Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
For me it is difficult to explain the situation. I am only a scientist who tries to see
beyond good and evil. I can investigate this but how to explain it from a political point
of view is another notion entirely.
Heurlin : Concerning again the distinction between two sorts of wars, netwar and
cyberwar, in your presentation netwar is one thing but is it the same as President Bush
calls the war against terrorism? This is a war at least according to the President and has
nothing to do with nation states. But the basic question is how do we distinguish
between netwar and cyberwar?
Azarov : What is collaboration between countries? First of all there are information-
independent countries and from my point of view, cyberwar and any other kind of war is
only for those countries if they have no national information infrastructure. But their
digital devices appear when social society and an information economy do not relate to a
situation, for instance, in a country where there is no developed civil society. Civil
society may begin to develop, but a country without a well-grounded economy is not a
developing country. What do we mean by a well-grounded economy? We do mean a
knowledge-based economy. And if a country has no disposition to begin a digital device,
and if in this case, civil society plays a very strong role where religious groups also have
a similar thinking, this situation could well lead to circumstances for netwar.
What thus is netwar? I think that all of you understand that rebutted groups around the
world, that can co-operate not only by Internet, but in all possible kinds of
communication, and where this group is not centralised, can provide terrorist acts with
their own aim. The reason is money, and my point of view is that this critical non-
dependable ideological group does not understand why they take certain actions. And I
can promise only one thing, in this world of money, they do not need a centralised
system because such a system has to show responsibility. Why would I pay money? This
is why globalisation provides the situation for netwar to be very possible. But the main
understanding of netwar is the political goal. They say that they would like to change the
political situation.
Cyberwar is an understanding, not a political situation. I may want to exchange your
information infrastructure. I may want to exchange the thinking of your leaders. I may
want to exchange the understanding of business models, etc., and this is why cyberwar is
a little bit like netwar, but not really netwar; it is an information war. Information war
between us is a real war; it can be like a cannon or a rocket, adding information and
understanding of the target, the structure of troops, etc. This information war is more
widely understood than cyberwar. And I emphasise that cyberwar, first of all, is a war
with no destruction of civilian national infrastructure. If cyberwar makes an action
against civilian infrastructure, this is a crime and international law has to understand and
come to a decision over this action.
But what is security, what is intelligence security? This firstly involves a lot of
methods, a lot of operation, thinking, understanding, collection of data for some
countries. But let us remember that in a new century, we have to understand that in the
intelligence service this is cyberwar. But my definition is a new understanding of
cyberwar. Can you deny the intelligence service? No, it is everywhere and that is why
we have to understand that cyberwar has only target, only one goal - control superiority.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search