Russia’s cyber power has developed independently during its long rivalry with the United States and Western Europe. In light of its expanding digital technology industrial base, this is understood as a sustained buildup of “Offensive cyber capability” to rival that wielded by the United States. Analysts see these activities as attempts to acquire intellectual property or political influence, conduct international espionage, and deploy potentially disruptive capabilities in preparation for future conflicts. Since the beginning of this century, it has also carried out large scale cyber activities directed at nations around the world. China also has clear strengths in the “Strategy and doctrine” category, with its national cyber strategy reflected in the text of its 2015 China’s Military Strategy white paper, as well as in the Cyber Security Law that went into effect in 2017. The country has the world’s most extensive cyber-domain domestic surveillance and censorship system, under the strict control of government leadership. Russia and China: Different Values, Greater StrengthĬhina has a very high ranking in the “Governance, command, control” category. That means that this report is not, as has been claimed, simply stating that Japan is “among the lowest tier of major nations.” Rather, it is saying that when it comes to cyber threats to its national interests, there are security and defense areas where its desired capabilities are significantly weak. These defensive capabilities are that state’s final recourse in maintaining its cyber security there are no alternative measures that can be taken in their place toward that end. ![]() These categories represent a measure of a state’s defensive capabilities in cyber space, or, in other words, its will and ability to eradicate invasive threats there. The country is making active diplomatic effortsĬonstitutional and political constraints make developing this capability difficult The country is at a high-risk stage of development in the field Military use of superior technology is limited Policies in place tend to be low on substance military is unpreparedĬommand coordination is weak military has only low-level capabilitiesĮfforts are held back by underfunding and constitutional constraints IISS’s unique cyber power methodology assesses states based on specific “Cyber Power Categories,” and the following table shows the results of that assessment for Japan in a straightforward manner, based on my interpretation. However, in 2018 it received the lowest possible rating for fundraising transparency, and the report created a new category just for IISS: “Deceptive.” The thinktank clearly has some reason to hide some funding sources, but research into diplomatic/security and military issues from any organization with that kind of stance should be considered potentially biased. The 2017 Global Go To Think Tank Index report ranked Britain’s IISS among the world’s top think tanks for defense and national security. I feel that a close reading of the report, with attention to its background, purpose, and assumptions, can help clarify the true core of the issue, and demonstrate responses Japan should make. However, most of the domestic media and social network responses in Japan emphasized the nation’s place “among the lowest tier of major nations,” which indicates that the true message to Japan in this report is not being conveyed. In other words, the organization sees Japan as having serious weaknesses in its cyber capabilities. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |