The main object of my research is : War I try to analyse the mutual impacts between newwarsandtheevolutionofthe international system Moreespeciallymyresearchisaboutwhat we call cyber-war or cyber-conflicts Isthereanewcategoryofwar (cyber-war)? Iscyberintroducingnewnational security issues? MydomainofresearchisInternational Relations Theusualapproachtoanalyse cyber(cyber-security,cyber-defense, cyber-war,cyber-attacks,cyber-threats) is based on realist theories of IR: The analysis is focused on the role of states and the anarchy of the system. The main ideas of such approach are:1 - States remain the main actors of cyberspace: Statesmayhavethecontrolofinfrastructures; contents, users Statesmaycontroltheuseoftheirnational internet Severalcountriessetupcyber-armies,cyber-militias,cyber-defenceagencies,cyber-commandsThereisaprocessof institutionalisationofcyber-securityandcyber-defence ThemainstrugglesintheInternetarethose between nation-states (USA, China, Russia, ) Cyberspace, cybersecurity, cyberdefense are matters of industrialized countries Very few things have changed since the origins of telecommunication networks un the 19th century Map of the worlds telegraph cables prior to the rise of wireless and World War I Map of the worlds telegraph cables prior to the rise of wireless and World War I 2-Cyberspacebyitsnaturemakes theinternationalsystemevenmore anarchic. This anarchy is based on the power of anonymity that:- Makesattributionofattacks impossible - Encouragescriminalsbutalso Statestousecyberspacefor offensive/agressive actions. Justremindsomefamousoperations that confirm such approach:- PRISMProgram(USAversustherestofthe world) - The231cyber-operationssetupbyNSA and CIA against foreign countries in 2011 - TheOlympicGamesoperation(Stuxnet attack from USA/Isral against Iran) - UseofcyberspaceduringtheRussia-Georgia war in 2008 - Cyberattacks against Estonia in 2007 Anarchy because :- Thereisnointernationallawof cyber armed conflicts- Thelawoncybercrimeisnot universalandremainsmainly applied at national level TheEuropeanConventionon Cybercrime is far from being a success of international cooperation! - Thereisnointernationalcooperation intermsofcybersecurityand cyberdefense- Lack of confidence;- Ouralliesprobablylaunch cyberattacks against our systems;- Nationalsecurityanddefense strategies remain secrets, confidential;- Opacity of the strategies;- Security dilemma; - etc.The question of this study was: What may be the contribution of constructivisttheoriestothe understandingofcyber security/defence issues? ToanswerthisquestionIusedthe conceptsofsecuritization(Ole Waever) andmacrosecuritization(B. Buzan) What is SECURITIZATION ? Aprocessthatwilljustify,legitimatenew policies : An actor (elite) who talks A speech act Thatmovesatopicintoanareaof national security Identifying a threat againstA referent object (object to be protected) Anaudience(whoaccepts/validatesthe securitization) Actions that need to be taken What is SECURITIZATION ? Securitisation will have consequences:- New national security strategies - New laws - New military doctrines - Institutionalisation(creationofsecurity and defence agencies) - Impacts on citizens, privacy, freedoms - What is SECURITIZATION ? Why,HowandWhendoesaspecific question become a national security issue? Forinstance:immigrationbecomesa national security problem Isthissecuritizationplacedatpolitical, societal,military,economicor environmental level? Computers and national security are linked since WWII ThefirstcomputerswerecreatedduringWWIIformilitarypurposes,to win war Sincethe1950s,nationalagenciessuchasNSAandCIAfunded computer science research During the Cold War, computer industries were targeted by espionage Theprotectionofcomputersandcomputerindustriesfromforeign espionnage have been the basis of cybersecurity as a national security issue Thecyberthreatdebateisanoldone too ItcanbetracedbacktotheReagan administration (during the 1980s) But it was not yet a national security issue 21 Information Warfare / Information Operations The information space is a domain for military operations 1993 Cyberwar (J. Arquilla / D. Ronfeldt) 1996 Netwar (J. Arquilla. D. Ronfeldt) Individuals may use the net for war Libicki 1982 Cyberspace W. Gibson 1992 1983 Internet 1992 CyberPearlHarbor 2010 Cyberattack from state actors is an act of war R. Clarke 2010 Internet is a critical national asset B. Obama 1997 Presidential Commission of the Protection of Critical InfrastructuresCyberterrorism2008 CCD COE- NATO 2010 Cyber Command - USA 1998 National Infrastructure Protection Centre (DoJ) to fight against cyberattacks When did cybersecurity become a national security issue? In the 1990s (post Cold War era; uncertainty) Mainly in the USA In a context of terrorist threat Around2010,themainargumentsandobjectsof cybersecurityare:cyberthreatagainstvital infrastructures,threatofStateattacks,War, National Defense. Itisamilitaryproblem+apolitical,societaland economic issue. The referent object is staged in universalist terms: Human civilisation Environment Ortheprocessisbasedonawidespreadsharingof the same threat: Terrorism Disease Examples:macrosecuritisationofthe Cold War, GWoT, etc.Is there macrosecuritization of cyber?Yes Because cyberthreats are considered as global: a great number of States have the power to launch cyber operations Enemies are everywhere TheattacksagainsttheUnitedStatesarenotonlyattacks againstasovereignState,butalsoagainstthevaluesof modern world (democracy, liberalism) The world seems to be organized in 2 groups: The USA/allies versus China/Russia/Iran Thesecountriesdonotsharethesamedemocratic values No becausenation-statesmayhavetheirown perceptionsofcyberthreatandtheirownsolutions, depending on :- Their level of technological development, - Theircapabilitytoproposeindependentsolutions ofsecurityadaptedtotheirown(national) cyberspace(self help) - TheUSAdiscourseoncybersecurityisoriented towardsitsowninterests(weneedtoprotectand defend our own cyberspace against) - Evenincyberspace,thenotionofregional conflictsisapplicable.Itmeansthata cybersecurityproblemmaybeconsideredasa regional problem rather than a global problem. What kind of information do we read in the evolution of Secretaries of Defense Speeches? Period: 1994 end of 2012 Number of speeches available: 841 Total number of speeches involving cybersecurity issues: 203 (ie.24%) W.J. Perry W.S. Cohen 1994 19972001200620112013 D. RumsfeldR. GatesL. Panetta Democrat Republican B. ClintonG.W. BushB. Obama 50 100 150 200 250 300 19%25 %25 % 16 %45 % Number of speeches where cyber theme isdeveloped Cyber0102030405060708090J-95O-95J-96A-97J-98O-98J-99A-00J-01O-01J-02A-03J-04O-04J-05A-06J-07O-07J-08A-09J-10O-10J-11A-129/11 Olympic Games Flame WikiLeaks 1994 - 971997-2001 2001-2006 2006-2011 2011-2013 Notions used by the 5 secretaries Notions shared by 4 secretaries A lot of words have very short life Never use: hacktivism,social networks,cloudcomputing, DDoS, big data W.J. Perry W.S. Cohen 1994 19972001 2006 2011 2013 D. Rumsfeld R. Gates L. Panetta Key ideas and argumentsTechnology is a tool for military power , information dominance Technology is the condition for victory against all kinds of enemies Alarmist/catastrophist:- Technology (cyber) is a source of new threats (cyberattacks against military, society, industry, peace ...) - Cyberwar is a threat - Cyberterrorism is a threat - Risks from dependance (of society) on cyberspace - Cyber Peal Harbord Solutions requested:- Increase investments in cyberdefense- Private industry as a provider - Cybersecurity is not limited to DoD. It isa national and international securityissue 1-Ithinkthattheprocessof makingcybersecurityanational securitychallengeisvery conventional, because: ThereferentobjectsareState (itssovereignty)andtheNation (its identity, its values) 2 - This securitization of cyber: Is mainly placed at State level ; Threats come from States; Sates are the victims Nationalsecurityanddefencepoliciesarelegitimated by the international system itselfTheaudienceofStatesistheinternationalcommunity (ie. other States)Ofcourse,cybersecurityissuessometimesbecome nationalproblemsthengovernmentsneedtojustify theirpoliciesandgainconfidencefromtheirown citizens Butmostofthetime,governments(military,security agencies) do not seek their national public confidence