that can shift the balance of power. Footnote 4 One strand of this theorizing focuses on the importance of persistence. Accordingly, a current wave of scholarship suggests, cyber conflict occupies a new strategic space where actors can pursue unprecedented strategic gains in conflict short of war by leveraging the vast scale, speed and ease of anonymity that cyberspace enables. Footnote 3 Strategic thought on warfare thus promises limited insights. Footnote 2 Yet in practice cyber conflict has beenlow in intensity, remaining below the threshold of armed conflict. Footnote 1 Theorists accordingly derived offensive and defensive strategies from the study of war, building on offense-defense theory and nuclear deterrence. ![]() Early theorizing conceived of cyber conflict as a new form of war. ![]() In fact, the very mode of conflict involved is contested. ![]() Yet what strategies enable the achievement of which goals through these instruments still remains unclear. States now routinely use cyber operations to attain strategic advantages.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |