Networking (Formerly Newsmedia) –
As the Solarium Commission report demonstrates, both Democrat and Republican lawmakers agree that the cyberspace domain needs addressing. Cyberspace – unlike the other domains – is a giant, hot mess. Norms must be defended; political interference by the autocracies must be defeated; threats to US critical infrastructure must be eliminated; economic loss through IP theft and massive espionage data leaks must be blocked. However, successive administrations have approached cyberspace operations as if they are massively dangerous risks to conventional conflict.
There is something about cyberspace that paralyzes strong leadership. Is it because the American people do not see loss and risk in cyberspace, unlike through the other domains, and so action can be avoided without domestic political cost? Or do cyberspace operations still conjure unknown risks to leadership, and thus leadership avoids action? Nevertheless, inaction is accepting risk too – the most certain fact is that subsequent malign activity will continue since the autocracies currently do not seem to fear unacceptable punishment through cyberspace.
Adding to this paradox is the historical fact that military cyberspace operations carry the least risk of escalation of all warfare domains. Cyberspace operations have yet to escalate to kinetic violence. Yet, successive administrations have labored intensely to review, slow, and limit their conduct.
Puzzling is that a US O-6 in Iraq can independently order military strikes against high-value ISIS individuals based on (area of hostilities) command authorities, but in many cases changing a zero to a one on a website somewhere in the world (to deny its function) requires Presidential approval. Of course, there are legitimate concerns over such cyberspace activities – many of which involve
violations of sovereignty. However, the cyberspace domain is the least defended yet the most complicated by interagency concerns and fears of escalation.
Read the report →