Advertisement

Minds and Machines

, Volume 27, Issue 2, pp 265–268 | Cite as

Cyber Conflicts and Political Power in Information Societies

  • Mariarosaria TaddeoEmail author
Article

When asked what his goal was for the 1815 Waterloo Campaign, the Duke of Wellington answered “Why, to beat the French” (Gray 1984, 9).1 By French he meant Napoleon, and by beating him he meant defeating him for good, so that Napoleon could not pose a threat to European states any longer. A conflict was the most effective means to achieve this goal. Fast-forward 200 years, now is China versus USA, the domain is cyberspace where China has been launching attacks against the USA for at least 4 years to acquire relevant information from USA companies and governmental offices. The USA would like to stop the cyber-attacks, to do so they do not engage in a cyber conflict and choose a political strategy: the American and Chinese presidents meet and define bilateral agreements to stop state-run cyber-attacks between their two countries. This conflict was not won by either of the two actors, but solved by both of them.

The Waterloo example highlights that there is a relation between political...

Notes

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to Professor Luciano Floridi and Professor Massimo Durante for our insightful discussions on the topic of this letter and to Dr Jennifer Doubt for her comments on an early draft.

References

  1. Dipert, R. (2010). The ethics of cyberwarfare. Journal of Military Ethics, 9(4), 384–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Eriksson, J., & Giacomello, G. (2006). The information revolution, security, and international relations: (IR)relevant theory? International Political Science Review, 27(3), 221–244. doi: 10.1177/0192512106064462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Floridi, L. (2016). Mature information societies—A matter of expectations. Philosophy & Technology, 29(1), 1–4. doi: 10.1007/s13347-016-0214-6.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Floridi, L., & Taddeo, M. (Eds.). (2014). The ethics of information warfare. New York: Springer.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Freedberg, S. (2014). NATO hews to strategic ambiguity on cyber deterrence. http://breakingdefense.com/2014/11/natos-hews-to-strategic-ambiguity-on-cyber-deterrence/.
  6. Freedman, L. (1998). Military power and political influence. International Affairs, 74(4), 763–780. doi: 10.1111/1468-2346.00044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gray, C. S. (1984). War-fighting for deterrence. Journal of Strategic Studies, 7(1), 5–28. doi: 10.1080/01402398408437174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. International Security Advisory Board. (2014). A framework for international cyber stability. United States Department of State. http://goo.gl/azdM0B.
  9. Lonsdale, D. J. (2017). Warfighting for cyber deterrence: A strategic and moral imperative. Philosophy & Technology. doi: 10.1007/s13347-017-0252-8.Google Scholar
  10. Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics (1st ed.). New York: Public Affairs.Google Scholar
  11. Nye, J. (2010). Cyber power. Boston, MA: Harvard Kennedy School, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. http://www.belfercenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/files/cyber-power.pdf.
  12. Taddeo, M. (2012). Information warfare: A philosophical perspective. Philosophy and Technology, 25(1), 105–120.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Taddeo, M. (2014a). Just information warfare. Topoi. doi: 10.1007/s11245-014-9245-8.Google Scholar
  14. Taddeo, M. (2014b). The struggle between liberties and authorities in the information age. Science and Engineering Ethics. doi: 10.1007/s11948-014-9586-0.Google Scholar
  15. Taddeo, M. (2016). On the risks of relying on analogies to understand cyber conflicts. Minds and Machines, 26(4), 317–321. doi: 10.1007/s11023-016-9408-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. UK Government. (2014). Deterrence in the twenty-first century: Government response to the committee’s eleventh report. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmselect/cmdfence/525/52504.htm.
  17. UN Institute for Disarmament Research. (2014). Cyber stability seminar 2014: Preventing cyber conflict. http://link.law.upenn.edu/portal/UNIDIR-cyber-stability-seminar-2014--preventing/FegECNo01q0/.
  18. Weber, M. (1947). In A. M. Henderson, & T. Parsons (Eds.), The theory of social and economic organization. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Digital Ethics Lab, Oxford Internet InstituteUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  2. 2.Alan Turing InstituteLondonUK

Personalised recommendations