To a certain degree it can be seen that we live in an anarchic society. The lack of a world government coupled with state sovereignty rules can and often has led to serious security issues. In unison with this is the increased globalisation the world is currently experiencing, which whilst there are undoubted benefits, the risk it poses to international peace is often compromised. The internet as a modern media paradigm can be seen to be an implicit contributor to global security issues currently being faced. Unlike television, radio and newspapers etc. which in the majority of cases are censored for what is deemed to be appropriate viewing, for its potential audience the internet provides a multi-faceted and far less regulated forum. As a forum that crosses international borders the internet is not constrained by distance and Geography (Denning, 2001), it thus complies with the nature of our increasingly globalised economies and in many cases, political and social systems. In providing such a space for communication the internet has opened up communication for non-state actors as well as the traditional national and international actors who would utilise pre-existing media as aforementioned.
So intertwined are daily on-goings and their relation to the worldwide web ‘It seems likely that every major conflict in the physical world will have a parallel operation in cyberspace’ (Denning, 2001). In considering the Arab-Israeli conflict, the well-documented rocket attacks, car bombings and suicide bombings are now only one side to the conflict as Israeli and Arab hackers attack national websites across the Middle East and release thousands of items of personal data. What is interesting to note is the hacking appears to be the work of civilians rather than governments (Marquadt, 2012), it is this fact that can beg the question as to whether web activists by partaking in hacktivism (which by definition is a means of protest, often to a political end through use of computers and computer networks) are considered web activists or cyber terrorists. Only 3 months ago in February 2013 the Israeli Computer Services Directorate, surprised security circles by declaring that Israel is preparing for information warfare with Palestinians and Arabs (Amer, 2013). This latest announcement has highlighted a necessity for innovation from weaponry attack; the movement of the conflict to the web ushers in a new era of tactics in a conflict spanning almost a century of the modern era.
In targeting these ‘web activists’ governments often label those inflicting damage as terrorists, it is clear to see why, as attacks such as these are often targeting cyber-space which is vital for infrastructure, such as defence records and national databases. However it is vital to take an impartial approach to such issues and consider the issue of perspective whereby to one party hacktivism is terrorism whereas to another it is simply activism. In a climate where ‘terrorism’ is a buzz word and the hot topic of Western agenda it is often rash to consider web activism acts of terrorism. The issue is very much a factor of western cyber-space also, the US Department of Justice has been under scrutiny after a leaked terror training presentation aimed at state and local law enforcement revealed that police were being trained to be suspicious of popular bumper stickers including some opposing U.S. government (Newman, 2012). Surely to view someone who as an opposing view to governmental policy as a terrorist is a suppression of free-speech and thus a violation of our basic human rights. Those who hold political views which seem to be adverse from the ‘norm’ may well be inappropriately labelled.
The internet as a medium for expressing political views then becomes both effective in allowing one to express views in a manner which allows mass participation, but through scrutiny from both state and non-state actors can become an area where ones views are held to ransom and can be misconstrued as ‘terrorism’. The differentiation often lies in the perspective of those involved, however what is clear is that the web will undoubtedly shape future conflict and be implicit to those governments, international bodies as well as non-state actors whether that be the individual or rogue collective actors.
Bibliography
Amer, A. A., 2013. Israel braces for cyberwarfare with Palestinians. [Online]
Available at: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/02/israel-palestine-cyber-war.html
[Accessed 2nd May 2013].
Denning, D., 2001. Cyber Warriors-Activists and Terrorists turn to cyberspace. Harvard International review, Summer, pp. 70-75.
Marquadt, A., 2012. Latest Arab-Israeli Conflict Is Growing Cyberwar. [Online]
Available at: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/01/latest-arab-israeli-conflict-is-growing-cyberwar/
[Accessed 2nd May 2013].
Newman, A., 2012. The New American. [Online]
Available at: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/13021-justice-department-trained-police-to-link-political-activism-with-terror
[Accessed 3rd May 2013].
Technology In Activism
Technology In Activism 