Cyber Ceasefires: Incorporating Restraints on Offensive Cyber Operations in Agreements to Stop Armed Conflict
Despite the increased use of offensive cyber capabilities in armed conflict, no guidance currently exists for peace practitioners on if, or how, peace processes may need to evolve with this trend. This CSS Mediation Resources represents one of the first attempts to address this gap, focusing specifically on how developments in offensive cyber capabilities might impact efforts to negotiate and implement ceasefires. It also sets out and analyzes possible adaptations and responses.
Where cyber operations have featured in an armed conflict, a potentially hazardous ambiguity is created by a failure to prohibit certain offensive cyber capabilities clearly or to put in place structures to manage and resolve incidents that arise in cyberspace during the implementation of a ceasefire. This is especially the case given the still evolving military application of these capabilities and the lack of consensus as to when the effects of a cyber operation rise to the threshold of an armed attack, creating ample room for miscalculation by conflict parties.
The authors provide three recommendations to aid peace practitioners involved in designing talks to stop hostilities:
1. Conflict analysis: Conflict analysis undertaken prior to a ceasefire negotiation should assess the presence or absence of offensive cyber capabilities and operations in the conflict landscape.
2. Process design: Where and when offensive cyber operations pose a salient threat to the stability of a prospective ceasefire, they should be incorporated into the negotiations process design.
3. Provisions and conceptual frameworks: When conflict parties opt to incorporate a restraint on cyber operations into a ceasefire agreement, agreeing on the broad goal of the cyber dimension of the ceasefire could help determine a suitable cyber ceasefire conceptual framework and associated technical provisions. The authors propose four possible options for cyber ceasefire conceptual frameworks (“Acknowledgement,” “Constraint and Coordination,” “Comprehensive Management,” and “Cooperation”) as well as combinations of associated technical provisions.