The People’s Liberation Army Cyberspace Force

Source Link

With the launch of its Cyberspace Force, China has elevated the digital domain to a theatre of war. The Cyberspace Force of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is China’s newest military branch, launched on 19 April 2024.

Based in Haidian District, Beijing, and with five antennas across the country, it operates under the direct authority of the Central Military Commission (CMC).

Its creation followed the dissolution of the Strategic Support Force (SSF) and shows a broader shift in China’s approach to modern warfare. The force is tasked with both defending and attacking in the cyber domain. Additionally, it covers:Network security

Electronic warfare

Information dominance

The Cyberspace Force plays a central role in China’s preparation for future conflicts, particularly in what the PLA calls “informatised warfare”, a doctrine focused on controlling the flow of information across all domains. By placing the unit directly under the CMC, China ensures centralised control, operational discipline, and strategic reach in cyberspace.

Images Sourced From: N509FZ

1. Mission and Doctrine of The People’s Liberation Army Cyberspace Force

1.1 Mission

The Cyberspace Force is tasked with defending China’s digital sovereignty and securing its national interests in cyberspace. According to the Ministry of National Defence, this includes “reinforcing national cyber border defence,” detecting and countering intrusions, and maintaining information security. These capabilities are essential responses to growing global cyber threats that, in Beijing’s view, increasingly target China. While the force is clearly equipped for offensive operations,

US missing the point on China’s industrial cyberespionage

William Akoto

Source Link

Cutting off China’s access to advanced US chips is likely to motivate Chinese cyber espionage. Image: Kritsapong Jieantaratip / iStock via Getty Images / The Conversation

The United States is attempting to decouple its economy from rivals such as China. Efforts toward this include policymakers raising tariffs on Chinese goods, blocking exports of advanced technology and offering subsidies to boost American manufacturing.

The goal is to reduce reliance on China for critical products, in the hope that this will also protect US intellectual property from theft. The idea that decoupling will help stem state-sponsored cyber-economic espionage has become a key justification for these measures.

00:07

03:36

Read More

For instance, then-US Trade Representative Katherine Tai framed the continuation of China-specific tariffs as serving the “statutory goal to stop [China’s] harmful … cyber intrusions and cyber theft.”

Early tariff rounds during the first Trump administration were likewise framed as forcing Beijing to confront “deeply entrenched” theft of US intellectual property.

This push to “onshore” key industries is driven by very real concerns. By some estimates, theft of US trade secrets, often through hacking – costs the American economy hundreds of billions of dollars per year. In that light, decoupling is a defensive economic shield – a way to keep vital technology out of an adversary’s reach.

Made in China 2.0: The future of global manufacturing?

Source Link

First announced in 2015, Made in China 2025 (MIC2025) set the tone and tempo of China’s industrial ambitions.

Today, this stategy is entering a new phase — an AI-augmented, green-energy-powered, self-reliance-oriented transformation of the world’s most formidable industrial base.

The question is no longer whether China can innovate, but what kind of innovation ecosystem it is building — and how it can redefine manufacturing across the world.

Launched a decade ago, “Made in China 2025” appeared to many as the emblem of China's vaulting industrial ambitions: a state-driven roadmap to catapult the nation from the world's factory floor to the apex of advanced manufacturing.

Though the slogan itself quietly vanished from official Chinese discourse under international scrutiny, the underlying agenda never did. Instead, its objectives evolved, were rebranded under banners like “dual circulation” and “high-quality development,” and ultimately seeped into the marrow of China’s industrial strategy.

Today, that strategy appears to be entering a new phase — one we might call “Made in China 2.0.” While it lacks a formal label, its contours are increasingly clear: an AI-augmented, green-energy-powered, self-reliance-oriented transformation of the world’s most formidable industrial base. In everything from electric vehicles and solar panels to humanoid robots and enterprise-grade AI systems, China is defining the terms of competition.

This transformation is unfolding amid profound global shifts. Fragmenting supply chains, rising techno-nationalism, and concerns over overcapacity have created a contested landscape for global manufacturing. Yet within that turbulent context, China has continued to expand its industrial and technological footprint. The question is no longer whether China can innovate, but what kind of innovation ecosystem it is building — and whether it might constitute an alternative paradigm to the liberal market model.

Iran Is on Course for a Bomb After U.S. Strikes Fail to Destroy Facilities0

Jeffrey Lewis, .

Source Link

A bald man in camouflage military fatigues reaches up to remove a poster board from a display easel. The poster is covered in various maps and diagrams of a nuclear facility in Iran. Bits of other people can be seen as they bustle around in the foreground.A poster of the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant is removed following a news conference at the Pentagon in the U.S. state of Virginia on June 26. Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

June 27, 2025, 10:50 AM

I’ve spent the past several days telling incredulous reporters that Israel’s bombing campaign against Iran, even with help from the United States, looked anemic—and that it would, at best, set Iran’s nuclear program back by several months, maybe a year if we were lucky.

Iran Conflict

Analysis and updates

Now CNN, the New York Times, Reuters, and even a sweating Fox News are reporting on the conclusions of a five-page classified assessment of the strikes that was prepared by the United States’ Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). It turns out that I may have been overestimating the effectiveness of the bombing campaign.

 That report indicated that the strike has set Iran’s nuclear program back by one to two months on the low end and less than a year on the high end. (The CIA estimate that it would take Iran “years” to rebuild the facilities that were destroyed is beside the point, since no one thinks Iran will do that.)

Don’t Let Iran Become Another Iraq

Jane Darby Menton, 

Source Link

a fellow in the nuclear policy program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.A member of the Iraqi Federal Police stands guard near the Seventeen Ramadan Mosque along al-Firdous square in Baghdad on March 9, 2023.A member of the Iraqi Federal Police stands guard near the Seventeen Ramadan Mosque along al-Firdous square in Baghdad on March 9, 2023. Ahmad Al-Rubaye/AFP via Getty Images

My FP: Follow topics and authors to get straight to what you like. Exclusively for FP subscribers. Subscribe Now | Log In

June 27, 2025, 12:01 AM

On Wednesday, U.S. President Donald Trump suggested that U.S. and Israeli military operations had effectively closed the Iran nuclear file: “The only thing we’d be asking for [in future talks with Iran] is what we were asking for before, about ‘we want no nuclear’—but we destroyed the nuclear.” Yet even if the president’s claims that Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities have been “completely and totally obliterated” prove to be correct (and this is far from guaranteed), the recent conflict has ushered in a period of significant nuclear uncertainty, which threatens to fester if not swiftly addressed.

Iran Conflict

Analysis and updates

Iran’s nuclear program has clearly been damaged, although it is too early to know just how badly. Other developments are less reassuring. Iran appears to have retained custody over its stockpiles of highly enriched uranium, likely enough to fuel multiple bombs if further enriched. As U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance told ABC News on Sunday, “We are going to work in the coming weeks to ensure that we do something with that fuel, and that’s one of the things that we’re going to have conversations with the Iranians about.”

AI turns cyberspace into a battleground in Israel-Iran conflict

Source Link

In recent weeks, from Operation Spiderweb in the Russo-Ukrainian war to the Israel-Iran confrontation, we have seen the face of modern warfare evolve beyond traditional battlegrounds.

Conflicts are now fought as much through cyber operations that can paralyse infrastructure and manipulate information with unprecedented speed and precision.

The recent conflict between Israel and Iran laid bare this transformation. After Israel’s unprovoked strikes on 13 June and Iran’s retaliatory attacks, it became clear how artificial intelligence is transforming the very nature of digital warfare.

During the twelve-day confrontation, a parallel cyber war unfolded, with both nations deploying different AI-driven tools in their attacks.

Last week when Predatory Sparrow, a hacking group linked to Israel, breached Iran’s Bank Sepah it paralysed a key artery of the country’s financial system.

Just a day later, the group drained roughly $90 million from Nobitex, Iran’s largest cryptocurrency exchange, and deliberately sent the funds to inaccessible blockchain addresses.

According to consultancy Elliptic, this act effectively “burned” the assets, ensuring they could not be recovered.

These coordinated strikes on Iran’s banking and cryptocurrency sectors, alongside Iran’s own AI-powered phishing and espionage campaigns, made clear that the conflict had become a proving ground for AI-driven unconventional warfare.

Blackouts, disinformation and phishing

Predatory Sparrow’s dual attacks disrupted Iran’s financial operations and undermined public confidence in its digital infrastructure.

Israeli-linked cyber attacks reportedly targeted Iranian state media. Videos circulated online showed Iranian TV airing “anti-regime” messages, indicating successful breaches of broadcast systems .

Iranian authorities, fearing further incursions, imposed a near-total internet blackout, with Cloudflare estimating that national internet traffic dropped by 97% .

The Hacktivist Cyber Attacks in the Iran-Israel Conflict

NSFOCUS 

Source Link

The geopolitical confrontation between Iran and Israel has a long history. In recent years, as the competition between the two countries in the military, nuclear energy and diplomatic fields has been escalating. On June 13, 2025, the IDF launched a large-scale military operation against Iran. Marked by Israeli air strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities and military sites and Iran firing missile salvos, 

the pro-Israel hacker group “Predatory Sparrow” launched a cyber attack on Iran’s Sepah Bank. The conflict between Iran and Israel has rapidly expanded to cyberspace, and a covert cyber war is quietly opening.

According to NSFOCUS Fuying Lab, since 2025, hacker groups have launched cyber attacks against Iran and Israel continuously. On June 10, 2025, three days before the IDF launched a large-scale strike on dozens of nuclear facilities, military bases and key infrastructure in Iran and targeted several senior commanders, 

there was a peak in cyber attacks against Iran. These cyberattacks against Iran covered multiple key areas such as financial services, media production sectors, and the Internet and telecommunications sectors. The timing indicates a strong sense of reconnaissance and pre-attack before large-scale operations.

The pro-Iranian hacker group’s attacks on Israel peaked on June 16, the day after the Israeli military’s “massive strike” against multiple Iranian weapons production sites, including surface-to-surface missile production sites, detection radar bases and surface-to-air missile launchers in Tehran. The targets of attack were mainly concentrated in the Israeli government and public sector, national defense, 

aerospace, education and other industries. In terms of the distribution of attack time, the surge in cyber attacks by pro-Iranian hacker groups on Israel followed the IDF’s large-scale military operations against Iran. This series of attacks strongly implicates Iran’s “cyber counterattack” against Israel.

Iran's hackers keep a low profile after Israeli and US strikes

A.J. Vicens and Raphael Satter

Source Link

Iran's cyber threat may be overstated, say US and Israeli experts

Iranian hackers target Israeli journalists, academics with phishing attempts

US warns of heightened cyber threat amid ongoing conflict

June 27 (Reuters) - After Israeli and American forces struck Iranian nuclear targets, officials in both countries sounded the alarm over potentially disruptive cyberattacks carried out by the Islamic Republic’s hackers.

But as a fragile ceasefire holds, cyber defenders in the United States and Israel say they have so far seen little out of the ordinary – a potential sign that the threat from Iran’s cyber capabilities, like its battered military, has been overestimated.

The Reuters Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

There has been no indication of the disruptive cyberattacks often invoked during discussions of Iran’s digital capabilities, such as its alleged sabotage of tens of thousands of computers at major oil company Saudi Aramco in 2012, or subsequent break-ins at U.S. casinos or water facilities.

"The volume of attacks appears to be relatively low," said Nicole Fishbein, a senior security researcher with the Israeli company Intezer. "The techniques used are not particularly sophisticated."

Online vigilante groups alleged by security analysts to be acting at Iran’s direction boasted of hacking a series of Israeli and Western companies in the wake of the airstrikes.

How To Manage Cybersecurity Risks In The Energy Sector? – Book Review

Eurasia Review

Source Link

nconsistent cybersecurity practices in organisations pose a threat to the energy sector. A new handbook from the University of Vaasa offers a structured, user-friendly resource to enhance cybersecurity resilience in the energy sector.

“As digitalisation accelerates, the energy sector faces more and more exposure to cyber threats, making human factors a critical point of intervention. By offering a structured and accessible resource, we aim to support a more resilient and sustainable energy landscape,” says Petra Berg, one of the authors.

The handbook combines the expertise of researchers from the University of Vaasa, Petra Berg, Bahaa Eltahawy, Mazaher Karimi, Linda Turtola and Mansi Negi. It is one of the achievements of the REDISET – Resilient Digital Sustainable Energy Transition project, a collaborative project investigating digital energy security and resilience in future energy systems in the Nordics. Even though the focus is in the Nordics, the findings of the books are applicable to similar energy systems elsewhere.

Buy bestselling books online

According to the authors, a major challenge in cybersecurity resilience is the variation in organisational cybersecurity culture, skill levels, and training, leading to inconsistent security practices. Over-reliance on regulations and resistance to complex security protocols further expose critical systems to threats.

One of the handbook’s key contributions is its emphasis on socio-cyber-physical risk management. It encourages organisations to move beyond compliance-driven approaches and adopt proactive, user-friendly strategies that integrate human behaviour into cybersecurity planning. By focusing on education, awareness, cooperation, and strategic investments, alongside the adoption of regulatory frameworks, the energy sector can significantly improve its cyber resilience.

Mencken’s Forgotten Wisdom On War – OpEd

James Bovard

Source Link

As a stampede of weasels seeks to con America into supporting another Mideast war, it is time remember America’s most underrated critic of bellicose folly. H.L. Mencken is famous for his smackdowns of politicians and ridicule of government and of much of American culture. But he also offered sage advice for citizens judging officialdom itching for carnage.

On May 9, 1939, the Baltimore Sun published Mencken’s essay on “The Art of Selling War.” This piece, included in the Second Mencken Chrestomathy published in 1995, deserves a far higher position in the Mencken and in the antiwar pantheon.

In words that are painfully relevant for today’s news, Mencken warned: “The fact that all the polls run heavily against American participation in the threatening European war is not to be taken seriously.” Mencken wrote:

“Wars are not made by common folks, scratching for livings in the heat of the day, they are made by demagogues infesting palaces…. The very unpopularity of war makes people ready to believe, when they suddenly confront it, that it has been thrust upon them… because their own demagogues have been pretending, all the while , to be trying to prevent it.”

Seven years later, the same points were echoed in an interview by Nazi kingpin Hermann Goering, who was on trial for war crimes in 1946 at Nuremberg: “Of course, the people don’t want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece…. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along.” Goering explained why self-government was a mirage when rulers chose war: “Voice or no voice, 

Khamenei’s Bunker Leadership: What Does It Mean For Iran’s Future? – Analysis

RFE RL / Kian Sharifi

Source Link

(RFE/RL) — Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s absence from public view during the Israel-Iran war could become a defining moment for his leadership and the Islamic republic’s future.

While Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was a constant presence — issuing daily statements and projecting resolve — Khamenei, Iran’s commander-in-chief, was largely unseen, releasing only two video messages during the conflict, one almost certainly filmed in a bunker.

As a third video message surfaced after the cease-fire, debate over the impact of his wartime conduct has sharpened among experts and the Iranian public.

Hiding for Survival

Khamenei’s disappearance was not simply a matter of leadership style; it was directly fueled by credible reports that he was at the top of Israel’s hit list.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz publicly confirmed that Israel actively sought to assassinate the Iranian supreme leader during the conflict, but couldn’t as he “went very deep underground,” meaning “there was no operational opportunity.”

The threat was so acute, Khamenei reportedly suspended all electronic communication and relied only on trusted aides. The New York Times reported he even designated a line of succession in case he was killed.

Leadership Under Fire?

UN Chief Calls For Political Courage To Secure Gaza Ceasefire As Humanitarian Crisis Reaches ‘Horrific Proportions’

Arab News  / Ephrem Kossaify

Source Link

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on Friday called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. Warning that the humanitarian crisis Israel created in the territory had reached “horrific proportions,” he demanded full, safe and sustained access for deliveries of aid.

Speaking ahead of his departure to attend the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development, co-hosted by the UN and Spain in Seville from June 30-July 3, Guterres said the situation in Gaza has now grown more dire than at any previous point in the long-running conflict.

“Bombs are falling — on tents, on families, on those with nowhere left to run,” he added. “People are being killed simply trying to feed themselves and their families. The search for food must never be a death sentence.”

He said the Israeli military operations launched in response to the Hamas attacks of Oct. 7, 2023, attacks he “unequivocally condemned,” have displaced families repeatedly, confining the population of Gaza to less than one-fifth of its total area. Even these shrinking safe zones remain under threat, he noted.

Guterres acknowledged the recent ceasefire agreement between Israel and Iran as a sign of hope but insisted that political courage is now needed to secure a similar ceasefire in Gaza.

Iran-Israel War Disrupts Life Along Pakistan’s Balochistan Border

Mariyam Suleman Anees

Source Link

Like the rest of the world, Pakistan closely watched the Iran-Israel war with great concern. With the two countries agreeing to a ceasefire, the war has ended for now. However, the implications of the war for the people of the region will continue to be felt for several weeks and months to come.

As a neighbor of Iran, Pakistan will have to deal with the fallout. On June 23, Pakistan’s National Security Committee (NSC) held a critical meeting to assess this impact on Pakistan’s stability and broader regional peace. While any instability in Iran triggers national security and foreign policy concerns in Islamabad, the implications for the lives and livelihoods of people in the border regions should be of concern as well.

Pakistan’s southwestern province of Balochistan shares a 900-kilometer-long border with Iran. Baloch people live on both sides of the border. For generations, family relations and cultural exchange have fostered a deeply interdependent environment across the border. People cross the border on a daily basis, not only to meet family members but also for their livelihoods and religious pilgrimages.

Amid the Iran-Israel war, all cross-border activity, including travel and trade, were disrupted. Assistant Commissioner of Gwadar Jawad Ahmed Zehr confirmed to The Diplomat that border crossing points for Iran had been closed from the Pakistani side. This includes the transit and trade hubs at Gwadar, Kech, Panjgur, and Washuk.

Operation Spider’s Web and the Future of Asymmetric Warfare

Ben Jebb, Don Edwards Leave a Comment

Source Link

Episode 130 of the Irregular Warfare Podcast takes listeners inside Operation Spider’s Web—Ukraine’s bold campaign of long-range drone strikes targeting Russian military and industrial infrastructure.

Our guests begin by examining why Ukrainian defense planners opted for this unprecedented strike operation and how it was designed to disrupt Russian strategic depth. They then unpack the technical, operational, and strategic considerations that enabled the operation, including the role of commercial drones, 

asymmetric targeting, and irregular doctrine. The episode concludes with reflections on how Spider’s Web is reshaping our understanding of deep operations and irregular warfare in the 21st century.

Brigadier General Kip Kahler is the former Senior Defense Official and Defense Attaché to Ukraine, with over two decades of national service in strategic roles across the interagency and foreign militaries.

COL Brian Petit is a retired SF Army officer who teaches and consults on strategy, planning, special operations, and resistance. He is an adjunct for the Joint Special Operations University.

Kateryna Bondar is a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and a former advisor to the Ukrainian government, where she led reforms in defense and innovation. Her article, entitled How Ukraine’s Operation “Spider’s Web” Redefines Asymmetric Warfare, serves as the anchor for episode 130.

The Israel-Iran War and the Crisis of the Nonproliferation Regime: Views from the Asia-Pacific

Source Link

On June 12, amid the ongoing war in Gaza, the security situation in West Asia was further shaken by Israel surprise airstrikes on multiple Iranian military and nuclear facilities. The attack also killed several key Iranian military leaders and nuclear scientists 

associated with the country’s nuclear programme. Iran responded with a wave of retaliatory missile strikes on Israel, leading to a volley of missile and drone attacks by both sides. In a dramatic and unprecedented escalation of hostilities, the United States’ B2 bombers and Tomahawk missiles struck the Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear sites in Iran, 

on June 22, eliciting an Iranian missile strike on the US’ Al Udeid Air Base airbase in Qatar. As the conflict continues to unfold, fears of a spiralling regional war are rife, calling for urgent international diplomacy.

We invited senior experts from the Asia-Pacific to comment on how the events from the Israel-Iran war are being viewed in the region, specifically the Israeli and US strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities and what consequences these may have on Iran’s nuclear programme as well as ultimately on the upcoming NPT Review Conference in 2026. Tanya Ogilvie-White, Nobumasa Akiyama, C Uday Bhaskar, Tong Zhao and Salma Malik share their views and concerns in this Pulse series on the Israel-Iran war.

Tanya Ogilvie-White

APLN Senior Research Adviser

This decade, we are witnessing the violent destruction of the rules-based order. First came Russia’s unprovoked attack on Ukraine; then, Israel’s horrific war in Gaza. Now, having failed to stop both conflicts, we are faced with Israel’s escalating war on Iran, aided by the brazen US assaults on Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan.

Russia Is Ready to Begin Its Summer Offensive

David Kirichenko

Source Link

Russia’s summer offensive signals Putin’s determination to overwhelm Ukraine using mass drone warfare, motorcycle assaults, and Chinese tech support, while betting on scale, endurance, and Western hesitancy to act.

Vladimir Putin appears increasingly confident that Russia will ultimately prevail on the battlefield in Ukraine as Moscow wages a bloody summer offensive. Just as Putin claimed in his 2021 essay that Russians and Ukrainians are “one people” and that Ukraine’s sovereignty hinges on Moscow’s approval, he reiterated in late June: “I’ve said it before, Russians and Ukrainians are one people. In this sense, all of Ukraine is ours. There’s an old rule that wherever a Russian soldier sets foot, that’s ours.”

Moskovsky Komsomolets noted that that phrase captured the essence of Putin’s “political faith and long-term strategy.”

Putin’s and Trump’s Strained Relationship

US President Donald Trump has been repeatedly disregarded by the Kremlin, despite issuing vague ultimatums, often invoking his signature “two-week” timeline, which has yielded no tangible results. This isn’t “peace through strength,” but rather “weakness through appeasement” that Trump has been demonstrating with Russia.

The Trump administration has resorted to engaging with the Lukashenko regime in Minsk, hoping to revive any momentum with peace talks. To Trump’s credit, he finally got both sides to start talking to each other. But the Russians’ message in the meetings has been that they are intent on finishing this war and subjugating Ukraine. Vladimir Medinsky, Putin’s aide leading the delegation, said, “We’re prepared to fight forever.”

EU–Canada Pact: A Quiet Reshaping of the Western Strategic Order

Noah M.

Source Link

On June 23, the European Union and Canada signed a landmark security and defense cooperation pact in Brussels. Hailed as a “historic step” by both sides, the agreement covers a wide array of strategic priorities: cyber and space security, arms control, defense procurement, crisis response, and stronger support for Ukraine. While the agreement has rightly received praise as a practical step forward in transatlantic cooperation, its broader significance is underappreciated.

This pact represents a quiet but deliberate recalibration of the Western security architecture away from a US-anchored model toward a more distributed, multipolar strategic order. It suggests that key US allies are no longer content to rely solely on Washington’s leadership in an era of global volatility and internal American ambivalence. Instead, they are proactively building alternative partnerships that embed resilience, diversify defense dependencies, and modernize how the West collectively manages geopolitical risk.

Beyond NATO: Strategic Hedge or Complementary Layer?

One of the most striking aspects of the EU–Canada agreement is that it is distinct from NATO, even as it reinforces many of the alliance’s goals. NATO remains the bedrock of transatlantic defense, but its internal politics have grown increasingly fractious. Divergences over burden-sharing, ambiguous US commitments, and different threat perceptions have led some allies to seek additional platforms for cooperation.

For Canada, the rationale is clear. According to Prime Minister Mark Carney, 75% of Canada’s defense procurement spending is currently directed toward US manufacturers. In an era of increasing global instability and political unpredictability in Washington, Canada seeks to diversify both its defense partnerships and its supply chains. In practical terms, this agreement could open new channels for joint procurement, R&D, and military-industrial collaboration with European defense firms.

Cyber War: The Invisible War in Cyberspace That Decides the Conflicts of the Present

Source Link

In the heart of contemporary conflicts, alongside tanks, drones and troops, an invisible, silent and often underestimated war is being fought: cyber war.

It is not just a futuristic scenario or a hypothetical threat. It is reality. From the conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, to the parallel attacks that occurred during the clash between Israel and Hamas, to the recent tensions between Israel and Iran, cyberspace has now become a real battlefield.

Indice dei contenuti nascondi

1. Cyberspace as a new domain of warfare

2. International law and the challenges of cyber war

3. Cyber operations: CNA, CNE and CND

4. Cyber attack and Article 5: when can NATO collective defense be triggered?

5. When can a cyber attack trigger Article 5?

6. From European regulatory documents to national defense

7. The Tallinn Manuals: the international legal framework of cyber conflict

8. The three key laws of Italian cybersecurity: 133/2019, 109/2021 and 90/2024

9. Cyberwar and propaganda: the future of conflicts is hybrid, but Italy is still culturally disarmed

Cyberspace as a new domain of warfare

Cyberspace is no longer just the environment where computer fraud, child pornography dissemination or unauthorized access are carried out. It has been officially recognized by NATO as the fifth domain of warfare, alongside land, sea, air and space. This means that offensive and defensive operations conducted through information systems can have the same strategic and geopolitical weight as conventional attacks.

In the context of international relations, cyber warfare is distinct from other digital activities such as cyber crime, info warfare, cyber terrorism or state digital surveillance.

Here we are talking about real attacks carried out by one State against another, with the aim of destabilizing, sabotaging or strategic acquisition of sensitive data.

The Global A.I. Divide

 Adam Satariano and Paul Mozur Graphics by Karl Russell and June Kim

Source Link

                                      

Last month, Sam Altman, the chief executive of the artificial intelligence company OpenAI, donned a helmet, work boots and a luminescent high-visibility vest to visit the construction site of the company’s new data center project in Texas.

Bigger than New York’s Central Park, the estimated $60 billion project, which has its own natural gas plant, will be one of the most powerful computing hubs ever created when completed as soon as next year.

Around the same time as Mr. Altman’s visit to Texas, Nicolás Wolovick, a computer science professor at the National University of Córdoba in Argentina, was running what counts as one of his country’s most advanced A.I. computing hubs. It was in a converted room at the university, where wires snaked between aging A.I. chips and server computers.

Nicolás Wolovick, a computer science professor at the National University of Cordoba in Argentina. “We are losing,” he said.

Sarah Pabst for The New York Times

Artificial intelligence has created a new digital divide, fracturing the world between nations with the computing power for building cutting-edge A.I. systems and those without. The split is influencing geopolitics and global economics, creating new dependencies and prompting a desperate rush to not be excluded from a technology race that could reorder economies, drive scientific discovery and change the way that people live and work.

How Geopolitical Tensions Are Shaping Cyber Warfare

Source Link

As global conflicts intensify, cyberspace is becoming just as contentious as the physical world. Digital frontlines are expanding rapidly, with nation-state-backed actors launching attacks against governments, infrastructure, finance, and private enterprise. What's changing isn't just the scale; it's also the focus. 

Today's adversaries adapt faster and act smarter, blending old tactics with new delivery methods and exploiting the same weaknesses that have gone unpatched for years. Cybersecurity professionals don't just need more data; they need to know what's happening in their neighborhood.

Regional Flashpoints and Nation-State Playbooks

Cyber conflict isn't monolithic — each nation-state brings its own motivations, methods, and level of sophistication to the digital battlefield.

Iran: Focused and Persistent

Iranian threat actors such as APT33, OilRig, Charming Kitten, and MuddyWater operate with clear political and ideological objectives. Their campaigns rely on social engineering, spear-phishing, custom malware, and known vulnerabilities. While their operations may lack some of the technical sophistication of their Chinese or Russian counterparts, these adversaries remain highly persistent and focused.

They aggressively target adversaries and dissidents, often aiming at aerospace, defense, and critical infrastructure. Their goal isn't just access — it's influence, disruption, and visibility. From the 2022 Albanian government takedown to the 2024 leak of private Israeli official data, the message is consistent: Disruption is a tool of statecraft.

Top 10 Emerging Technologies of 202

Source Link

Remarkable innovations emerge from research labs every year, creating unprecedented opportunities to address humanity's greatest challenges.

The Top 10 Emerging Technologies of 2025, developed in collaboration with Frontiers, highlights 10 innovations with the potential to reshape industries and societies. Based on expert nominations and rigorous foresight evaluation, 

the report spans from structural battery composites and engineered living therapeutics to osmotic power and AI-generated content watermarking. Each entry explores scientific progress, strategic impact, and ecosystem readiness across five dimensions.

The findings provide leaders with a forward-looking lens to harness transformative technologies for sustainable growth, resilience and inclusive innovation.

What is a War College?

Source Link

There is, at last, a battle to claw back our war colleges and service academies from a few decades of an unchallenged march through these institutions by the academic left that has changed so many of our civilian institutions.

We’ve covered this topic often here, but today we’re going to look specifically at a story unfolding at our Naval War College that frames this well.

At its core, this pushback is based on different views of what our war colleges should be. Is there a need for war colleges to replicate the latest socio-political trends and fads found at civilian universities, or should war colleges focus their finite time and resources in areas that cannot be found in civilian universities that can help support the development of strategic thinking in our field grade and higher officers?

We can frame the argument, no pun intended here, on the right and left sides, by two articles that nicely mirror each other not just in title, but in substance.

First, a Substack I wrote a little more than two years ago, Our Navy Needs More of the War, Less of the College.

Our war colleges are not what you think they are.

With each passing year there is less focus on war, and more on college. At the Naval War College, just getting additional time, money, faculty, and leadership focus on the “naval” portion has become a challenge with all the other ancillary agendas trying to keep pace with the cool kids cross-town at Salve Regina University.

Trump’s Army?

Source Link

Whereas historical fascists had an enemy without and an enemy within, Trump only has an enemy within. That is why, immediately after joining Israel’s attacks on Iran, he declared victory – and a cease-fire: The world is too much for him; the army is just for dominating Americans.

TORONTO – It is a truism that authoritarian regimes stand or fall on the loyalty of the security forces, and US President Donald Trump has left little to chance since returning to the White House. His defense secretary, 

Pete Hegseth, immediately purged a half-dozen top generals, including the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and in early May ordered a 20% reduction in the number of four-star generals and a 10% cut in lower-ranking generals

But it was a speech to troops a month later, at a base named after a Confederate general, that revealed most clearly Trump’s conception of national security and the role of the armed forces in ensuring it. He made no mention of the world today, addressed no common American interest that might necessitate national defense, and expressed no concern about threats from China or the Russian invasion of Ukraine. 

And whereas US presidents typically speak of individual heroism as evidence of a country worthy of defending, Trump said nothing about cherished Constitutional rights such as freedom of expression and assembly, and not a word about democracy. America did not exist in Trump’s speech.

Instead, Trump used US military history to advance a cult to himself. Great battlefield achievements became deeds performed for the pleasure of a leader who then invokes them to justify his own permanent power. Military glory becomes a spectacle into which the leader can inject any meaning.

India-U.S. Relations: Between Courteous Acquaintance and Civilizational Dissonance

 Ajay Jha 

Source Link

In the realm of international diplomacy, India and the United States are often described as natural partners. Yet, beneath the photo-ops and defense agreements lies a complex reality: this is not a relationship of equals in cultural perception or mutual understanding. Rather, it is a courteous acquaintance often marred by deep civilizational dissonance and misaligned expectations.

The Illusion of Natural Alliance

In Washington’s strategic calculus, India is often viewed through the lens of utility: a counterweight to China, a lucrative defense market, and a potential ideological ally. From this vantage, the U.S. finds it frustrating when New Delhi does not toe the line—be it on Russia, Iran, or global trade rules. But India does not see itself as a junior partner in any Western coalition. It sees itself as a civilizational state—an ancient, enduring entity with its own norms, systems, and path to modernity.

Civilizational Memory vs. Modern Superpower

India’s worldview is shaped not merely by the last 75 years of independence, but by thousands of years of philosophical, cultural, and social evolution. Baked into Indian Statecraft are concepts like dharma, which emphasizes moral duty and balance. There is also pluralism, and relational diplomacy, which emphasizes mutual respect and strategic autonomy. This contrasts sharply with America’s liberal-internationalist worldview, rooted in Enlightenment values such as liberty and free markets. Included is missionary zeal, and a tendency to universalize one’s experience.

This civilizational self-awareness makes India uniquely resistant to pressure. When the U.S. imposes moral lectures or sanctions threats (as with CAATSA over Russian defense deals), India sees not principled diplomacy but a form of modern-day imperial overreach.

Can India's fast-growing defence firms challenge the global biggies?

Source Link

Bharat forge chairman and Managing Director Baba Kalyani summed up the key takeaway from Operation Sindoor at the recently held Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) annual business summit. “Executed with strategic clarity and precise coordination, it showcased not only the operational brilliance of the Indian armed forces but also the growing strength of India’s indigenous defence manufacturing ecosystem.”

The operations were a defining moment for India’s fast-growing defence manufacturing sector. The prospect of more orders prompted some to announce capital expenditure plans. “We have to take responsibility to build equipment fast so that we can provide our armed forces much more than what they have today and what they need in future,” Kalyani added. Pune-based Bharat Forge is one of India’s leading private sector defence manufacturers.

Almost on cue, Dassault Aviation and Tata Advanced Systems announced four production transfer agreements to make fuselage of the Rafale fighter jet at a new facility in Hyderabad. The partnership is a significant achievement for India’s aim of becoming a major defence manufacturing hub. It marks a significant first for the €6.2 billion French aerospace company as the Hyderabad facility, to be set up by Tata Advanced Systems, will be the first factory outside France to manufacture Rafale fuselage. 

The partnership has the potential to boost the country’s defence and aerospace ecosystem and encourage other biggies to explore manufacturing tie-ups with Indian companies. At present, indigenous manufacturing is primarily driven by partnerships between government-run Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and industry.

India Hits China with Tariffs on Key Imports, Counters Fertilizer Blockade Head-On

Source Link

India is no longer playing nice when it comes to Beijing’s economic muscle-flexing. In a strong dual-front response to China's trade provocations, the Indian government has imposed anti-dumping duties on six critical chemical imports while also scrambling to respond to a silent but significant squeeze on specialty fertilizers.

 With the bilateral trade deficit touching a staggering $99.2 billion, the message from New Delhi is clear: economic sovereignty comes before anything else.

The Directorate General of Trade Remedies (DGTR) recently concluded detailed investigations that confirmed what many domestic producers have long alleged—cheap Chinese chemicals were flooding the Indian market and undercutting local industries. Acting on these findings, the Ministry of Commerce moved fast,

 levying duties ranging from $20.87 per kg to over $2,000 per tonne. These tariffs will stay in place for the next five years.

Key Sectors Targeted in Duty Crackdown

The list of chemicals affected reads like a who’s who of industrial essentials. PEDA, critical to herbicide production, now carries duties up to $2,017.9 per tonne. Acetonitrile, a solvent crucial in pharma manufacturing, gets slapped with up to $481 per tonne in duties, while Vitamin A Palmitate—used widely in nutritional supplements—draws a fresh tariff of $20.87 per kg.

At 80, the U.N. Is Down But Not Out

Richard Gowan

Source Link

A U.N. peacekeeper in a blue helmet is seen in profile as he holds the pole of a blue U.N. flag in front of a razor wire border fence. Three other blue-helmet troops are visible behind him, holding rifles and peering at the camera. 

The landscape beyond the fence is a dusty hill spotted with sparse plants.U.N. peacekeeping troops from the Indian contingent secure the Lebanese border with Israel, seen on the outskirts of of Kfarchouba on Aug. 26, 2023. Marwan Naamani/Picture Alliance via Getty Images

My FP: Follow topics and authors to get straight to what you like. Exclusively for FP subscribers. Subscribe Now | Log In

The United Nations celebrates its 80th birthday in a state of advanced disarray. Signed by the representatives of 50 states on June 26, 1945, 

the organization’s charter set out to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.” Today, the U.N. has 193 members, but amid ongoing bloodshed in Ukraine and Gaza and elsewhere, none of them—including the five veto powers in the Security Council—can pretend that it is succeeding.

The war between Israel and Iran has only highlighted the organization’s limitations. The Security Council has met repeatedly to discuss the crisis;

 ambassadors have traded barbs; and China, Russia, and Pakistan drafted a resolution condemning the U.S. attacks on Iranian nuclear sites. But this is all little more than diplomatic performance art, and nobody really believes that the U.N. has the authority to halt the war.