cyberwarfare

Article 5 of NATO’s foundational 1949 North Atlantic Treaty demands that if an “armed attack” is carried out against even just one member state, all other member states “shall” consider that attack (and any armed attack) on a member state “an attack against them all” and “will assist,” up to and “including the use of armed force.”  This bedrock is the centerpiece for over seven decades of the Pax Americana: the U.S.-led global system of military power, alliances, collective defense, and ability to project combined strength anywhere on the planet.  For it to continue in these roles, NATO must adapt to current and future threats by adding cyberwarfare—including information warfare—to Article 5.

As the threat and effect of psychological warfare becomes more pronounced in cyberspace, policymakers must address this burgeoning security threat.

For naval intelligence to effectively support the Chief of Naval Operation’s new strategy, it must first adapt to the realities of the digital information age.

Conventional and cyber conflict diffusion diverge on two points:  third-party intervention (escalation) and collateral damage (pathogen).  The findings raise questions regarding state neutrality, non-state actors, and authenticating attackers.

As cyberspace operations continue to evolve, they raise some unique questions regarding the nature of conflict and how it should be discussed and regulated.