Cyber operations: the new balance

Joint Force Quarterly, July, 2009 by Stephen W. Korns

In addition to the above, a wise cyber New Balance would prudently avoid the "10-foot-tall Ivan" syndrome that some analysts argue symbolically represented overstated Soviet Cold War capabilities. A thoughtful approach would seek a conscientious balance between cybersecurity and openness, and inclusively engage the public. The Gilmore Commission succinctly captured the essence of this tension by suggesting that any new normalcy policy should include "heightened security but not with such an obsessiveness that it would destroy the economic base or the civil freedoms of the country." (38)

Finally, a sensible New Balance policy would rationally approach the issue of cyberwar. Cyber weapons may offer the advantage of low cost in terms of human life and physical damage. In fact, a growing line of thought suggests that the potentially nonlethal and discriminative nature of cyber weapons should motivate international law to accommodate and even encourage the judicious application of cyber operations. (39) However, while some have asserted that the United States is at war in cyberspace today, there must also be follow-through in articulating the strategy and conditions for a discernible end. Implying an undefined and unending cyberwar could lead to the misperception that the United States seeks militarization of the Internet. In addition, international law remains immature for determining when a cyber event crosses the threshold triggering use of force. Cyber New Balance would seek to avoid unproductive discourse of endless, boundless cyberwar while constructing a methodology for discriminating between cybercrime, cyberterrorism, and the conduct of legitimate military cyber operations.

Lessons from the Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and Bush new normalcy cases provide compelling evidence to suggest that enlightenment, rather than retrenchment, is the path for cyber New Balance. The economic calamity of the Great Depression directly confronted Roosevelt, as the Soviet nuclear arsenal did Eisenhower and terrorism did Bush. The threats were known and real. Similarly, cyber threats are real and have evolved. In the face of fractious cyber challenges, an insightful reevaluation of DOD cyber policy is advisable.

With Secretary Gates' New Balance as the fundamental underpinning, DOD has a compelling opportunity to rebalance cyber priorities in line with the realities of cyber new normalcy. A comprehensive cyber New Balance effort recognizes that action must be taken across the entirety of the defense community, including defense industrial base partners. Progress necessitates identification and resolution of entrenched technical and cultural impediments that hamper progress. A New Balance strategy can attain true cyber new normalcy through change in culture and conduct, improved technical capabilities, and altered policy constructs that deliver meaningful deterrence. Failing these, DOD cyber capabilities will undoubtedly remain ossified under old normalcy.

Notes

(1) Frank G. Hoffman, Conflict in the 21st Century: The Rise of Hybrid Wars (Arlington, VA: Potomac Institute for Policy Studies, December 2007), 28, available at <www.potomacinstitute.org/ publications/Potomac_HybridWar_0108.pdf>.