By Jenna Rimasson
Translation: Davina Durgana
Passage au crible n°44
Pixabay
On June 1st, 2011, Google announced the piracy of its network. Affected by this operation are high government officials, Chinese dissidents as well as members of the army. Peking refused all implication in this cyber-attack, which was taken very seriously by Washington.
> Historical background
> Theoretical framework
> Analysis
> References
Developed during the Vietnam War, the Internet became a technology intrinsically tied to the idea of combat, as militaristic as it is democratic. From then on, computer espionage became one of the threats against which States and transnational firms are trying to protect themselves. In terms of the virtual, it often sustains an engaged fight on other fronts. Thus, in April 2001, after the death of a Chinese pilot, above a Hainan island, caused by an American spy plane, the official website of the Pentagon was the victim of a cyber-attack. In 2004, the South Korean government was also targeted. The following year, the Chinese hackers were introduced in the networks of the largest Japanese firms – notably, Mitsubishi and Sony – the Embassies and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. Note that this operation arose after the defeat of the PRC in facing the Country of the Rising Sun, before the Asian Soccer Cup, an event illuminated by the emergence in China of anti-Japanese sentiment. In 2006, the Navy War College system, in Newport, United States, was infiltrated before they were pirated by the French and German Ministries of Defense. Denying all responsibility of their Government, Prime Minister Wen JIabao had then presented his apologies to German Chancellor Angela Merkel on August 27th, 2007.
Cyber-criminality. It seems that criminal infractions such as fraud, violations of intellectual property rights, and of confidentiality, are perpetrated by technological tools, in particular with the advantage of the Internet. In accordance with this concept, issues are properly posed by new technologies as well as by the Revolution of Aptitudes of citizens and by their mobilizations in networks. Cyber-criminality has thus allowed different contested transparencies of State monopoles, notably that of the control of territory and security. Beyond the public order, Governments are sometimes obliged to negotiate with non-conventional actors, capable of exerting an impact on structures of knowledge and production. Industrial espionage is accomplished by technological means, such as to this end, through cyber-crimes.
Decompartmentalizing Public and Private Spheres. Already emphasized by Norbert Elias, the evolution of macro-social practices does not seem to be without ties with those of micro-social components. The acceleration of globalization, a global process, consolidates the interactions between heterogeneous actors. More than an interaction between these two spheres, one observes currently a remodeling of the international order previously dominated by States with entities capable of challenging them, that is to say equaling, national authorities.
Desiring to preserve sovereign monopoles, the Chinese government attempts to control the development of emerging activism, associated with New Technological Information and Communication (NTIC). To this end, it integrates in its fight citizens competent in this growth. The SPLA (Sudan People’s Liberation Army) has invested in this domain and has consecrated today a Cyberspace Department. Thousands of engineers are thus recruited as Soldiers of the Net. The State and Civil spheres overlap and – thanks to this technological development – offer Beijing the opportunity to undertake a democratic opening from above. All at once, distinguishing this fundamental distinction is made more difficult – in the case of Cybercrime – by the incrimination of Chinese authorities by other countries; the State can always argue of a lack of jurisdiction and use as an excuse their powerlessness in facing private entities to exonerate all responsibility.
The control of these immaterial and decentralized flows as well as the elaboration of judicial measures reveal to be as complex at the international level as on the domestic level because the young generations, aspiring for more freedom, are exploring the possibilities offered by the Web and are forcing the adoption of a new mode of regulation policy. From this point on, the Government can no longer pretend to control all of the emissions of information and can see for example, the concurrence with citizen journalism. The security response demonstrates its inefficiency in a globalized world; the attempt of Chinese leaders to install filtering software on Internet sites – a Green Block – on particular computers has been unsuccessful. The inadequacy of these devices is much more confirmed on the transnational scene. Currently, the collectives formed on the Web, whether they are illegal or legal, allows them to voice their demands in a public space and to directly access the global arena. The distinction between local, national and international seems outmoded and suggests a glocalized universe.
The operations orchestrated on the Internet require the highest technological competencies, but remains inexpensive and acquires a strong media impact. They are far from being reserved for actors of the civil society that contest official actions; economic operators, public administrators and even illicit organizations will also use it. These network struggles are established between entities with similar natures and capacities, which are equally asymmetrical. To this end, recall the example of Sony where the network was pirated a week after the electronic mailboxes of Google. The interference of the border between individuals and the State thus extends to different fields in which the latter is successful as far as the creation of monopoles, and the abolishing of the hierarchal system dominated by public authorities.
If Cybercrime assumes certain characteristics of terrorism – surprise attacks, symbolic targets, media attention and a political objective – the past events have proven that the State actors are not only the targets. They can also retake to their side this informal instrument of combat with the objective of acquiring intelligence, of manipulating information or of degrading the systems which transmit information. Additionally, the process used and the achieving entity already contains in itself, a message. In the present case, the violation of the Gmail message service by Chinese dissidents and by American leaders is not harmless. Recall the trade dispute that had already taken place in 2010 between China and Google. This firm, accusing Chinese authorities of operating important censures, decided to transfer its network to Hong Kong. Additionally, this infraction and effect to the confidentiality has been inscribed in the context of financial tensions between Beijing and Washington. In fact, the PRC has announced in March the sale of 9.2 billion dollars in American Treasury bonds. Indirectly, this transaction has been translated into a contestation of the monetary hegemony of the United States where the credibility of gold is already attacked by a colossal public debt. Since the attacks on the World Trade Center in September 2001, the American authorities have adopted a repressive attitude and have implemented an active fight against these types of actions. Then, the heterogeneity of implicated actors and the fluidity of their mobility, questions the adequacy of the Stateframework, that is to say inter-state, to curb these threats. Plus, the refusal of governments has thwarted the installation of a global cyber-police since the creation of which would suppose an abandonment of powers of States for the global benefit. Finally, cyber-attacks perpetrated by other States and which the White House has lively condemned, emphasizes the stigmatization of promoting processes favoring entryism of non-State actors, destabilizers of the Westphalian order.
Arquilla John, Ronfeldt David, Networks and Netwars. The Future of Terror, Crime and Militancy, Santa Monica, Rand Corporation Publishing, 2001. par la Maison Blanche
Douzet Frédérick, « Les Frontières chinoises de l’Internet », Hérodote, 125, (2), 2007, pp.127-142.
