This article stresses the role of information in the modern society, points out and analyzes the problems of information security. Today, information has tremendous potential as it can be used in positive way but also as the powerful weapon because of the development of modern technologies. Information wars as well as hybrid wars, which are interconnected, are the contemporary means of combat of not only terrorist groups but also countries. However, information war is not only the usage of cyber attacks and other technical means; it is also fight for hearts and minds. Therefore, the article alsodraws attention tothe role of media, propaganda and their influence on information space of our country.
XXI century, by all means, is the age of information. Today’s world uses information as a fuel to develop, grow and prosper in amounts never before been possible. However, uncontrolled and (deliberately or accidentally) misused information can turn into a very dangerous weapon, which will have negative impact on people's opinion and thoughts, the economy and politics and even disrupt the stability of thesociety and state in general.
The rapid development of the IT sphere greatly influenced the life of the societies worldwide, uniting them into the information society, which exists in one global information space. It means that information now has less boundaries on its way, which means that more and more people can be affected by it, may it be in the positive or negative way. That is why it is important to say that information resources and processes may be at the root of many social cataclysms (both in CIS and in the rest of the world).
The development of electronic technology, especially computer and its spreading into all spheres of life, including government and military control, led to the recent emergence of a fundamentally new type of states’ confrontation – the information one. Of course, one can claim that information wars have been known and practiced for a long time but the weapons used included (and were limited to) such tools as propaganda, (mis)usage of mass media, manipulation of public opinion, rumors, disinformation, etc. The technological progress just gave the info wars truly new meaning. The so-called "information wars" or their cyber aspect, have recently began to be used to prevent unauthorized use, damage or destruction of elements of their own information infrastructure and/or violation of its integrity or to destroy the elements of enemy’s information infrastructure in order to gain information superiority. Nevertheless, targets for information weapons may be different and saying that they will only be aimed at military objects means being absolutely naïve.
The war itself has changed, in a broad sense meaning its saturation with information technologies. It should be noted that the information war is only a means, not an end, in the same way as the bombardment – also just a means, not an end [1]. However, I agree with Mr. Libicki that one should not forget that “… information warfare is about much more than information systems, although sometimes it is easy to think otherwise. It is fundamentally about information and the use to which information is put” [2]. We are living in the age of information and it should be admitted that we are very dependent on it, maybe more than the generations that lived before us. Compared to the time of censorship of the USSR, now our society is oversaturated with information. The origin and quality of some of it is unknown and therefore suspicious. Without proper control, such information may present a serious threat to the stability of the society and state, and therefore become (and already became) a factor that affects national security. This aspect will be covered more in the other section of the article.
Among the most noted examples of information warfare is the Cold War between the USSR and the USA. Prior to this, the same example of aggressive communicative influence was the control of situation in Chile, culminating in the overthrow of Allende. CIS countries added the war in Chechnya to this list, which was first lost in the information space.
Experts claim that underestimation or even ignorance of information security appears to have played an important role in the spontaneous disintegration of the USSR, increasing economic, political, national, environmental and other threats to the entire post-Soviet space. Of course, it did not go unnoticed by competent experts and specialists in CIS and in the world. For example, the first appearance of the concept of information security in the post-soviet space dates back to May 15, 1992, when the Heads of States of Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Armenia, Ukraine and Russia signed an "Agreement on the security of cryptographic hardware," (“Соглашение об обеспечении безопасности шифровальных средств”) in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. Since then countries have developed doctrines, concepts, legal acts and laws that regulate information security, focusing on its different aspects. For example in Kazakhstan it is regulated by the Law “About national security of Kazakhstan” (2012), by the project of the unified state technical policy of information security in the sphere of information and communication technologies and by now outdated Concept of Information Security until 2016. In Russia it is regulated by the new Doctrine of information security of the Russian Federation (2016), “Information society (2011-2020)” state program of the Russian Federation, Concept of national security of the Russian Federation, etc. In Belarus it is regulatedmainly by Concept of national security of the Republic of Belarus (2010), Law “About information, informatization and defense of information” (2008). There are also treaties and agreements on the information security existing between the above-mentioned countries, one of which is the Agreement on the Cooperation of States members of the CIS in the field of information security (2013). It is interesting to note that in these documents information security and national security are closely associated but there are different stresses on technical and other, “human” or social aspects of information security.
In today's world, in the clashes between states and states, states and terrorist organizations there are no front lines. There are claims that nowadays, there are so-called "hybrid" wars fought between the states. “Arab spring”, color revolutionsare said to be among them. However, there is a controversy and polemics about whether to call certain conflicts “hybrid war” or not and who to blame. For example, the handbook «Military Balance 2015" calls Russia's actions in Crimea the "hybrid war", and provides the following definition of it: "(the hybrid war is) the use of military and non-military tools in an integrated campaign aimed at achieving surprise, seize the initiative and receive psychological benefits, using diplomatic capabilities; large-scale and rapid information, electronic and cyber operations; cover and concealment of military and intelligence operations; in conjunction with economic pressures" [3]. Therefore, the connection of hybrid wars and information wars is clearly visible. Peacetime does not guarantee the safety of the state and society and its information security should be of the highest priority.
Apart from the hybrid wars, cyber attacks have become favorite weapon of some governments in the XXI century. The effect of such attacks may differ greatly – depending on resources the attacker has at the disposal and of course, who (or which country) is standing behind the attack. Examples include Stuxnet, computer worm which “wiped out roughly a fifth of Iran’s nuclear centrifuges” in Natanz, Iran in 2006 and it is believed to be an American-Israeli project [4]. Although it is one of the most known and disastrous case, nuclear facility in Natanz is not the only object of strategical and critical infrastructure to become vulnerable to such attacks and incidents. Even just in the USA, other examples include Davis-Besse worm infection (near Oak Harbor, Ohio) and incidents with Browns Ferry nuclear plant (near Athens, Georgia) and Hatch nuclear plant (near Baxley, Georgia), not to mention other cases, for example attack on sewage system in Maroochy, Australia which resulted in the heavy damage to the environment of the large area. The author claims that the difference between these incidents (Davis-Besse, Browns Ferry, Hatch) and the Iranian case is that attack on Iranian object was very sophisticated and intentional [5]. It shows that even the most fortified and defended objects are not completely safe today.
However, the problem is that it is hard to trace these attacks back to the attacker and have attacker’s clear identification. So for example, the US intelligence services’ recent blames on Russia, which as they say has been hacking into US networks, and interfering the voting process may not completely be proven to be true. And the advantage of such attacks is that the risk of war declaration as a reaction to such attack is minimal. Moreover, it is only a tiny bit of info wars and cyber attacks conducted now and then. There may be different reasons why some of them are not reported and probably will not be reported in the future, probably depending on their nature and effect.
That’s why it’s becoming more and more important to acknowledge such “new” kinds of threats and be prepared to counter them. It is understood by every serious and competent organization. NATO is no exception. In official 2014 Wales Summit declaration term “cyber war” is mentioned several times and what is significant to note is that hybrid threats are also mentioned:
„We look forward to continued dialogue and cooperation between NATO and the EU. Our consultations have broadened to address issues of common concern, including security challenges like cyber defense.... We will also seek to work more closely together in several other areas, including ....addressing hybrid threats, in line with decisions taken. “ Article 104, Wales Summit Declaration 2014 [6].
While talking about info wars and how the information may be misused or used as a weapon, it is absolutely necessary to mention mass media and report of Mr. DaniyarS abitov which is called “Информационная безопасность Казахстана: защита данных и смыслов” (Information security of Kazakhstan: defense of data and meanings) (2016). MrSabitov in his report on information security notes that the role of media in shaping public opinion is obvious. As he notes, there is no country in the world that does not use the media for purposes of propaganda. It is considered that there is a so-called a Western School of Journalism, where objectivity is put uppermost. However, it is rather a theoretical concept, an ideal, which is taught in universities [7]. Reportcites well-known Russian journalist Vladimir Pozner who in an interview said that the way Russians are depicted on American television is actually not much different from the image of the Americans in Russian media. This observation is very important as it shows that media, according to Mr. Sabitov’sreport, is used as weapon of propaganda everywhere, USA included. Good example is the strong informational campaign against the Iraqi government in the beginning of 2000s. What was done in particular? The pull the journalists covering the event was formed, the channel broadcasting in Arabic language for to the Arabic-speaking population was created and there was the process of neutralization of the work of "independent" media like "Al Jazeera". The administration of Saddam Hussein in turn was engaged in counter-propaganda activities [8].
Yet another example of info war is Russian-Ukrainian clash which began its active phase from events in Maidan in 2013 and since then observers could witness the various types of both propaganda and counterpropaganda activities from both sides.
Nevertheless, the main problem (for Kazakhstan) according to report is that “information, unlike the combat weapon even with the large area of impact, doesn’t have boundaries/borders”. It means that all content in Russian language broadcasted in any way (TV, Internet) automatically influences Kazakhstani people (initially uninvolved in conflict), too. To make matters worse, even 8 years ago, back in 2009 PM of Kazakhstan Karim Masimov claimed that more than the half of Kazakhstani citizens (55%) live in Russian information space [9]. Many Kazakhstani experts, such as DosymSatpayev, Marat Shibutov, deputy of the Mazhilis of the RK ArturPlatonov and others draw attention to the importance of the public relations media in the protection of information security of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as to the lack of quality and quantity of the “domestic” content, others, such as Tatyana Chumachenko say that not only governmental actors but also non-governmental actors are interested in stable informational environment and if they cooperate it will make the state more solid [10].Moreover, the President of Kazakhstan NursultanNazarbayev in his 2017 Address to the Nation of Kazakhstan stated that it is one of the top priorities for the Kazakhstan to counter religious extremism propaganda everywhere, including Internet and social networks as well as to oppose cybercrime with the help of various methods including the creation of “Cyber shield of Kazakhstan”.
It is a serious threat not only to information security but also to national security of Kazakhstan in a whole. In my opinion, the only way to solve this problem is not to restrict access and prohibit everythingthat can be prohibited, but to focus on the production of own content, to fill our information space with Kazakhstani media products and of course to be constantly vigilant.
I want to conclude with words of prof. Frank Webster, who said: „War itself is changing, increasingly being what one might call Information War, by which is broadly meant saturation with information and communications technologies, plus a special concern for the media.” Today’s world has constantly increasing number of threats – some are new, like cyber threats some only appear to be new, like hybrid wars, some are old, like propaganda wars, but all of them impose serious danger to global community, states and society. It is hard and dangerous to oppose such threats but it is more dangerous not to be aware and not to have enough knowledge about them. This article observed and reviewed different types of information wars, provided information about theoretical aspects of such wars and also included practical examples. Moreover, it also mentioned status of information situation in Kazakhstan now and information threats, which it faces. And it is hard to say that but they are becoming less and less purely theoretical.
Bibliography
- Rzhavskiy K.V. Информационная безопасность: практическая защита информационных технологий и телекоммуникационных систем: Учебноепособие (Information Security: Practical protection of information technology and telecommunication systems: The tutorial). Волгоград: Изд-воВолГУ, 2002. 122 с.
- Libicki M.C. Conquest in Cyberspace: National Security and Information Warfare. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007. 323 pages
- The Military Balance 2015. The annual assessment of global military capabilities and defense economics – URL:https://www.iiss.org/en/publications/military%20balance/issues/the-military-balance-2015-5ea6 (retrieved 12.2016)
- Broad W., Markoff J., and SangerIsraeli D. Test on Worm Called Crucial in Iran Nuclear Delay. New York Times. – – URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/world/middleeast/16stuxnet.html (retrieved 22.12.2016)
- Kesler B. The Vulnerability of Nuclear Facilities to Cyber Attack // Strategic Insights. Vol. 10. Issue 1, 2010. PP. 15-25
- NATO Wales Summit Declaration, 2014. Article 104 – URL: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_112964.htm (retrieved 12.2016)
- Sabitov D. Information security of Kazakhstan: defense of data and meanings. Report on information security. Institute of World Economy and Politics (IWEP). –2016. PP. 47-48 – URL: http://iwep.kz/files/attachments/article/2016-04-07/doklad_ _informacionnaya_bezopasnost_daniyar_sabitov.pdf (retrieved 27.12.2016)
- Tolstobrov A. Информационная война США и Великобритании в ходе военной операции против Ирака (Information war of USA and Great Britain in the course of military operation against Iraq), 2004. – URL: http://www.iimes.ru/rus/stat/2004/14-11-04.htm (retrieved 11.2016)
- Satpayev D. Information Frankenstein (Информационный Франкенштейн), Forbes Kazakhstan. – 2013. – URL: http://forbes.kz/massmedia/informatsionnyiy_frankenshteyn (retrieved 01.2017)
- Chumachenko T. Some theoretical aspects and main components of informational policy // Вестн. КазНПУ им. Абая. Сер. межд. жизнь и политика (Bulletin of Kazakh National Pedagogical University after Abai. International Affairs and Politics series). – 2015. – №2 (41). PP. 71-74