According to its recently published cyber strategy, the U.S. seeks to develop international consensus on how traditional law of armed conflict (LOAC) norms and understandings are modified and applied in cyberspace to help secure this global commons. Although the International Committee of the Red Cross's Interpretive Guidance on Direct Participation in Hostilities and the recent U.S. cyber strategy documents and policy statements are very different in many ways, examination of the relationships between their different aspects could be very useful in setting terms of reference framing the discussions which must occur to develop consensus on how LOAC rules and understandings regarding direct participation in hostilities could be adapted for use in cyberspace. This requires identification of their respective strengths and weaknesses, and potential areas of common ground between them. To be useful, this examination must include consideration of the significance of rules of engagement, formulations of hostile intent, and the proper inferences to be drawn from intelligence analyses as well as the legal standards by which direct participation in hostilities is determined.
{"title":"Direct participation in cyber hostilities: terms of reference for like-minded states?","authors":"J. Prescott","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2283741","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2283741","url":null,"abstract":"According to its recently published cyber strategy, the U.S. seeks to develop international consensus on how traditional law of armed conflict (LOAC) norms and understandings are modified and applied in cyberspace to help secure this global commons. Although the International Committee of the Red Cross's Interpretive Guidance on Direct Participation in Hostilities and the recent U.S. cyber strategy documents and policy statements are very different in many ways, examination of the relationships between their different aspects could be very useful in setting terms of reference framing the discussions which must occur to develop consensus on how LOAC rules and understandings regarding direct participation in hostilities could be adapted for use in cyberspace. This requires identification of their respective strengths and weaknesses, and potential areas of common ground between them. To be useful, this examination must include consideration of the significance of rules of engagement, formulations of hostile intent, and the proper inferences to be drawn from intelligence analyses as well as the legal standards by which direct participation in hostilities is determined.","PeriodicalId":423817,"journal":{"name":"2012 4th International Conference on Cyber Conflict (CYCON 2012)","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116961677","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The class of combatant constitutes one of the most important instrumentalities of the law of war. Combatant status resolves critical and enduring legal questions such as immunity from prosecution for warlike acts, susceptibility to intentional targeting, and, in part, treatment upon capture. Since the late nineteenth century, codifications of the international law of war have included criteria for combatant status keyed to ensuring desirable battlefield conduct and, to the extent possible, humanity in war. This paper revisits the author's prior work on the topic of combatancy in cyber warfare. Building on recent public revelations concerning state capacity for offensive cyber attacks, as well as new developments in computer network attack, this paper highlights logical and normative shortcomings in current understandings of combatant status in cyberspace. In place of rote reliance on existing criteria intended for the kinetic battlefield, this paper proposes reliance on State affiliation as the sole criterion for evaluating combatant status in cyber warfare between States. An admitted interpretive gloss on current criteria, the proposed framework offers a workable and realistic reconciliation of humanitarian goals and emerging State practice in cyber warfare.
{"title":"The notion of combatancy in cyber warfare","authors":"S. Watts","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2484823","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2484823","url":null,"abstract":"The class of combatant constitutes one of the most important instrumentalities of the law of war. Combatant status resolves critical and enduring legal questions such as immunity from prosecution for warlike acts, susceptibility to intentional targeting, and, in part, treatment upon capture. Since the late nineteenth century, codifications of the international law of war have included criteria for combatant status keyed to ensuring desirable battlefield conduct and, to the extent possible, humanity in war. This paper revisits the author's prior work on the topic of combatancy in cyber warfare. Building on recent public revelations concerning state capacity for offensive cyber attacks, as well as new developments in computer network attack, this paper highlights logical and normative shortcomings in current understandings of combatant status in cyberspace. In place of rote reliance on existing criteria intended for the kinetic battlefield, this paper proposes reliance on State affiliation as the sole criterion for evaluating combatant status in cyber warfare between States. An admitted interpretive gloss on current criteria, the proposed framework offers a workable and realistic reconciliation of humanitarian goals and emerging State practice in cyber warfare.","PeriodicalId":423817,"journal":{"name":"2012 4th International Conference on Cyber Conflict (CYCON 2012)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122900517","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}