Skip to main content

Negotiation on Cyber Warfare

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Cyberspace
  • 1097 Accesses

Abstract

In spite of the growing the risk that cyber capacities could be used as military tools no international agreement has been finalized so far to prevent a cyberwarfare involving sovereign states as well as non-state actors. States have different conceptual approaches and priorities when approaching this subject and discussing definitions. There are additional peculiarities. The possession and use of cyber weapons capacities are not visible. The author of an attack cannot be clearly identified, and non-state actors can play at the same level as national states. The operators of such weapons can hardly be included in the classical legal category of “combatant”. Most countries have already established cyber structures integrated into their military chains of command and fully dedicated them to cyber defense and cyber offense. The cases of the US, Nato, European Union and the United Nations. Cyberwarfare has not yet acquired a legal status of its own in spite of the fact that after land, sea, air and outer space, cyberspace has become the fifth domain in which states can confront each other militarily. States have not even started to negotiate any sort international regulation. The Tallinn Manual on the International Law applicable to cyber warfare has no international legal value but has the merit of having established some fundamental principles. It indicates that the norms applicable to cyber are the same as those applicable to the other types of weapons and in particular the International humanitarian law. Nothing prevents the international community from considering cyberwarfare also in a preventive mode, and to craft cyber-specific rules prohibiting cyber instruments capable of provoking catastrophic consequences. A general prohibition of possession and use of cyber offensive capabilities would ideally be the preferable solution but we are nowhere close to such a solution. An uncontrolled cyber incident could act as a shock absorber to prevent a conflict from escalating; it could also become a trigger for a wider confrontation that the international community cannot risk. The problem of how to address the security implications of a cyber world will be with us for the years to come. Better to address the issue in a preventive mode rather than subsequently to a possible cyber confrontation.

Outgoing Chair of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR).

Submitted: 9.8.16; Accepted: 13.9.16.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • NATO (2010) Lisbon Summit Declaration. Retrieved from: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_68828.htm

  • NATO (2016). Warsaw Summit Communiqué issued by the heads of state and government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Warsaw. Retrieved from: 70/71. http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/events_132023.htm

  • Trezza C (2016) Land, sea, air, space and cyber warfare: diplomatic approaches. In: García-Segura LA, Martin Ramírez J (eds) Mapping the cyberspace. An emerging priority challenge. Universidad Antonio de Nebrija, Madrid, p 27

    Google Scholar 

  • UN General Assembly (2015a) Creation of a Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) for 2016–2017. Retrieved from: https://www.lawfareblog.com/cybersecurity-un-another-year-another-gge

  • UN General Assembly (2015b) Group of governmental experts on developments in the field of information and telecommunications in the context of international security. UN General Assembly document A//70/174, 22 July 2015

    Google Scholar 

  • UN General Assembly (2015c) Resolution 70/237, 23 December 2015, welcoming the outcome of the 2014/2015 GGE and requiring the secretary-general to establish a new GGE that would report to the General Assembly in 2017

    Google Scholar 

  • UNSC (2004) Resolution 1540 adopted by the UN Security Council at its 4956th meeting, on 28 April 2004

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlo Trezza .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Trezza, C. (2017). Negotiation on Cyber Warfare. In: Ramírez, J., García-Segura, L. (eds) Cyberspace. Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54975-0_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54975-0_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-54974-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-54975-0

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics