Another interesting piece on cyber warfare by Richard Clarke in the National Interest.
Sure, it has become sort of a cotton industry that the possibility cyber warfare is real, warfare is changing, etc. But the interesting part are the following nuggets.
Unfortunately, the government has no cyber-defense strategy. While the cyber warriors of Fort Meade may take comfort in America’s reputation as having the most potent arsenal of cyber weapons, they may be members of the national cyber-war team with the lowest overall capability. Indeed, America’s ability to defend its vital systems from cyber attack ranks among the world’s worst.
He goes on to drive the point home:
THE FACT that legislators and policy makers do not understand the strategy issues surrounding cyber war may stem from the lack of public discussion, absence of academic contribution, minimal media coverage and insistence on unnecessary government secrecy. A multidepartment effort this year to develop a cyber-war-deterrence strategy produced a paper that is still labeled “secret.” The last time someone thought a secret could deter an opponent was when 1960s movie character Dr. Strangelove yelled at the Soviet ambassador that a deterrent weapon only works “if you tell us you have it.”
So if the threat of a full-scale cyber warfare is real–and not something Dick Cheney hyped up from one of his perhaps many, many nightmares–why the lack of serious debate and strategy?
In fact, as I (ahem) suggested in an earlier Commentary (http://www.rsis.edu.sg/publications/Perspective/RSIS0982007.pdf), this is increasingly the new centre of gravity. Attacking the cyber infrastructure offers several attractive options: it blinds the opponent, even if this is only temporary; it dislocates the opponent, possibly for longer terms; and it then renders the opponent totally vulnerable to kinetic attack.
I cannot agree more with you–if we look at CoG in the Clausewitzian sense, then yes, computers are “it.”
But again, regardless of whether computers are CoGs or not, the importance of cyber warfare is pretty clear. Back to my earlier question, why the absence of both public debates and governmental strategy?