Cyber Power

Within the United States, the military is the primary externally facing Cyber arm for the government. The Department of Defense (DoD) shares responsibilities with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). On the one hand, the division of responsibilities rightly restricts the authority required to exercise Cyber-attacks, but it also fails to navigate through the grey space of Cyber ambiguity. Perhaps it too closely associates Cyber with hard power or military force, but Cyber is not just a military attack tool. It is not purely a diplomatic or economic soft power either, instead falls somewhere in-between these two political tools. It should be used as a smart power, or an option short of war that can be used to political advantage abroad, but is more forceful than an economic sanction. It is very likely that Cyber power would be most effective as both a tool of economic power and one that can support information operations to influence sociological and psychological factors. In order to achieve Cyber dominance world-wide, the United States should consider the creation of Cyber organization with separate authorities to operate outside of those granted to the military and law enforcement communities.

When considering it only as a tool of the Warrior and Law Enforcer, US Policy makers view Cyber in the wrong light. It may just as easily be placed into the realm of Diplomacy as a distinct tool separate from function of war. Yet, the majority of American Cyber capability and employment is in the hands of the military. Without a doubt, it is a tool that can be used and incorporated into the strategic planning of war and the operational and tactical executions. It has direct impact on Command, Control, and Communications in the field of war. In addition, Cyber allows for the potential to influence early phases of conflict, when considering how to affect things such as development of military programs, future choices, etc. But beyond those examples, there exists the possibility to execute Cyber options independent of military action.

Cyber is already being used as a smart power by individual actors, groups, businesses, and states to each achieve their own ends. The attack on Sony by North Korea had no affect from a military perspective, but it did establish North Korea’s bona fides as a viable Cyber actor world-wide. In essence, even though it seemed to accomplish no particular objective, North Korea’s perceived power in the world increased by committing the action no matter the outcome. ISIS harnessed the power of social media and Cyber in order become a power among the Muslim Violent Extremist Organizations (VEO) of the world. The Chinese breached the US government’s personnel site and had access to a government organization’s systems for months. Its actions will likely never be fully mitigated. How should the US employ the same power? Currently, those actions are limited to either the clandestine action of information collection, defense of networks, or use in conjunction with military action.

Access to Cyber infrastructure is a necessity of the modern world. In the U.S., access to the internet has achieved a veritable right associated with citizenship. The ability to control or execute influence of the “Cyberspace” of an adversary may be the equivalent of applying a Cyber-sanction. In essence, a country would block the progress of another entity. It limits communications into and out of the nation, making a pariah of that state and relegating them to their own dark corners. It would work hand in hand with the economic isolation imposed on that society. Similar actions may also be applied to VEOs in order to shut down access to all satellite systems, GSM, or land based communications.

The impact of Cyber action would be similar to the economic impact of sanctions and isolation of a nation. Blockades are not capable of affecting a country the way it would have prior to the modern technological revolution. Interconnectivity allows for a constant flow of information and the survival of the adversary. In such a world, the trunks of communication are the real international assets. Those who control the trunk lines actually control the very economic vascular system of the world. Without the flow of information over those life lines, economies of states will stagnate.

Planning decisions under the current configuration are dependent on military actions. Cyber effects relegated to military authorities are planned against military objectives. But, Cyber capabilities will be more successful in achieving effects against civilian populations. Cyber can be used as a tool to shift a civilian population and shape the environment to achieve strategic end-states far better than in the military realm. Examples include: Disruption of financial markets, disruption of electrical power, transportation systems (vehicular, rail, sea, and air), message delivery, and access to international communications. It is not just about the Cyber networks and what they run, but the information that resides in Cyberspace. Everything from the drivers licenses to property deeds are found electronically in the developed world and all of that could be held hostage. As nuclear warheads were developed in the name of deterrence, North Korea, Iran, Russia, and China will progress to achieve the same goals in order to secure and expand their power base. As other countries expand their capabilities, the current configuration of Cyberspace bureaucracy will hamper the ability of the United States to compete.

Perhaps the government should consider separating Cyber from DHS and the military to create an independent organization. Additionally, much like the Coast Guard has a mission that aligns it with both DHS and DoD depending on level of war a Cyber Security Agency would need to likely have an equivalent service. In the future, there could be a Coast Guard, Navy, Air Force, Army, and Cyber Force. No matter where the planning and execution of cyber operations resides, it is clear that policy makers need to consider the employment of cyber capabilities beyond its conventional hard power alignment.