[governance] Tallin Manual - a Cyber Warfare convention?

Tue Mar 26 02:38:27 EDT 2013

On Monday 25 March 2013 02:08 AM, Ian Peter wrote:
> I agree with Lee – I think there might be a lot we can do.
> I think there is a strong argument for a declaration of an Internet 
> war free zone of sorts – I think of Swiss neutrality, 
> non-proliferation treaties, nuclear weapon free zones, etc. I think a 
> compelling argument can be made that cyberwarfare with its inability 
> to localise damage can be seen to be something we should not 
> contemplate. We may not be able to stop it, but we may be able to have 
> it declared illegal or immoral. That would be a good first step.

Ian,

Where do you think these steps can be taken, in an effective manner? 
Civil society needs a real doable roadmap.

parminder

> Ian Peter
> *From:* Lee W McKnight <mailto:lmcknigh at syr.edu>
> *Sent:* Monday, March 25, 2013 7:29 AM
> *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org 
> <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org> ; Louis Pouzin (well) 
> <mailto:pouzin at well.com> ; Ian Peter <mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com>
> *Subject:* RE: [governance] Tallin Manual - a Cyber Warfare convention?
> Louis,
>
> re CS influence, I note the Red Cross had a seat at the table while 
> the docs were drafted or at least was on the pre-publication review 
> list, unsure myself how they worked together.
>
> But I would not be so dismissive of CS's ability to influence 
> modification of part or object to certain sections. In fact, sounds 
> like a good topic for an IGC co-sponsored workshop at IGF...assuming 
> we don;t already have a submission coming in right on target.
>
> Now putting on my political and media games analyst hat...the public 
> naming and shaming of the particular building in Shanghai full of 
> People's Liberation Army contractors incessantly cracking government 
> and firm systems and - borrowing?- or should I say sharing for 
> themselves that information, fits in context of the push towards new 
> international law for cyber warfare.
>
> Which in principle may be better than the absence of such a legal 
> framework; or granted, possibly worse when implemented in practice.
>
> But my comment is just that it is too soon to say how this will all 
> play out, and we should not assume we cannot have an impact on the path.
>
> Lee
>
> PS: And belated warmest congratulations!!! : )
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* pouzin at gmail.com [pouzin at gmail.com] on behalf of Louis Pouzin 
> (well) [pouzin at well.com]
> *Sent:* Sunday, March 24, 2013 12:37 PM
> *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Ian Peter
> *Subject:* [governance] Tallin Manual - a Cyber Warfare convention?
>
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 3:40 AM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com 
> <mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com>> wrote:
>
>     As Samuel Morse might have remarked, “What God hath wrought”.
>     A landmark document created at the request of NATO has proposed a
>     set of rules for how international cyberwarfare should be
>     conducted. Written by 20 experts in conjunction with the
>     International Committee of the Red Cross and the US Cyber Command,
>     the/Tallinn Manual on the International Law Applicable to Cyber
>     Warfare/
>     <http://issuu.com/nato_ccd_coe/docs/tallinnmanual?mode=embed&layout=http%3A%2F%2Fskin.issuu.com%2Fv%2Flight%2Flayout.xml&showFlipBtn=true>analyzes
>     the rules of conventional war and applies them to state-sponsored
>     cyberattacks.
>     http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/21/4130740/tallin-manual-on-the-international-law-applicable-to-cyber-warfare
>     - - -
>
> Thanks Ian for precious links. It seems that time is coming for legal 
> definitions of cyberwarfare, in which we are living already. 
> Initiatives belong to the powers that be, the only ones with the 
> capacity to follow or violate the rules. CS doesn't have much 
> influence, except through occasional media power.
>
> Some more frightening documents on real war:
>
> http://www.salon.com/2013/02/19/latin_america_territorio_libre_from_the_cia_partner/?source=newsletter&utm_source=contactology&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Salon_Daily%20Newsletter%20%28Premium%29_7_30_110
>
> http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/projects/globalizing-torture
>
> One may observe that oppressive regimes resort to coded sanitized 
> language to mean illegal and criminal activities. This was anticipated 
> by Orwell (newspeak), and turned real with soviet labor camp 
> (concentration), nazism special treatment (gas chamber), maoism 
> reeducation (deportation), bushism and obamism extraordinary rendition 
> (torture), inter alia.
>
> Louis
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130326/ce9da009/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t