The great cyber war is «cancelled» in Ukraine: – Hacker attacks are nothing compared to a bomb
Already shortly after the first Russian tank rolled over the border into Ukraine, it became clear that something had gone wrong for the Russians in their attempt to start a blitzkrieg. The coordination essential to an effective, modern army was not in place.
This meant that the Russians suffered extensive losses on land, while the otherwise impressive air force almost stood still. At the same time, one Russian general after another was eliminated too close to the front – the Russians had clear problems with the communication links to the invading soldiers in Ukraine.
Whether this is due to incompetence, corruption or sabotage remains hidden in the thick fog that hangs over information during a war. But this chaotic situation was exactly what the Ukrainian generals wanted:
– Modern warfare is about creating or destroying connections between military units, says Lasse Kronborg, who is a captain in the Danish defense and teaches cyber warfare at the Defense Academy. He is also a co-author of the NATO doctrine (guidelines) which defines how the alliance defends and attacks in cyberspace.
– Many of these connections are supported by computer systems. So by influencing them, you can disrupt the enemy, explains Kronborg, who has not, however, learned about cyber attacks that actually took place against the Russian systems that were started by the war.
Cybergeddon is cancelled
According to Kronborg, the war in Ukraine shows that there are no prospects for the «cybergeddon» (end-time battle) that it was feared the Russian bear could start. The problems in the Russian military leadership are too great for that.
– At the start of the war in Ukraine, it turned out that Russia’s ability to coordinate efforts has been difficult between land and air. In that case, it is almost impossible to coordinate with a third domain in the form of cyber, is Kronborg’s assessment.
He works with a particular difference between Russia and NATO countries’ views on cyber warfare.
– Russia’s doctrine does not describe cyberspace as a battlefield. In Denmark and in NATO, we see it as a space just like water, air and land, he points out.
A strategically difficult choice
Kronborg is supported by his colleague from the Swedish Defense Academy, Jeppe Teglskov. He researches the actions of states in cyberspace. Teglskov also says that the absence of cyberspace as a battlefield may be due to Russia’s assessment that the country has more effective ways of achieving its military goals:
– Part of the explanation for the fact that we have not launched more attacks from the Russian side may be that this type of attack is simply not effective enough when the war first breaks out. That a cyber attack simply cannot be compared to a missile attack when the bullets start flying.
When we had such big assumptions about the Russians’ digital warfare, it is because, according to Teglskov, Russia has for many years and with great success moved in the gray zone between war and peace, and this is how the Russians think of cyberwar. should be conducted. When the war breaks out, the cyber part becomes less important to them.
– And then we must remember that if you have compromised a system, you are often faced with a choice between destroying it so that the whole world can see it or continuing to spy on it. So it is far from certain that we have put everything that has happened, which says that the fog of war is particularly dense in cyberspace.
A new doctrine is born
Kronborg also says that the perception of cyber war has changed a lot in the military world:
– When I first started writing about cyber warfare back in 2012, many thought I was a space cadet.
However, it was not more than a year from the time before Denmark declared itself ready with a Cyber a In January of the same year, Nato published its new cyber doctrine, which Kronborg helped to write.
– The cyber soldiers who make up this capacity come from the Center for Cyber Security. It is not known how many there are and what weapons they are carrying. But it is hardly 50,000 people, as other, large countries are probably sitting on, says Kronborg.
The Secretive Domain
The special thing about this new, fourth domain in modern war in addition to land, water and air, is also that allied countries do not even share with exactly what tools and tools they have. Because cyber weapons are usually only worth something once. Therefore, all countries try a limited number of people who are vets about them.
– Instead, the way it works today is that Nato asks countries that have declared themselves ready to create offensive effects that destroy, change or block the opponent’s data or IT systems. Nato will never figure out how to do that, says Kronborg, who explains that cooperation is therefore even more segmented on land, at sea and in the air.
War is a tool
When we have not seen examples from Ukraine, according to Kronborg and Teglskov, it may be because truly devastating cyber attacks cannot be carried out. But it may also be that cyber attacks are not the most effective way to achieve the desired military goals.
– War is about creating an uncomfortable situation for the other party, such that he makes bad decisions or is forced to make concessions – either political or military. And the most unpleasant thing a person can be exposed to is the threat of violence and injury, says Kronborg and continues:
– A major attack against Denmark, which shuts down the hospital system and other parts of society, will create economic decline and unemployment if it is very bad – but it is nothing compared to a bomb at the train station Nørreport.
He says that cyber war is most relevant as a supporting and prerequisite-creating means. Which, by the way, applies to 95 percent of the way we wage war today. You don’t win a war by attacking a radar installation – you open up other operations that lead to the larger goal.
“War is a method to achieve a political goal. In this way, the war itself as a concept supports the political apparatus, says Lasse Kronborg to illustrate that cyber warfare plays a direct role in modern warfare, even if it mostly functions as a means of support.
This article was first published on Version 2