Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Likelihood of Cyberwar between the United States and China: A Neorealism and Power Transition Theory Perspective

  • RESEARCH ARTICLE
  • Published:
Journal of Chinese Political Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The studies addressing cyberwar and depicting electronic doomsday scenarios, such as cyber version of 9/11, are immensely policy-driven. They lack a theoretical rigor in their explanations, causing a theory-policy gap in the study of cyberwar. This gap is more acute in the discussion on cyberwar scenarios between China and the United States (U.S). Additionally, while some used neorealist frameworks to understand the nature of U.S-China relations in cyberspace, they did so mostly with no systematic analysis of the likelihood of cyberwar between the two. I intend to bridge this theory-policy gap by examining the prospect of cyberwar between the U.S. and China using Neorealism and Power Transition Theory (PTT). I argue that PTT offers a more useful framework. Applying PTT indicates that while cyberwar currently seems unlikely, China will become cyberwar-prone to switch the status quo in cyberspace to its favor, especially if it achieves offensive cyberwar capability parity with the U.S. while simultaneously remaining dissatisfied with the cyber order. I utilized secondary empirical sources in the relevant literature in conducting this study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ball, D. 2011. China’s cyber warfare capabilities. Security Challenges 7(2):81–103.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Branigan, T. 2010. Chinese army to target cyber wat threat: New department dedicated to protecting information security follows creation of US cyber command. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jul/22/chinese-army-cyber-war-department. Accessed 18 August 2018.

  3. Bumiller, E., and Shanker, T. 2012. Panetta warns of dire threat of cyberattack on U.S. The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/12/world/panetta-warns-of-dire-threat-of-cyberattack.html. Accessed 18 August 2018.

  4. Cai, C., and D. Dati. 2015. Words mightier than hacks: Narratives of cyberwar in the United States and China. Asian Perspective 39(3):541–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. China Copyright abd Media. 2017. International Strategy of Cooperation on Cyberspace. https://chinacopyrightandmedia.wordpress.com/2017/03/01/international-strategy-of-cooperation-on-cyberspace/. Accessed 18 August 2018.

  6. Choucri, N. 2000. Introduction: CyberPolitics in international relations. International Political Science Review 21(3):243–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Choucri, N. 2012. Cyberpolitics in international relations. Cambridge: MIT press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Christensen, T.J., and A. Snyder. 1990. Chain gangs and passed bucks: Predicting alliance patterns in multipolarity. International Organization 44(2):137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Clarke, R.A. and Knake, R.K. 2010. Cyber war: The next threat to national security and what to do about it. New York: HarperCollins.

  10. Cohen, M.S., C.D. Freilich, and G. Siboni. 2016. Israel and cyberspace: Unique threat and response. International Studies Perspectives 17(3):307–321. https://doi.org/10.1093/isp/ekv023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Domingo, F.C. 2016. Conquering a new domain: Explaining great power competition in cyberspace. Comparative Strategy 35(2):154–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/01495933.2016.1176467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Eun, Y.-S., and J.S. Abmann. 2016. Cyberwar: Taking stock of security and warfare in the digital age. International Studies Perspectives 17(3):343–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/insp.12073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Farwell, J.P., and R. Rohozinski. 2011. Stuxnet and the future of cyber war. Survival 53(1):23–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2011.555586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Forsythe, M., and Sanger, D.E. 2015. China calls hacking of U.S. workers` data a crime, not a state act. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/03/world/asia/china-hacking-us-opm.html.Accessed 18 August 2018.

  15. Friedberg, A.L. 2005. The future of U.S.-China relations: Is conflict inevitable? International Security 30(2):7–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gartzke, E. 2013. The myth of cyberwar: Bringing war in cyberspace back down to earth. International Security 38(2):41–73. https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Goldsmith, J., and Wu, T. 2006. Who controls the internet?: Illusions of a borderless world [eBook]. New York: Oxford University Press.

  18. Han, S. 2009. China's pursuit of peaceful power transition: A case of ICT (information and communications technologies) standard setting. International Area Review 12(3):27–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hjortdal, M. 2011. China's use of cyber warfare: Espionage meets strategic deterrence. Journal of Strategic Security 4(2):1–24. https://doi.org/10.5038/1944-0472.4.2.1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hughes, R. 2010. A treaty for cyberspace. International Affairs 86(2):523–541. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2346.2010.00894.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kaiser, R. 2015. The birth of cyberwar. Political Geography 46:11–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2014.10.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kello, L. 2013. The meaning of the cyber revolution: Perils to theory and statecraft. International Security 38(2):7–40. https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kim, W., and S. Gates. 2015. Power transition theory and the rise of China. International Area Studies Review 18(3):219–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/2233865915598545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Klimburg, A. 2011. Mobilising cyber power. Survival (00396338) 53(1):41–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2011.555595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kramer, F.D. 2009. Cyberpower and national secuirty: Policy recommendations for a strategic framework. In Cyberpower and national security, eds. F.D. Kramer, S.H. Starr, and L.K. Wentz, 3–23. Washington, DC: Potomac Books.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kramer, F. D., Butler, R. J., and Lotrionte, C. 2016. Cyber, extended deterrence, and NATO. Washington, DC: Atlantic Council. http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/images/publications/Cyber_Extended_Deterrence_and_NATO_web_0526.pdf

  27. Kosenkov, A. 2016. Cyber conflict as a new global threat. Future Internet 8(3):1–9. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi8030045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kshetri, N. 2014. Cybersecurity and international relations: The U.S. engagment with China and Russia. http://web.isanet.org/Web/Conferences/FLACSO-ISA%20BuenosAires%202014/Archive/6f9b6b91-0f33-4956-89fc-f9a9cde89caf.pdf. Accessed 18 August 2018.

  29. Kuebl, D.T. 2009. From cyberspace to cyberpower: Definin the problem. In Cyberpower and national security, eds. F.K. Kramer, S.H. Starr, and L.K. Wentz, 24–42. Washington, DC: Potomac Books.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Lee, S.H. 2015. Global and regional orders in the 21st century in terms of multi-layered power transition theory: The cases of US–China and China–Japan relations. International Area Studies Review 18(3):266–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lewis, J.A. 2012. In defense of Stuxnet. Military and Strategic Affiars 4(3):65–76.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Libicki, M.C. 2009. Cyberdeterrence and cyberwar. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Liff, A.P. 2012. Cyberwar: A new ‘absolute weapon’? The proliferation of cyberwarfare capabilities and interstate war. Journal of Strategic Studies 35(3):401–428. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2012.663252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Lim, Y.-H. 2015. How (dis)satisfied is China? A power transition theory perspective. Journal of Contemporary China 24(92):280–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2014.932160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Limnéll, J. 2016. Developing a proportionate response to a cyber attack. Aalto: Aalto University. https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/handle/123456789/19849.

  36. Lindsay, J.R. 2013. Stuxnet and the limits of cyber warfare. Security Studies 22(3):365–404. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2013.816122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Lindsay, J.R. 2014. The impact of China on cybersecurity: Fiction and friction. International Security 39(3):7–47. https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lindsay, J.R., T.M. Cheung, and D.S. Reveron, eds. 2015. China and cybersecurity: Espionage, strategy, and politics in the digital domain. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Lobel, H. 2012. Cyber war Inc.: The law of war implications of the private sector's role in cyber conflict. Texas International Law Journal 47(3):617–640.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Lynn, W.J., III. 2010. Defending a new domain: The Pentagon's cyberstrategy. Foreign Affairs 89(5):97–108.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Maness, R.C., and B. Valeriano. 2016. The impact of cyber conflict on international interactions. Armed Forces & Society 42(2):301–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X15572997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Manson, G.P., III. 2011. Cyberwar: The United States and China prepare for the next generation of conflict. Comparative Strategy 30(2):121–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/01495933.2011.561730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Mearsheimer, J. J. 2001. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: Norton, ©2001.

  44. Morgan, P. M. 2010. Applicability of traditional deterrence concepts and theory to the cyber realm. In Proceedings of a workshop on deterring cyberattacks: Informing strategies and developing options for U.S. policy, 56–76. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

  45. Mudrinich, E.M. 2012. Cyber 3.0: The Department of Defense strategy for operating in cyberspace and the attribution problem. Air Force Law Review 68:167–206.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Mueller, M. L. 2010. Networks and states: The global politics of internet governance [eBook]. Cambridge: MIT Press.

  47. Nye, J. S., Jr. 2011. The future of power. New York: PublicAffairs.

  48. Powers, S. M., and Jablonski, M. 2015. The real cyber war: The political economy of internet freedom. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

  49. O'Connell, M.E. 2012. Cyber security without cyber war. Journal of Conflict & Security Law 17(2):187–209. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcsl/krs017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Organski, A. F. K. 1968. World politics (2nd ed.). New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

  51. Rid, T. 2012. Cyber war will not take place. The Journal of Strategic Studies 35(1):5–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2011.608939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Said-Moorhouse, L. 2016. US-Iran nuclear deal: Iran’s president warns trump not to ruin agreement. CNN Politics. http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/06/politics/iran-warns-donald-trump-nuclear-deal/. Accessed 18 August 2018.

  53. Schweller, R.L. 2004. Unanswered threats: A neoclassical realist theory of Underbalancing. International Security 29(2):159–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Sanger, D. E. 2012. Confront and conceal: Obama’s secret wars and surprising use of American power. New York: Crown Publishers.

  55. Sanger, E.D. 2018. Nations seek the elusive cure for Cyberattaks. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/21/business/davos-international-cyberattack-prevention.html. Accessed 18 August 2018.

  56. Singer, P. W., and Friedman, A. 2014. Cybersecurity and cyberwar: What everyone needs to know. New York: Oxford University Press.

  57. Spade, J. M. 2011. China’s cyber power and America’s national security. The U.S. Army War College. http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a552990.pdf. Accessed 18 August 2018.

  58. Strinde, G. 2011. Cyberwar: Connecting classical security theory to a new security domian. http://www.lunduniversity.lu.se/lup/publication/1970395. Accessed 18 August 2018.

  59. Stone, J. 2013. Cyber war will take place! Journal of Strategic Studies 36(1):101–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2012.730485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Taliaferro, J.W. 2000-2001. Security seeking under anarchy: Defensive realism revisited. International Security 25(3):128–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Tammen, R. L., Kugler, J., Lemke, D., Stam, A. C., III, Abdollahian, M., …, Organski, A. F. K. 2000. Power transitions: Strategies for the 21st century. New York: Chatham House Publishers.

  62. Tammen, R.L. 2008. The Organski legacy: A fifty-year research program. International Interactions 34(4):314–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050620802561769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Thomas, E. 2016. US-China relations in cyberspace: The benefits and limits of a realist analysis. E-international relations students. http://www.e-ir.info/2016/08/28/us-china-relations-in-cyberspace-the-benefits-and-limits-of-a-realist-analysis/. Accessed 18 August 2018.

  64. Tiezzi, S. 2015. China vows no compromise on ‘cyber sovereignty’: Xi Jinping doubles down on the controversial concept at the 2nd world internet conference. The diplomat. http://thediplomat.com/2015/12/china-vows-no-compromise-on-cyber-sovereignty/. Accessed 18 August 2018.

  65. Valeriano, B., and Maness, R.C. 2015. The dynamic of cyber conflict between rival antagonists. In Cyber hype versus cyber realities: Cyber conflict in the international system [eBook], 78–108. New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190204792.003.0004.

  66. Van Evera, Stephen. 1998. Offense, Defense, and the Causes of War. International Security 22(4):5-43

  67. Wohlforth, W.C. 1999. The stability of a unipolar world. International Security 24(1):5–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Walt, S.M. 1985. Alliance formation and the balance of world power. International Security 9(4):3–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Waltz, K.N. 1979. Theory of international politics. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., c1979.

  70. Wang, D., and Mark, G. 2015. Internet censorship in China: Examining user awareness and attitudes. ACM Transactions On Computer-Human Interaction 22(6):1-22. https://doi.org/10.1145/2818997.

  71. Yang, G. 2009. The power of the internet in China: Citizen activism online. New York: Columbia University Press.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank to Dr. Steven Roach, Dr. Bernd Reiter, Dr. Jongseok Woo, Dr. Nezir Akyesilmen, and Ph.D. candidate Nathan Barrick for their valuable contribution to this paper. Table 1: “Overall Cyber War Strength” from CYBER WAR by RICHARD A. CLARKE and ROBERT K. KNAKE. Copyright (c) 2010 by Richard A. Clarke and Robert K. Knake. Reprinted by permission of HarperCollins Publishers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of South Florida, 4202 E Fowler Ave, Tampa, FL, 33620, USA

    Yavuz Akdag

Authors
  1. Yavuz Akdag
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yavuz Akdag.

Additional information

This article draws significantly from the Author’s thesis: Akdag, Y. (2017). Cyber Deterrence against Cyberwar between the United States and China: A Power Transition Theory Perspective. (Unpublished master’s thesis). The University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Akdag, Y. The Likelihood of Cyberwar between the United States and China: A Neorealism and Power Transition Theory Perspective. J OF CHIN POLIT SCI 24, 225–247 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11366-018-9565-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11366-018-9565-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation