subhan
New member
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2017
- Member Type
- Student or Learner
- Native Language
- Urdu
- Home Country
- Palestinian Territory
- Current Location
- Pakistan
Hello,
Kindly comment on my essay.
Cyber Warfare
Wars have been a tragic part of our history, they are a tragic part of our present, and they will be a tragic part of our future. International institutions have evolved to develop consensus on how wars should be conducted. On principle terms, United Nations has prohibited foreign military. But as humanity is adopting new methods of communication and transportation by employing new technologies, the methods of carrying out war and harming adversary is also taking differentshapes. Adoption of new technologies have lead to globalization. The world is connected through the internet like never before. Scholars and security analyst suggest that future wars will greatly involve exploiting the global internet network to harm an adversary. They have named such types of attacks as cyberwarfare.
Conventional wars have always been part of human history and international society has now developed laws around it. For example, use of chemical weapons are banned by the United Nations and using it is considered as an act of war. Cyberwars is a new phenomenon and currently no laws have been established for it.
The questions that cyber warfare raise are what kind of attack by a state against another state should be considered as an act of war? What should be the response of the targeted state against cyber attack? And who should be held responsible when a cyber is carried out? For example, a state conducts a cyber attack against its adversary's nuclear installation. The adversary's nuclear facility destabilizes and they go to great lengths to prevent a nuclear fallout, however, no casualties occur. The adversary in return, attacks the state electricity grids. Due to the weak infrastructure, the state experiences complete electricity shutdown. As electricity is not supplied to hospitals for days, thousands of people die. What should be response of the state after such an attack?
In conventional warfare, it is relatively easy to ascertain who is accountable for attacks against a state. The state can then counter-attack appropriately. In Cyberwarfare, it is not clear who to blame, the hacker, the government agency supporting the hacker, or the state. The state's response gets complicated under such circumstances and actions can lead to unnecessary escalation.
Scholars suggest that the way forward is either a peaceful world where cyber attacks are not necessary, or international consensus should be developed to devise laws related to cyber attacks. However, It is the latter case where the international society seems to be heading.
Kindly comment on my essay.
Cyber Warfare
Wars have been a tragic part of our history, they are a tragic part of our present, and they will be a tragic part of our future. International institutions have evolved to develop consensus on how wars should be conducted. On principle terms, United Nations has prohibited foreign military. But as humanity is adopting new methods of communication and transportation by employing new technologies, the methods of carrying out war and harming adversary is also taking differentshapes. Adoption of new technologies have lead to globalization. The world is connected through the internet like never before. Scholars and security analyst suggest that future wars will greatly involve exploiting the global internet network to harm an adversary. They have named such types of attacks as cyberwarfare.
Conventional wars have always been part of human history and international society has now developed laws around it. For example, use of chemical weapons are banned by the United Nations and using it is considered as an act of war. Cyberwars is a new phenomenon and currently no laws have been established for it.
The questions that cyber warfare raise are what kind of attack by a state against another state should be considered as an act of war? What should be the response of the targeted state against cyber attack? And who should be held responsible when a cyber is carried out? For example, a state conducts a cyber attack against its adversary's nuclear installation. The adversary's nuclear facility destabilizes and they go to great lengths to prevent a nuclear fallout, however, no casualties occur. The adversary in return, attacks the state electricity grids. Due to the weak infrastructure, the state experiences complete electricity shutdown. As electricity is not supplied to hospitals for days, thousands of people die. What should be response of the state after such an attack?
In conventional warfare, it is relatively easy to ascertain who is accountable for attacks against a state. The state can then counter-attack appropriately. In Cyberwarfare, it is not clear who to blame, the hacker, the government agency supporting the hacker, or the state. The state's response gets complicated under such circumstances and actions can lead to unnecessary escalation.
Scholars suggest that the way forward is either a peaceful world where cyber attacks are not necessary, or international consensus should be developed to devise laws related to cyber attacks. However, It is the latter case where the international society seems to be heading.
Last edited by a moderator:
