Reuven Cohen, Contributor
I focus on disruptive trends in technology and cloud computing.
Last weeks New York Times bombshell article by David Sanger claimed that President Obama secretly ordered the cyber-attacks on the computer systems that run Iran’s main nuclear enrichment facilities. The story tells of a significantly expanding American involvement in the sustained use of so called cyber-weapons against other nations using the “Stuxnet“ software. The story has caused quite the uproar. But what was missing from the story is something far more interesting, according to both The White House and Pentagon’s own definitions, a cyber-attack is to be considered “An act of war.” So by it’s own definition, are we at war?
Steve Rendall wrote a brief post at fair.org on the topic saying, “It would have been much more interesting had reporter David Sanger cited independent legal experts on whether such cyberattacks constitute acts of war. If they do, the White House program could have far more profound consequences than merely disrupting Iran’s nuclear program.”
States have an inherent right to self-defense that may be triggered by certain aggressive acts in cyberspace…. Certain hostile acts conducted through cyberspace could compel actions under the commitments we have with our military treaty partners…. When warranted, the United States will respond to hostile acts in cyberspace as we would any other threat to our country.
Also then points to Glenn Greenwald who notes, the Pentagon is similarly on the record arguing that cyberattacks are acts of war:
Needless to say, if any cyber-attack is directed at the U.S. –rather than by the U.S.–it will be instantly depicted as an act of unparalleled aggression and evil: Terrorism. Just last year, the Pentagon decreed that any cyberattack on the U.S. would be deemed “an act of war.”
I’ll keep you posted as this story unfolds.