Where only two decades before, John Acquilla’s paper: “Cyberwar is Coming” may have resembled the fanciful promises for the future offered by the Jetsons, recent developments have suggested that Acquilla’s prediction that the internet would fundamentally change warfare may have credence. Whilst in 1993 a futuristic concept that belonged in the realms of James Bond and Dr Who, in recent years the media, policy planners and militaries alike the world over have heralded the dawn of a new age of warfare. Fought not by the fittest and toughest where death could come at any moment, Cyberwarfare could be launched in dark basements by computer professionals with little regard for the health and fitness standards of traditional militaries. Composed
…show more content…
Is Cyberwarfare merely an act in support of war, or can it exist as an act of war unti itself? To this, one might juxtapose the realities of Cyberwarfare with both traditional and modern concepts of war. However, as one who holds a poststructualist theory of international relations would suggest, ‘Cyberwarfare’ is a term of the English language, and is therefore malleable and whether it falls into the category of an “Act of War” depends entirely on how we define it. This problem, described as the ‘Indefinite Line’, has posed problems for both military planners and legal experts alike as both seek to determine doctrine and laws respectively. Where a realist might argue that defining cyberwarfare is a waste of time and rather one should examine the interests at play, a constructivist could argue that Cyberwarfare exists so long as states say it exists & pour resources into funding it. Whilst the world is yet to experience a ‘Pearl Harbour style’ Cyberattack that might conclusively determine as to whether or not Cyberwarfare can be considered an act of war, the lack of such an attack does not dissuade from a comparison or contrast with war as a
Is Cyberwarfare merely an act in support of war, or can it exist as an act of war unti itself? To this, one might juxtapose the realities of Cyberwarfare with both traditional and modern concepts of war. However, as one who holds a poststructualist theory of international relations would suggest, ‘Cyberwarfare’ is a term of the English language, and is therefore malleable and whether it falls into the category of an “Act of War” depends entirely on how we define it. This problem, described as the ‘Indefinite Line’, has posed problems for both military planners and legal experts alike as both seek to determine doctrine and laws respectively. Where a realist might argue that defining cyberwarfare is a waste of time and rather one should examine the interests at play, a constructivist could argue that Cyberwarfare exists so long as states say it exists & pour resources into funding it. Whilst the world is yet to experience a ‘Pearl Harbour style’ Cyberattack that might conclusively determine as to whether or not Cyberwarfare can be considered an act of war, the lack of such an attack does not dissuade from a comparison or contrast with war as a