Photo by John Lund/Getty Images

Cyberwarfare undermines democracy while dictatorships stay strong

FSI Stanford
Jun 21, 2017 · 2 min read

Part Three in a series of essays by Toomas Ilves, former president of Estonia and currently the Bernard and Susan Liautaud Visiting Fellow, Center for International Security and Cooperation, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies.

Excerpted from testimony for Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism on March 15, 2017.

What we have seen in the U.S. and in Europe, particularly in countries with elections this year, is asymmetric. If an authoritarian government undermines your elections, you can hardly undermine theirs if they do not have democratic elections. Hacking emails of the rulers and publishing embarrassing finds does little if the media in the ruler’s country is under state control, and if republishing them on the web lands you in jail or worse.

Liberal democracies are susceptible to such attacks even from relatively small cyber powers such as Iran. Similarly, a small group of hackers working for a foreign government such as APT 28 and APT 29 can burrow into poorly protected servers anywhere. It is the asymmetry of such attacks that places democracies in danger. Authoritarian regimes enjoy a tactical advantage in this digital world, and their own mechanisms are quite robust against a similar attack.

Democracies stand on several key pillars: free and fair elections, human rights, the rule of law and a free media. Until 2016, an open media was seen as a resilient pillar that supported the others. Yet, because of hacks, doxing and fake news, we can already imagine the problem democratic societies will face in future elections: how to limit lies when they threaten democracy? How to keep parliaments and parties free of hacking? How to respond when embarrassing emails influence the election?

We in the West possess asymmetrical advantages as well. We can investigate money laundering, especially in the countries favored by the adversaries, and take appropriate action. We can make it hard for the children of the regime to study in the West or to live here on stolen riches. A notable example is Vladimir Pekhtin, the chairman of the Duma ethics committee, who sponsored a law to ban Russian’s ownership abroad despite owning a multi-million dollar property in Miami.

In other words, we in the West could use our asymmetric advantage. But we won’t.

Let’s not mince words: tactics like hacking are warfare against liberal democracies. All democracies will need to rethink how to protect their electoral processes.

Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies

The Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies is…

Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies

The Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies is Stanford’s premier research institute for global affairs.

FSI Stanford

Written by

The Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies is Stanford’s premier research institute for international affairs. Faculty views are their own.

Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies

The Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies is Stanford’s premier research institute for global affairs.

Medium is an open platform where 170 million readers come to find insightful and dynamic thinking. Here, expert and undiscovered voices alike dive into the heart of any topic and bring new ideas to the surface. Learn more

Follow the writers, publications, and topics that matter to you, and you’ll see them on your homepage and in your inbox. Explore

If you have a story to tell, knowledge to share, or a perspective to offer — welcome home. It’s easy and free to post your thinking on any topic. Write on Medium

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store