Dr Saifaldin Z. Al-Darraji
Introduction
There are numerous challenges to global stability, security and prosperity in the next ten years; however, two ‘great challenges’ with national and international impact are cybersecurity and climate change. This paper explores these challenges and why they are significant in a global context. The international relations term ‘global stability’ means a ‘Property of a system in which a slight disturbance in the state of affairs — an equilibrium that can be static or dynamic — does not produce too disturbing effect on that system.’[1] In comparison, ‘global security’ describes the actions and survival measures taken by international organisations and states when faced by military, political, economic, societal, health epidemic, and environmental threats.[2] ‘Global prosperity’ relates to the improving economic condition of nation-states and the better quality of life for citizens and fosters global peace.[3] In Part 1 ‘Cybersecurity’ we discuss the internet and the threats and risks from sabotage, espionage, and subversion campaigns; and review cyberspace and government policy. Part 2 ‘Climate change’ starts with a definition of the subject, and then explores the problems associated with climate change; and reviews national and international policymaking.
Cybersecurity
Cyberspace is reshaping politics, economics and societies across the world. Many societies and businesses rely on the continual operation of digital machines to run critical services like hospitals, finance, and communications. As a result, the internet contains many challenges to society and requires a security response to reduce risk. ‘Cybersecurity’ is a new and evolving term. It is about protecting cyberspace from threats of cyber-crime, cyber-terrorism, and cyber-attack by states or non-state actors. It deals with the protection of networks and computer systems from attacks which can endanger the hardware, software programmes, or information. These attacks might leak private information, as well as cause damage or disruption.[4]
Despite the new opportunities created by cyber innovation, it comes with a considerable security risk. The greatest is ‘information security’ (others are risk management; regulation, and infrastructure management; and disaster recovery). Cavelty and Wenger say ‘Cybersecurity politics’ is, concerned with the misapplication of digital technologies by individuals, businesses, and governments, like Russia and China, but not exclusively, for political, economic, and social purposes. It includes, who develops technology, how it is used, and who determines its use or misuse. These relate to a state’s ‘projection of power’.[5] To explain this, we will look at cyberspace and sabotage, espionage, and subversion campaigns.
‘Sabotage’ is a malicious and deliberate act which leads to the disruption of routine tasks as well as features, including the destruction or harm to information or equipment. For instance, during the Crimea crisis of 2014, CyberBerkut (a group of pro-Russian hacktivists) used denial-of-service attacks on the Ukrainian government and Ukrainian and western business websites. Similar ‘cyber incidents’ (disturbances of operations) include Stuxnet, WannaCry, and NotPetya.[6]
‘Cyber espionage’ (cyber spying) is the action of obtaining (political and military) information and secrets without the permission of the owner for an advantage over individuals, competitors, rivals, groups, and governments. It is undertaken through proxy servers, malicious software, worms, trojan horse and spyware, while the perpetrators are organised crime gangs, governments, or individuals. For example, Operation Olympic Games was directed by the United States against Iran nuclear facilities.[7]
‘Subversion’ means the ‘activities intended to influence a targeted country’s domestic politics’; in political warfare, cyber subversion undermines the power and authority of a regime, political system or state institutions. It aims to achieve strategic impact without the use of force. ‘Fake news’ stories are one example. Furthermore, there have been allegations of ‘interference in the American elections’ during Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign.[8]
Governments are increasingly making cybersecurity part of their national and international security policymaking as they seek to protect themselves from risks and threats that might destabilise a state’s security and economy. It involves them negotiating and making agreements with bureaucracies, society, business, and international agencies about ‘… defining roles, responsibilities, legal boundaries and acceptable rules of behavior’.[9] For instance, on national security grounds, the British government excluded Chinese-owned Hauwei from the British 5G network.
In Western societies, digital advancements continue to be driven by private businesses, with governments regulating their operation; though, as we have seen with Facebook and Twitter, governments often lag. Cyber-attacks are a part of everyday life; paradoxically, the more workplaces and governments digitise, the more susceptible they become. Consequently, national security services will increasingly become involved in cybersecurity.[10]
Climate change
The U.S. National Geographic defines ‘climate change’ as the ‘… long-term shift in global or regional climate patterns. Often climate change refers specifically to the rise in global temperatures from the mid-20th century to present… Climate change could refer to a particular location or the planet as a whole’.[11] Climate change is a universal phenomenon with social , economic, political, geographical, psychological and ecological implications.[12]
It refers to the excessive formation of carbon dioxide along with other greenhouse gases which are the result of human activity (i.e. burning fossil fuels). In the process CO2 increases the amount of reflected solar energy which stays caught in the Earth’s atmosphere — and warms the planet incrementally (warming the air, oceans, the surface of the Earth).[13] Deforestation is another cause of CO2 increase and global warming pollution. Former vice-president Al Gore says ‘human civilization’ and the ‘earth’s ecological system’ are on a collision, with the ‘climate crisis’ the ‘manifestation’. Many problems and threats have arisen because of this collision and collectively referred to as ‘ecological crises’: the destruction of the fish stocks and coral reefs, shortages of freshwater, depletion of the topsoil, cutting down of forests, and toxic waste. ‘But the deterioration of our atmosphere is by far the most serious manifestation of this crisis’, says Gore.[14]
The environmentalist Mark Lynas says ‘Scientists predict that by 2100 global temperatures will have risen by between 1.4 and 5.8 degrees Celsius. The lower end of this scale would cause significant disruptions for ecosystems and human society.’[15] One example will have to suffice: should the sea level rise by 5 to 7 metres a large part of highly populated, coastal Bangladesh would be underwater, leading to refugees, unemployment, disease, hunger, and border issues (with India and Myanmar/Burma).[16]
There are two sides to this debate, those who argue that climate change is a reality, for instance, the scientific community, environmentalists, ecologists and many in the general public. Alternatively, a group exists who argue that climate change and global warming is part of natural cycles of the Earth’s history, its present, and future. This group includes sceptics, oil companies and populist politicians. Both sides agree that human activities have intensified with industrialisation and modern agriculture, leading to pollution threats.
John Vogler reported that just five countries and one political union accounted for nearly 70% of CO2 pollution: Japan 4%, Russia 5%, India 6%, EU 11%, United States 16%, and China 29%. It is crucial to keep in mind that the current negotiation about agreements on climate change and carbon emissions has taken place in the context of national and international interests, competition, and development. Thus far, the world community has agreed to make ‘nationally driven contributions’ rather than ‘emission reduction commitment’, with each state committing to varying targets. Arguably, what is required to address climate change and to reach consensus is a substantial structural change within the international system?
At present, in the world’s governments, the notion of ‘full convergence’ between politics and policy consensus is still a way off. Two negative impacts of this are; first, anxieties about the financial cost of a move to a minimal carbon economy continue; second, businesses worry that embracing new, costly technologies that might leave them exposed to competition that continues to use the ‘old’ technologies. There is anxiety that new technology will not be shared.
The developing countries, like China, India, and Brazil, question why they should be denied social progress through industrialisation and the burning of fossil fuels.[17] The problems associated with a normative approach to climate change is made that much more difficult because of the diversity which characterises the world community. This unevenness is linked to both objective conditions as well as to perceptions. Richard Falk says this raises issues of both corrective and distributive justice.[18]
Last but not least, the world’s public need to be informed about climate change and informed about the logic and necessity of living innovatively and sustainably. The new technologies will need to produce eco jobs for those workers who have lost their jobs because of the new technology advancements and the re-engineering of present technologies.
Conclusion
Digital technology is linked with politics and requires regulating and governance. The aim is to ensure the security, stability and prosperity of each state in conjunction with technological advances. However, the interconnection between technology and society will surely increase in the decades to come and will be running in the background of our everyday lives and support social institutions and services. Perhaps technology and humans will come together in a future cyber environment that will generate positive and negative outcomes. Consequently, cybersecurity and digital regulation and governance will need regular re-evaluation and expanding to make it fit for purpose. The cybersecurity threats and challenges require a collaborative and multi-pronged approach by world governments. It will improve security and stability and build trust for all.[19]
The threat to world security by climate change is dramatic. A warmer global climate of 1 to 1.5 degrees Celsius will impact most nation-states negatively and could lead to humanitarian crises. However, these will be insignificant to global warming of 2 or more degrees Celsius. To help reduce the climate change threat requires national governments and the United Nations to agree and implement carbon reduction and decarbonisation policies. It includes analysis of costs, comprises, and incentives. Only then can the carbon emission reduction targets be met within time. Aid and support need to be provided to sates that will lose out if they adopt the eco changes, so that balance in the global stability, world security and economic sustainability is achievable going forward.[20]
Bibliography
Books, Articles, and Online: Cyber Security
_________‘Global security’, Rand Organisation. 2020. Online. Available at: https://www.rand.org/topics/global-security.html (accessed 12 Oct 2020).
_________Itgovernance.co.uk, 2020. Online. Available at: https://www.itgovernance.co.uk/what-is-cybersecurity (accessed 13 Oct 2020).
__________National Cyber Security Centre, ncsc.gov.uk, 2020. Online. Available at: https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/section/about-ncsc/what-is-cyber-security (accessed 13 Oct 2020).
Antonini, Claudio D., ‘Definition of Stability in International Relations’, IFAC Proceedings Volumes,
Volume 32, Issue 2, July 1999, Pages 6344–6346. Online. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1474667017570834 (accessed 12 Oct 2020).
Buchanan, Ben. 2017. The Cybersecurity Dilemma. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Browning, Christopher S. 2103. International Security, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Çatal, Betul. 2020. ‘Democratic Peace Theory and International Security: A Critical Perspective’, International Journal of Eurasia Social Sciences, Vol: 11, Issue: 39: 118–135.
Cavelty, Myriam Dunn and Andreas Wenger. 2020. ‘Cyber security meets security politics: Complex technology, fragmented politics, and networked science’, Contemporary Security Policy, 41:1, 5–32, DOI: 10.1080/13523260.2019.1678855. Online. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13523260.2019.1678855 (accessed 16 October 2020).
Clarke, Richard A, and Robert K Knake. 2010. Cyber War. New York: HarperCollins.
Croft, Adrian, and Peter Apps. 2014. ‘NATO Websites hit in Cyber attack linked to Crimea tension’, Reuters, March 16.
Kaminski, A. Kaminski. 2020. ‘ “Operation Olympic Games”: Cyber-Sabotage As a tool of American Intelligence aimed at Counteracting the Development of Iran’s Nuclear Programme’, Security and Defence Quarterly, 29, no. 2.
Omand, David. 2020. ‘Cyber Threats to Nato’, Chacr.Org.Uk. Online. Available at: https://chacr.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Ares-and-Athena-NATO-today-Cyber-Threats-to-NATO.pdf (accessed 4 Nov 2020).
Radelet, Steven. 2016. ‘Prosperity Rising: The Success of Global Development — and How to Keep It Going’, Foreign Affairs. Online. Available at: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2015-12-14/prosperity-rising (accessed 12 Oct 2020).
Paterson, T. and Lauren E Hanley. 2020. ‘Political warfare in the digital age: cyber subversion, information operations and “deep fakes”’, Australian Journal of International Affairs, 74: 439–454.
Singh, Sakshi, and Suresh Kumar. 2020. ‘The Times of Cyber Attacks’, Acta Technica Corviniensis– Bulletin of Engineering 13, no. 3: 133–137.
Smith, Michael E. 2017. International Security. 2nd ed. London: Palgrave.
Books, Articles, and Online: Climate Change
____________2008. Fragile Earth. HarperCollins, London.
Encyclopedia, National Geographic, 2020. Online. Available: https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/climate-change/ (accessed 13 Oct 2020).
Brown, Garrett W., Iain Mclean, and Alistair Macmillan. 2018. A Dictionary of Politics & International Relations. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Eswaran, R, and G. Vinayagamoorthi. 2019. ‘Cyber Security and Information Security’, International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE) 8, no. 3: 1–3.
Gore, Al. 2009. Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis. Bloomsbury, London.
Richard Falk, Richard. 2010. ‘A Radical World Order Challenge: Addressing Global Climate Change and the Threat of Nuclear Weapons’, Globalizations 7, no. 12 (2010): pp. 137–155.
Perlmutter, Daniel D, and Robert L Rothstein. 2011. The Challenge of Climate Change. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Wallden, Petros, and Elham Kashefi. 2019. ‘Cyber Security in The Quantum Era’, Communications of the ACM 62, no. 4.
Zakeer, Ahmad. 2020. ‘Impact of Climate Change Awareness on Climate Change Adaptions and Climate Change Adaptation Issues’. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Research 33, no. 3: 619.
[1] Claudio, D. Antonini. 1999. ‘Definition of Stability in International Relations’, IFAC Proceedings Volumes, Volume 32, Issue 2, July, Pages 6344–6346. Online. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1474667017570834 (accessed 12 Oct 2020).
[2] Betul Catal, 2020. ‘Democratic Peace Theory and International Security: A Critical Perspective’, International Journal of Eurasia Social Sciences, Vol: 11, Issue: 39, pp. 118–135.
[3] Steven Radelet. 2016. ‘Prosperity Rising: The Success of Global Development — and How to Keep It Going’, Foreign Affairs. Online. Available at: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2015-12-14/prosperity-rising (accessed 12 Oct 2020).
[4] Sakshi Singh and Suresh Kumar. 2020. ‘The Times of Cyber Attacks’, Acta Technica Corviniensis– Bulletin of Engineering 13, no. 3: 133–137.
[5] Myiarm Dunn Cavelty and Andreas Wenger. 2019. ‘Cyber security meets security politics: Complex technology, fragmented politics, and networked science’, Contemporary Security Policy, 41:1, 5–32, DOI: 10.1080/13523260.2019.1678855. Online. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13523260.2019.1678855 (accessed 16 October 2020), p. 5.
[6] Ibid, p. 5.
[7] Mariusz A. Kaminski. 2020. ‘ “Operation Olympic Games”: Cyber-Sabotage as a tool of American Intelligence aimed at Counteracting the Development of Iran’s Nuclear Programme’, Security and Defence Quarterly, 29, no. 2.
[8] Cavelty and Wenger, Ibid, p. 7.
[9] Ibid, p. 7.
[10] Ibid, pp. 23–25.
[11] Encyclopedia, National Geographic. 2020. Online. Available: https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/climate-change/ (accessed 13 Oct 2020).
[12] Zakeer Ahmed, ‘Impact of Climate Change Awareness on Climate Change Adaptions and Climate Change Adaptation Issues’, Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Research 33, no. 3 (2020): 619.
[13] Garrett W. Brown, Iain Mclean, and Alistair Macmillan. 2018. A Dictionary of Politics & International Relations. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 90.
[14] Al Gore. 2009. Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis. Bloomsbury, London, p. 32.
[15] Mark Lynas. 2008. Fragile Earth. HarperCollins, London, p. 254.
[16] ____________2008. Fragile Earth. HarperCollins, London, p. 255.
[17] Daniel D. Perlmutter, and Robert L Rothstein. 2011. The Challenge of Climate Change. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 159–160.
[18] Richard Falk, ‘A Radical World Order Challenge: Addressing Global Climate Change and the Threat of Nuclear Weapons’, Globalizations 7, no. 12 (2010): pp. 137–155.
[19] Ben Buchanan. 2017. The Cybersecurity Dilemma. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 157.
[20] Perlmutter, The Challenge of Climate Change, pp. 159–160.
