CONCEPTS AND DOCTRINES
Cyber Influence Operations: A Battle of Wits and Bits – A Call to Action for the Indian Armed Forces (Part III)
This series on Cyber Influence Operations (CIO) commenced with an analysis of concepts and terminologies and went on to discuss various tools, techniques and stratagems which are available for engaging in this new form of warfare in the cognitive domain. Thereafter, it reviewed the strategies being adopted by Russia, USA and China to operationalize CIO. This culminating three-part article in the series charts out a way forward for the Indian Armed Forces for developing IO/ CIO capabilities. The first two parts covered doctrine and organisational aspects respectively. This last part makes several recommendations in the area of human resource development and cadre management, taking note of the highly specialist nature of CIO disciplines.
Cyber Influence Operations: A Battle of Wits and Bits – A Call to Action for the Indian Armed Forces (Part II)
In recent years, employment of Cyber Influence Operations (CIO) by state and non-state actors has resulted in dramatic strategic effects, and leading world powers have demonstrated noteworthy agility in coming to grips with this new form of warfare in the Information Age. This is the culminating (three-part) article of a series on CIO which has endeavoured to study various facets of CIO with the end objective of analysing its implications for India’s national security. The article outlines the way forward for the Indian Armed Forces for developing doctrine, organisation, and most importantly, human resource for developing IO/ CIO capabilities. The first part reviewed the current status of doctrines and proposed doctrines which need to be enunciated, giving out the conceptual underpinnings which must guide them. This second part proposes organisational structures necessary for the Indian Armed Forces to effectively carry out IO/ CIO.
Cyber Influence Operations: A Battle of Wits and Bits – A Call to Action for the Indian Armed Forces (Part I)
Cyber Influence Operations (CIO) as a concept is still evolving. Over the last decade or so, employment of CIO by state and non-state actors has had dramatic successes in creating strategic effects. As a result, global players have taken noteworthy initiatives to come to grips with this new form of warfare in the Information Age. CIO are essentially a manifestation of IO in Cyberspace. This series has endeavoured to study various facets of CIO, with the end objective of analysing its implications for India’s national security. The previous three articles threw light on the concepts, techniques and stratagems associated with CIO, and the doctrine, operational employment and capabilities of major powers, including Russia, the US and China. This culminating article in the series (in three parts) reviews existing capability with the Indian Armed Forces for conducting IO/ CIO, and then outlines the way forward for developing doctrine, organisation, and most importantly, human resource for fighting grey zone battles in the cognitive domain.
Cyber Influence Operations: A Battle of Wits and Bits – Strategies and Capabilities of Major Players (Part II)
Over the last decade, strategic ramifications of Cyber Influence Operations (CIO) have been felt with increasing impact in various global conflict scenarios. The previous articles in this series on CIO have dwelt on conceptual aspects, bringing out that the emerging notion of CIO lies at the confluence of Cyber Operations and Influence Operations, and is essentially a manifestation of Information Operations in cyberspace. This piece in is continuation to “Strategies and Capabilities of Major Players – Part I”, wherein an insight was given into the doctrinal approach, operational employment, and organizational capabilities of Russia and China for conduct of CIO. This part does the same for China, and also touches upon Pakistan’s efforts to employ CIO stratagems against India. A brief look is also taken on how the differing political ideologies of democratic and autocratic regimes could play a role in influencing their CIO strategies.
Cyber Influence Operations: A Battle of Wits and Bits – Strategies and Capabilities of Major Players (Part I)
Over the last decade, strategic ramifications of Cyber Influence Operations (CIO) have been felt with increasing impact in various global conflict scenarios. Notable examples include the cyber operations conducted against Estonia (2007), Georgia (2008) and Ukraine (2015 onwards), and interference in the US presidential elections in 2016, all these purportedly at the behest of Russia. The United States and China, amongst other countries, have also developed strategies and doctrines and operationalized their CIO capabilities for achieving strategic cognitive effects. The previous articles in this series have dwelt on conceptual aspects, bringing out that the emerging notion of CIO lies at the confluence of Cyber Operations and Influence Operations, and is essentially a manifestation of Information Operations in cyberspace. This article (in two parts) provides an insight into the strategic employment of CIO by major players, primarily Russia, US and China, by giving an overview of their doctrinal approach and operational employment of CIO, as also organizational capabilities to support these operations. To a lesser extent, Pakistan’s efforts to employ CIO stratagems against India are touched upon. A brief look is also taken on how the differing political ideologies of democratic and autocratic regimes could play a role in influencing their CIO strategies.
Cyber Influence Operations: A Battle of Wits and Bits – Targets, Techniques and Stratagems
Cyber Influence Operations (CIO) are proving to be an increasingly potent capability in the armoury of nations for achieving strategic effects in global conflict scenarios. The current series on CIO is an endeavour to bring clarity to the concept and operational aspects of CIO and emphasize its emerging importance in 21st Century conflicts, with special reference to the Indian security scenario. The first article in this series dwelt on conceptual aspects, bringing out that the emerging notion of CIO lies at the confluence of Cyber Operations and Influence Operations, and is essentially a manifestation of Information Operations in cyberspace. This second article takes a step further and dwells on the multiple dimensions along which different flavours of CIO might unfold, the large variety of techniques which are available for conduct of CeSIO and CeTIO, and the manner in which these techniques may be synergistically employed to execute a multitude of creative influence stratagems in cyberspace.
Cyber Influence Operations: A Battle of Wits and Bits – The Cauldron of Concepts and Terminologies
The notion of Cyber Influence Operations (CIO) has invited tremendous attention over the last decade or so, more so after the alleged interference by Russia in the US presidential elections of 2016. A literal understanding of the term CIO would suggest any activity undertaken to influence a target audience through the medium of cyberspace. However, a formal conceptualisation of CIO, together with associated terminology, is still a work in progress, and is closely intertwined with the relatively more mature concepts of Information Operations (IO), Cyberspace Operations (CO) and Influence Operations. The current series on CIO is an endeavour to bring clarity to the concept and operational aspects of CIO and emphasize its emerging importance in 21st Century conflicts, with special reference to the Indian security scenario. In this first article of the series, an attempt is made to achieve a degree of coherence in the cauldron of concepts and terminologies associated with CIO.
Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems: Slaves not Masters! Meaningful Human Control, Saving Lives and Non-Feasibility of a Pre-Emptive Ban
Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems (LAWS) are currently the subject of a global debate, particularly at the UN, over ethical, moral and legal aspects related to their deployment in future wars. Human rights groups are advocating a pre-emptive ban on their development on the grounds that deployment of LAWS would be in violation of International Humanitarian Law (IHL). This is the final article in a three-piece series focusing on issues which are at the heart of this ongoing debate. The previous two write-ups dwelt on the unique characteristics of LAWS, analysed different positions on their purported violation of IHL, and discussed various nuances of Autonomy and Unpredictability. This piece will examine the important notion of Meaningful Human Control (MHC), and also bring out how employment of LAWS may in fact lead to saving of human lives. The pros and cons of a pre-emptive ban on LAWS vis-à-vis a binding regulation on their development will also be discussed.
Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems: Slaves not Masters! Conflict Scenarios, Autonomy and Unpredictability
AI-powered weapon systems are soon expected to acquire the capability to “select and kill” targets without human intervention. Such systems are widely referred to as Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems (LAWS), sensationally dubbed as “killer robots”. A raging debate is on globally, particularly at the UN, over the ethical, moral and legal aspects of deploying LAWS in future wars, with human rights groups advocating a pre-emptive ban on their development. This is the second of three articles in a series which discusses issues which are at the heart of this ongoing debate. The first article discussed the unique characteristics of LAWS, and why these are viewed as being in violation of the International Humanitarian Law (IHL). This piece begins with an analysis of whether or not LAWS actually violate IHL principles against the backdrop of three typical warfighting scenarios. It goes on to discuss some noteworthy nuances of Autonomy in LAWS, the intriguing feature of Unpredictability in AI-powered systems, and the need for caution while attempting to make the critical “select and engage” function autonomous.
Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems: Slaves not Masters! “Killer Robots” and International Humanitarian Law
Increasing levels of autonomy are being incorporated in AI-powered weapon systems on the modern battlefield, which are soon expected to acquire the capability to “select and kill” targets without human intervention. Such systems are widely referred to as Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems (LAWS), sensationally dubbed as “killer robots”. As a reaction to these developments a raging debate is on globally, particularly at the UN, over the ethical, moral and legal aspects of deploying fully autonomous weapon systems in future wars. Human rights groups are advocating a pre-emptive ban on their development on the grounds that employment of LAWS would be in violation of International Humanitarian Law (IHL). This work, comprising of three articles, discusses issues which are at the heart of this ongoing debate. In this first article, a brief tour is given of relevant literature on the subject, the unique characteristics of LAWS, and why these are viewed as being in violation of IHL.