RESEARCH

Geopolitical Aspects of Cybersecurity: International Cooperation and Conflicts

The heightening of globalization and the ever-dependence on technology has made cyber security an issue of international diplomacy.

Abstract

The heightening of globalization and the ever-dependence on technology has made cyber security an issue of international diplomacy. This research article aims to examine the geopolitical nature of cybersecurity in terms of cooperation and confrontation. Going through the potential causes of cyber conflicts, the research explores the historical backgrounds of cyber-attacks arranged by states and the role of such actions at the contemporary stage of international relations. This research article offers a conceptual analysis of the researched problem, identification of specific difficulties of attribution, the role of international norms in the context of securitization theory, and the diplomatic, legal, and technical approaches toward cyber threats. Accordingly, self and mutually pertaining economic and political interests and goals, national security and other safety concerns, as well as the development of technologies, are presented as the major causes of cyber conflicts. In the article's final section, the author debates the importance of international collaboration in fighting these challenges and comes up with some literature that may be useful in improving global cybersecurity initiatives.

Keywords: Cyber Security, Cyber War, Cyber Warfare, State Cyber Operations, Multilateral Cooperation, Securitization Theory.

Introduction

The issue of cyber security has increasingly become an essential aspect of International Relations given that digital technology has become embedded into the social relations of the global community [1]. There is also an emerging issue in relation to cyber warfare, which is typically backed by states and poses a threat to international peace and security. These are not technical disagreements; they are systemic and tied up in the interplay between nation-states. This paper will pursue the following objectives: To understand the geopolitical implication of cybersecurity, to depict the relationship between a cyberattack and geopolitics, to determine the aims of sponsoring cyber-attacks by states and the geopolitical relationship of cyber threats, and to analyze the significance of global cooperation in stemming the menace of cyber-attacks. The research aims and goals are to identify factors that lead to cyber warfare tension and outcomes and the role of global norms and cooperation in cybersecurity.

In today's interconnected world, where almost all aspects of nation-state and global power depend on digital infrastructure, the stakes in cyberspace are higher than ever. Because cyber threats are landing their way into critical infrastructure assets, identity theft, and even political processes, cyber security has become one of the most important topics for discussion among governments worldwide [4]. However, the international community needs help to build a consistent approach to cybersecurity, as the interest, legal systems, and technical development vary between the countries when implementing the norms and standards. This research aims to solve these challenges by exploring the geopolitics of cybersecurity and identifying measures to promote cooperation at the international level in this significant field.

Related Works

Several research studies on cybersecurity and IR have emphasized the increasing importance of cyber warfare in international relations. Kumar Somani emphasizes the dual aspects of cybersecurity: the risks introduced by the growth of digital technologies and the steps required to build a protective wall for the new environment [1]. Their work reveals that the world needs an active approach to cybersecurity since countries must constantly be advancing in response to threats. Janczewski Colarik mentions that state-sponsored cyber-attacks can be politically motivated, economical, or have military value [2]. They posit that such motivations are often anchored on other strategic national interests where computer incursions are employed as strategic instruments in lieu of military force.

       Janczewski and Colarik offer an insightful perspective on the motivations behind state-sponsored cyber-attacks [2]. They argue that these attacks are often driven by political, economic, or military objectives, reflecting deeper strategic interests. Unlike traditional military engagements, cyber warfare allows states to achieve their goals covertly, minimizing the risk of confrontation. Politically motivated cyber-attacks can be used to undermine the stability of rival states or to influence political outcomes. For instance, cyber espionage might gather intelligence on adversaries’ decision-making processes or disrupt political activities. Economically, cyber-attacks can serve as tools of economic warfare, targeting critical infrastructure, financial systems, or intellectual property to gain competitive advantages or disrupt the economic stability of rival states. Military motivations behind cyber-attacks might involve disrupting or degrading an opponent’s military capabilities, thereby gaining a strategic advantage without engaging in traditional combat.

The increasing prevalence of cyber warfare has profound implications for international relations. As states become more reliant on digital technologies, the stakes in cyber conflicts continue to rise. Cybersecurity is now a key component of national security, and states must invest in developing the capabilities to defend against and respond to cyber threats. Moreover, the use of cyber-attacks as a tool of statecraft has the potential to destabilize international relations. The covert nature of cyber warfare can lead to miscalculations and escalations, as states may interpret cyber actions as acts of aggression, even when they are intended to be limited in scope. This uncertainty creates a more volatile international environment where the lines between peace and conflict are increasingly blurred.

Securitization theory posits that cyber threats are politically constructed problems needing exceptional solutions [3]. With the help of this theoretical framework, it is possible to make sense of why some cybersecurity threats are considered more important than others and why vast funding is provided for their prevention. In securitization theory, the matter is considered as framing where cybersecurity is represented as the national security issue, allowing states to take extra measures – measures that are usually considered beyond the acceptable norms, like surveillance or cyber operations.

Securitization theory provides a valuable framework for understanding the politicization of cybersecurity. By recognizing that cyber threats are not merely technical problems but are socially and politically constructed, we can better comprehend why specific threats are prioritized over others and why extraordinary measures are justified in their prevention. However, the securitization of cybersecurity also raises important questions about the balance between security and civil liberties, the ethics of state actions in cyberspace, and the potential consequences of militarizing the digital domain. As cybersecurity continues to evolve as a critical issue for states, it is essential to examine the processes and implications of its securitization critically.

Promising, prior works present extensive literature reviews on cybersecurity threats and their respective effect on national security [4]. They point out the challenges of ascription in cyberspace because the Internet is distributed with users' identities concealed to the extent that it is almost impossible to tell who is behind an attack. They also left much looseness in identifying states behind cyber-attacks and have frozen the establishment of the proper international response in this field. Moreover, these works focus on international norms as an element influencing the state’s behavior in cyberspace. Although the process has been launched, it is reported that there are still areas for improvement.

One of the central themes in the literature on cybersecurity is the difficulty of ascription in cyberspace. The global and distributed nature of the Internet, combined with the ability of users to conceal their identities, creates a significant obstacle in identifying the perpetrators behind cyber-attacks. This anonymity is a double-edged sword: while it enables the free flow of information and protects privacy, it also provides a shield for malicious actors. As the literature suggests, the attribution challenge is exacerbated by the use of sophisticated techniques such as proxy servers, VPNs, and botnets, which can obscure the trustworthy source of an attack. This uncertainty in identifying attackers complicates the ability of states to respond effectively to cyber threats, as they often need help to determine who is responsible definitively.

Methods

 This research study employed a content analysis method parallel to historical analysis focusing on the geopolitical aspect of cybersecurity. A review of secondary data, including scholarly articles, government material, and case studies, was carried out to identify the rationale, action plan, and outcomes of cyber terrorism by states. Securitization theory was used to analyze cyber threats as politically constructed objects that needed a political and security approach to protection. Seeking to extend the discussion of cybersecurity beyond cyber security studies, this study seeks to answer the following research question: How is it possible to advance comprehension of the international relations of cyber conflicts?

In the content analysis, attention was paid to factors such as critical concerns and patterns that dominated the literature and were mainly related to the nature of motivation and state responses to cyber threats. Content analysis examined how cyber conflict has developed over the years and focused on some selected essential events in the contemporary world. In detail, the practical consequences of state-led cyberspace operations were discussed using examples of the Stuxnet attack on Iran's nuclear system and the interference of Russian hackers in the 2016 US elections.

Results

 The study findings established that economic and political needs, threats to national security, and the gravity of technology inspire state-sponsored cyber-attacks. These attacks have critical consequences on international security; they are characterized by upsetting international relations, assaults on essential infrastructures, and, finally, on the confidence between nations [4]. The study also discusses the problems of assigning cyber operations to specific actors, proving the responsibility of culprits, and offering a solution to them. However, it is essential to notice that there has been some engagement in international cooperation in cyber security, e.g., the European Union’s joint communication on resilience, deterrence, and defense stresses that the approach should be comprehensive.

Motivations behind state-sponsored cyber attacks

One of the discoveries made in this study is that economic gain is a factor in the cyber conflict. Quite a few states carry cyber espionage to get a hold of compromising intellectual properties, business secrets, etc. For example, China's cyber espionage on Western corporations has been attributed to China's new model of economic warfare aimed at expanding its informational–technological potential and weakening the Western countries' position, including through weakening dependence on foreign software. Likewise applying the same reasoning, the Russian government’s hacking into the democratic processes of its rivals in the West could be regarded as part of the scheme to undermine the strength of its geopolitical opponents and expand its sphere of influence globally [4]. Besides, it shows that such factors as technology contribute to the nature of cyber wars. Over time, technology advances, making it possible for states to conduct complex cyber operations that will have severe consequences for the targeted parties. The creation of the ‘offensive cyber tools,’ including malice and ransomware, has reduced the entry barriers for the states who wish to engage in cyber warfare. This has resulted in Cyber warfare where state and non-state actors, hackers, and terrorists target the weak points of any computer-based system.

Discussion

The results of this particular study aptly indicate that it is not easy to deal with cybersecurity issues expressly on the international level. Therefore, the incentives towards state-sponsored cyber-attacks are plural: political, economic, military, and otherwise. Another factor explaining why these attacks are complex to point to known actors is that it compounds the challenge of an effective global response to cyber threats. This challenge is worsened by the fact that cyber wars are, most of the time, low intensity, and it is usually a tiny state with fewer resources than a super state but is capable of achieving substantial strategic effects with the mere use of cyberspace [5].

At the same time, establishing international norms and standards in the sphere of cybersecurity, the shift in focus to diplomatic, legal, and technical measures is an actualization of the possibility of further cooperation. Thus, within the securitization theory, it is possible to outline both the political construction of cyber threats and the necessity of employing exceptional measures to confront them. Security is another way states may justify spending to develop the capacity to fight against cyber threats and partner with other nations to combat the threats.

This research article also underlines that certain trust-building activities can help strengthen international cooperation in cybersecurity. Due to the issues with attribution and the danger of misunderstanding the intent of cyber activities, a first hedge against escalation is provided by confidence-building measures, which may include sharing information about incidents and conducting joint cyber drills [6]. Still, the regulation of internet norms and laws on the international level can be a starting point for identifying states responsible for their actions in cyberspace and preventing malicious actions.

Conclusion

 In conclusion, cyber threats sponsored by states are a significant challenge to the stable development of the world, and their elimination involves collective actions by the global community. This paper focuses on explaining the motives for cyber war and recognizing an active fundamental security concept by activating diplomatic, legal, and technical tools. The study also accords prominence to international standards and cooperation in developing a common perception of cyber threats and promoting global security. Future research should aim to define better prevention and mitigation measures regarding threats, which are closely linked to the attribution problem of actors and the nature of cyber operations. While the article gives more focus on the issue of cybersecurity, it affords a deeper analysis of the geopolitical implications of cybersecurity. It calls for a more collective effort from world nations to find the solution to these problems. In this context, this study extends the existing body of knowledge on this topic by laying down the foundation to systematically investigate and understand the relationship between cyber security and international relations by incorporating the theoretical framework of securitization.

References

 [1] Chiappetta, A. (2019). Cybersecurity impacts on geopolitics. FormaMente, 14(1), 61-74. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/The_cybersecurity_impacts_on_geopolitics/links/5d2454ad299bf1547ca5020d/The-cybersecurity-impacts-on-geopolitics.pdf

[2] Kouba, T. (2023). Prevention of threats to Galileo Global Navigation Satellite System.

[3] Lysenko, S., Liubchenko, A., Коzakov, V., Demianchuk, Y., & Krutik, Y. (2024). Global cybersecurity: Harmonizing international standards and cooperation. Multidisciplinary Reviews, 7. https://malque.pub/ojs/index.php/mr/article/view/3820

[4] Pomerleau, P. L., & Maimon, D. (2022). Evidence-based Cybersecurity: Foundations, Research, and Practice. CRC Press.

[5] Romashkina, N. P., Markov, A. S., & Stefanovich, D. V. (2023). Information Technologies and International Security. https://elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_53980361_27006509.pdf

[6]Teichmann, F., Boticiu, S. R., & Sergi, B. S. (2023). The evolution of ransomware attacks in light of recent cyber threats. How can geopolitical conflicts influence the cyber climate? International Cybersecurity Law Review, 4(3), 259-280. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1365/s43439-023-00095-w

[7] Whyte, C. (2018). Dissecting the digital world: A review of the construction and constitution of cyber conflict research. International Studies Review, 20(3), 520-532. https://academic.oup.com/isr/article-abstract/20/3/520/4911525

RESEARCHER

Dr. Anar Israfilov

RESEARCH ABSTRACTS

Backed in
Research.

About the AI Research Centre

You can download our research article as a pdf below and examine it in detail.