Cyber Campaigns and Strategic Outcomes
In this Journal of Strategic Studies article, Richard J. Harknett and CSS’ Max Smeets argue that cyberspace has opened a new dimension of power politics in which cyber campaigns could potentially become a salient means, alternative to war, for achieving strategic advantage.
Over the course of the last three decades, cyberspace has become a new field of competition among states. Analyzing this new phenomenon, the academic and policy community has paid particular attention to the possibility of highly disruptive or destructive cyberattacks such as those which cause a freeze in the financial system, power blackouts or the destruction of pipelines. Based on the concept of cyberwar, only such exceptional events were assumed to achieve a strategic advantage over a competitor or rival, thereby affecting the balance of power among states.
Yet, empirically, large-scale cyberattacks equivalent to an armed attack remain outliers that rarely occur. The actual behavior of actors in cyberspace has been rather more nuanced, taking place predominantly below the level of destruction outlined by the cyberwar literature. This has led some scholars to argue that cyberwar itself is a myth and that most cyber operations are sophisticated versions of subversion, espionage, and sabotage, which are as old as warfare itself. Though these activities are important in their own right, they do not affect the strategic balance between actors and should thus be seen as tactical in nature.
Strategic without the need for an armed attack
This new article by Richard J. Harknett and CSS senior researcher Max Smeets argues that cyberspace has opened a new dimension of power politics in which cyber campaigns could potentially become a salient means, alternative to war, for achieving strategic advantage. A cyber campaign refers to a series of coordinated cyber operations, which take place over time to achieve a cumulative outcome leading to strategic advantage. While a single cyber operation might not affect the balance of power among states, cyber campaigns can have strategic impact. According to CSS’ Max Smeets, “our focus of study should thus be on how different cyber operations are interconnected and how they produce cumulative effects that over time do indeed shape the strategic balance between states.”
China as a peaceful cyber power?
How does the adoption of the concept of cyber campaigns shape our understanding of competition in cyberspace? To answer this question, the authors look at China’s activities in cyber space. If we look at cyber activities in terms of highly disruptive cyberattacks, the Peoples Republic has indeed refrained from such operations and must thus be considered peaceful. Yet, the authors contend that if we redirect our lens, focusing more on cyber campaigns as opposed to cyberwars, we can reveal a very different picture of Chinese cyber behavior. Looking at China through the lens of cyber campaigns reveals that the country is an incredibly active, strategically motivated actor in cyberspace. One that is able to change the balance of power in the international system through offensive cyber operations.
Reference
For more on Cyber Security Politics at the CSS click here.