![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This article explores the fashion/popularity of the idea that the exercise of cyber power is a form of warfare. Specifically, the article explains the recent decline of the cyber warfare fashion in academia and discusses its implications for strategic studies. To achieve this, we synthesize observations from previous studies with new quantitative and qualitative data. The article contributes to a growing body of literature by tracing and explaining the history of a particular theme within strategic studies.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 The essence of the definition comes from the work of Colin Gray. See Colin Gray, Making Strategic Sense of Cyber Power: Why the Sky Is Not Falling (Carlisle: Strategic Studies Institute, 2013), 9; Other scholars have pointed out that cyber power does not cover only what happens in cyber space but also what happens through cyber space. See, for example, Myriam Dunn Cavelty, ‘Europe’s Cyber-Power’, European Politics and Society 19/3 (2018), 4.
2 Brandon Valeriano and Ryan C. Maness, Cyber War Versus Cyber Realities: Cyber Conflict in the International System (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), 3.
3 This pattern seems to apply across all the relevant journals and also beyond strategic studies scholarship, see Robert Gorwa and Max Smeets, ‘Cyber Conflict in Political Science: A Review of Methods and Literature’, Working Paper Prepared for the 2019 ISA Annual Convention (Toronto, 2019).
4 For example, journals associated with air forces, such as Strategic Studies Quarterly, discuss cyber power more often than the journals associated with naval forces, such as Naval War College Review. Similarly, Survival publishes more articles on cyber power than Military Strategy Magazine.
5 For example, David Betz, Erik Gartzke, Benjamin Jensen, Lucas Kello, Martin Libicki, David Lonsdale, Jon Lindsay, Ryan Mannes, Thomas Rid, Jacquelyn Schneider, Max Smeets, Danny Steed and many others. Few of these scholars have a formal background in strategic studies. Instead, the majority comes from a wide variety of backgrounds, ranging from political science, international relations, war studies, economics, intelligence studies and computer sciences. Despite this variety in backgrounds, these scholars have significantly enhanced our understanding of how cyber power matters to strategic affairs.
6 Cameran Ashraf, ‘Defining Cyberwar: Towards a Definitional Framework’, Defense & Security Analysis 37/3 (2021), 279–82.
7 Gorwa and Smeets, ‘Cyber Conflict in Political Science: A Review of Methods and Literature’, 8–11. Despite the title, this work also discusses research progress in the mainstream strategic studies scholarship.
8 Myriam Dunn Cavelty and Andreas Wenger, ‘Cyber Security Meets Security Politics: Complex Technology, Fragmented Politics, and Networked Science’, Contemporary Security Policy, Special Issue: Cyber Security Politics, 40/1 (2020), 5–32; Danny Steed, ‘The Strategic Implications of Cyber Warfare’, in Cyber Warfare: A Multidisciplinary Analysis, James A. Green (ed.), (New York: Routledge, 2015), 73–95; Christopher Whyte and Brian M. Mazanec, Understanding Cyber Warfare: Politics, Policy and Strategy (New York: Routledge, 2019).
9 Tim Stevens, ‘A Cyberwar of Ideas? Deterrence and Norms in Cyberspace’, Contemporary Security Policy 33/1 (2012), 148–70; Myriam Dunn Cavelty, ‘Cyberwar’, in The Ashgate Companion to Modern Warfare, ed. George Kassimeris and John Buckley (Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2010), 123–45; James A. Green and Richard Stiennon, (eds.), ‘A Short History of Cyber Warfare’, in Cyber Warfare: A Multidisciplinary Analysis (New York: Routledge, 2015), 7–32; Elinor C. Sloan, Modern Military Strategy: An Introduction (New York: Routledge, 2012), 85–97.
10 Cavelty and Wenger, ‘Cyber Security Meets Security Politics: Complex Technology, Fragmented Politics, and Networked Science’, 21–22.
11 For a rare exception, see Sergei Boeke and Dennis Broeders, ‘The Demilitarisation of Cyber Conflict’, Survival 60/6 (2018), 73–90. However, these authors explore how those responsible for the employment cyber power demilitarize some of its aspects. In contrast, our work focuses primarily on the evolution of (de)militarization in academic discourse.
12 Myriam Dunn Cavelty, ‘Cyberwar’, in The Research Ashgate Companion to Modern Warfare, ed. George Kassimeris and John Buckley (Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2010), 126–27.
13 Rebecca Slayton, ‘What Is a Cyber Warrior? The Emergence of U.S. Military Cyber Expertise, 1967–2018’, Texas National Security Review 4/1 (2021/2020), 71–72.
14 Martin Libicki, What Is Information Warfare? (Washington: National Defense University, 1995).
15 Sarah White, ‘Subcultural Influence on Military Innovation: The Development of U. S. Military Cyber Doctrine’ (Doctoral dissertation, Cambridge, Harvard University, 2019), 377.
16 Slayton, ‘What Is a Cyber Warrior? The Emergence of U.S. Military Cyber Expertise, 1967–2018’, 63.
17 John Arquilla and David Ronfeldt, Cyberwar Is Coming! (Santa Monica: RAND Corporation, 1992); Myriam Dunn Cavelty, Cyber-Security and Threat Politics: US Efforts to Secure the Information Age (New York: Routledge, 2009), 9.
18 Ralf Bendrath, ‘The Cyberwar Debate: Perception and Politics in US Critical Infrastructure Protection’, Information & Security 7 (2001), 80–103; Dunn Cavelty, ‘Cyberwar’, 129.
19 Ralf Bendrath, Johan Eriksson, and Giampiero Giacomello, ‘Cyberterrorism to Cyberwar, Back and Forth: How the United States Securitized Cyberspace’, in Johan Eriksson and Giampiero Giacomello (ed.), International Relations and Security in the Digital Age, (London: Routledge, 2007), 65.
20 Bendrath, Eriksson, and Giacomello, 65–67.
21 Colin Gray, Modern Strategy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999); David Lonsdale, The Nature of War in the Information Age: Clausewitzian Future (London: Frank Cass, 2004); David Betz, ‘The More You Know, the Less You Understand: The Problem with Information Warfare’, Journal of Strategic Studies 29/3 (2006), 505–33.
22 Christopher Tuck, Understanding Land Warfare (London: Routledge, 2014), chapter 9.
23 Gray, Making Strategic Sense of Cyber Power: Why the Sky Is Not Falling, vii – viii.
24 Gray, 6–7.
25 Stephen Blank, ‘Web War I: Is Europe’s First Information War a New Kind of War?’, Comparative Strategy 27/3 (2008), 227–47; Miroslav Mareš and Veronika Netolická, ‘Georgia 2008: Conflict Dynamics in the Cyber Domain’, Strategic Analysis 44/3 (2020), 224–40; and James P. Farwell and Rafal Rohozinski, ‘Stuxnet and the Future of Cyber War’, Survival 53/1 (2011), 23–40.
26 Kevin Poulsen. ‘Cyberwar’ and Estonia’s Panic Attack (22 August 2007). Available at: https://www.wired.com/2007/08/cyber-war-and-e/.
27 Richard A. Clarke, ‘War From Cyberspace’, The National Interest 104 (2009), 31–36.
28 Jordan Branch, ‘What’s in a Name? Metaphors and Cybersecurity’, International Organization 75/1 (2021), 50.
29 Branch, 50; Jon R. Lindsay, ‘Cyber Conflict vs. Cyber Command: Hidden Dangers in the American Military Solution to a Large-Scale Intelligence Problem’, Intelligence and National Security 36/2 (2021), 260–78.
30 See, for example: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/2010-to-2015-government-policy-cyber-security/2010-to-2015-government-policy-cyber-security.
31 Hughes and Colarik, ‘The Hierarchy of Cyber War Definitions’, 19.
32 Although Arquilla and Ronfeldt’s initial work was think-tank based, the authors also published in Comparative Strategy. It is perhaps for this reason that Hughes and Colarik treat the work as a piece of scholarship. See John Arquilla and David Ronfeldt, ‘Cyberwar Is Coming!’, Comparative Strategy 12/2 (1993), 141–65.
33 Robert Gorwa and Max Smeets, ‘Cyber Conflict in Political Science: A Review of Methods and Literature’, Working Paper (as per footnote n. 7), 9. The authors did not focus on strategic studies per se but on political science papers in general. They also did not focus on the topic of cyber warfare exclusively but on a broad range of topics discussed in political science publications.
34 Gorwa and Smeets, 10.
35 To map the developments of the last few years, we have searched the Web of Science database for articles with relevant terminology in their titles or abstracts and we have focused on the works from International Relations and Political Science.
36 Jeffrey Carr, Inside Cyber Warfare (Sebastopol: O’Reilly, 2012); Richard A. Clarke and Robert A. Knake, Cyber War: The Next Threat to National Security and What to Do About It (Toronto: HarperCollins Publishers Ltd, 2010); James A. Green, (ed.), Cyber Warfare: A Multidisciplinary Analysis (New York: Routledge, 2015); and Peter W. Singer and Allan Friedman, Cybersecurity and Cyberwar: What Everyone Needs to Know (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014).
37 Thomas Rid, Cyber War Will Not Take Place (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013). For the roundtable, see: https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/fjss20/36/1.
38 For SSQ debates, see https://www.jstor.org/stable/e26270505. For IS debates, see Erik Gartzke, ‘The Myth of Cyberwar: Bringing War in Cyberspace Back Down to Earth’, International Security 38/2 (2013), 41–73; Jon R. Lindsay and Lucas Kello, ‘A Cyber Disagreement’, International Security, Correspondence, 39/2 (2014), 181–92.
39 https://www.igi-global.com/journal/international-journal-cyber-warfare-terrorism/1167; https://www.jstor.org/journal/jlawcyberwarfare.
40 Will Goodman, ‘Cyber Deterrence: Tougher in Theory than in Practice?’, Strategic Studies Quarterly 4/3 (2009), 102–35; Emilio Iasiello, ‘Is Cyber Deterrence an Illusory Course of Action?’, Journal of Strategic Security 7/1 (2013), 54–67; Joseph S. Nye, Cyber Power (Cambridge: Belfer Center, 2010); Eric Sterner, ‘Retaliatory Deterrence in Cyberspace’, Strategic Studies Quarterly 5/1 (2011), 62–80; and Stevens, ‘A Cyberwar of Ideas? Deterrence and Norms in Cyberspace’.
41 Craig B. Greathouse, ‘Cyber War and Strategic Thought: Do the Classic Theorists Still Matter?’, in Cyberspace and International Relations: Theory, Prospects and Challenges, ed. Jan-Frederik Kremer and Benedikt Müller (Heidelberg: Springer, 2014), 21–40; Jeppe T. Jacobsen, ‘The Cyberwar Mirage and the Utility of Cyberattacks in War How to Make Real Use of Clausewitz in the Age of Cyberspace’ (Danish Institute for International Studies, 2014); and Martin Libicki, ‘Why Cyber War Will Not and Should Not Have Its Grand Strategist’, Strategic Studies Quarterly 8/1 (2014), 23–39.
42 Matthew Crosston, ‘Virtual Patriots and a New American Cyber Strategy: Changing the Zero-Sum Game’, Strategic Studies Quarterly 6/4 (2012), 100–118; Adam P. Liff, ‘Cyberwar: A New “Absolute Weapon”? The Proliferation of Cyberwarfare Capabilities and Interstate War’, Journal of Strategic Studies 35/3 (2012), 401–28; and Dale Peterson, ‘Offensive Cyber Weapons: Construction, Development, and Employment’, Journal of Strategic Studies 36/1 (2013), 120–24.
43 Erica D. Borghard and Shawn W. Lonergan, ‘Deterrence by Denial in Cyberspace’, Journal of Strategic Studies Online First (2021), 1–36; Timothy M. Goines, ‘Overcoming the Cyber Weapons Paradox’, Strategic Studies Quarterly 11/4 (2017), 86–111; Samuel Zilincik, Michael Myklin, and Petr Kovanda, ‘Cyber Power and Control: A Perspective from Strategic Theory’, Journal of Cyber Policy 4/2 (2019), 290–301.
44 Valeriano and Maness, Cyber War Versus Cyber Realities: Cyber Conflict in the International System.
45 Robert Chesney and Max Smeets, ‘Introduction: Is Cyber Conflict an Intelligence Contest?’, Texas National Security Review Special Issue: Cyber Competition (2020), 2.
46 Lennart Maschmeyer and Myriam Dunn Cavelty, ‘Goodbye Cyberwar: Ukraine as Reality Check’, Policy Perspectives 10/3 (2022), 1–4.
47 Rid, Cyber War Will Not Take Place. However, other scholars have pointed out that this incompatibility may not be insurmountable and can be alleviated by a reconceptualization of other basic building blocks, such as the concept of violence. See, for example, John Stone, ‘Cyber War Will Take Place!’, Journal of Strategic Studies 36/1 (2012), 101–8.
48 Jacobsen, ‘The Cyberwar Mirage and the Utility of Cyberattacks in War How to Make Real Use of Clausewitz in the Age of Cyberspace’.
49 Martin Libicki, Defending Cyberspace and Other Metaphors (Washington: National Defense University, 1997), 6.
50 Carr, Inside Cyber Warfare, 2.
51 Steed, ‘The Strategic Implications of Cyber Warfare’, 86–87.
52 For a broad overview of the different meanings behind the term cyber war, see Julian Richards, Cyber-War: The Anatomy of the Global Security Threat (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014).
53 Troy E. Smith, ‘Cyber Warfare: A Misrepresentation of the True Cyber Threat’, American Intelligence Journal 31/1 (2013), 84.
54 Valeriano and Maness, Cyber War Versus Cyber Realities: Cyber Conflict in the International System.
55 Erik Gartzke, ‘The Myth of Cyberwar: Bringing War in Cyberspace Back Down to Earth’, International Security 38/2 (2013), 42.
56 Myriam Dunn Cavelty, ‘The Militarisation of Cyberspace: Why Less May Be Better’ (Tallinn: NATO CCD COE, 2012), 1–13.
57 Dunn Cavelty, 3–4.
58 David Ormrod and Benjamin Turnbull, ‘The Cyber Conceptual Framework for Developing Military Doctrine’, Defence Studies 16/3 (2016), 281–82.
59 Valeriano and Maness, Cyber War Versus Cyber Realities: Cyber Conflict in the International System.
60 Peter Dombrowski and Chris C. Demchak, ‘Cyber War, Cybered Conflict, and the Maritime Domain’, Naval War College Review 67/2 (2014), 70–96.
61 Richard J. Harknett and Max Smeets, ‘Cyber Campaigns and Strategic Outcomes’, Journal of Strategic Studies 45/4 (2022), 535.
63 Paul Rosenzweig, Cyber Warfare: How Conflicts in Cyberspace Are Challenging America and Changing the World (Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2013), 58.
64 Lindsay, ‘Cyber conflict vs. Cyber Command’, 261.
65 Joshua Rovner, ‘Cyber War as an Intelligence Contest’, War on the Rocks, 16 September 2019, https://warontherocks.com/2019/09/cyber-war-as-an-intelligence-contest/, paragraph 4.
66 Ibid, paragraph 11–12.
67 David Gioe, Michael S. Goodman, and Tim Stevens, ‘Intelligence in the Cyber Era: Evolution or Revolution?’, Political Science Quarterly 135/2 (2020), 191–224.
68 For one example of such a heated debate, see this roundtable: https://tnsr.org/roundtable/policy-roundtable-cyber-conflict-as-an-intelligence-contest/#intro.
69 Ben Buchanan, The Hacker and the State: Cyber Attacks and the New Normal of Geopolitics (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2020); Lennart Maschmeyer, ‘The Subversive Trilemma: Why Cyber Operations Fall Short of Expectations’, International Security 46/2 (2021), 51–90; and Rid, Cyber War Will Not Take Place; Smith, ‘Cyber Warfare: A Misrepresentation of the True Cyber Threat’.
70 Julian Richards. Cyber-War: The Anatomy of the Global Security Threat (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014), 73.
71 Erik Gartzke & Jon R. Lindsay, ‘Weaving Tangled Webs: Offense, Defense, and Deception in Cyberspace, Security Studies’, 24/2 (2015) 316–348.
72 Lucas Kello, The Virtual Weapon and International Order (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2017), 249.
73 Ofer Fridman, Russian ‘Hybrid Warfare’: Resurgence and Politicization (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018).
74 Murat Caliskan and Paul A. Cramers, ‘What Do You Mean by “Hybrid Warfare”? A Content Analysis on the Media Coverage of Hybrid Warfare Concept’, Horizon Insights 4 (2018), 23–35; Silvie Janičatová and Petra Mlejnková, ‘The Ambiguity of Hybrid Warfare: A Qualitative Content Analysis of the United Kingdom’s Political – Military Discourse on Russia’s Hostile Activities’, Contemporary Security Policy 42/3 (2021), 312–44; and Robert Johnson, ‘Hybrid War and Its Countermeasures: A Critique of the Literature’, Small Wars & Insurgencies 29/1 (2018), 141–63.
75 Libiseller, Chiara. ’“Hybrid warfare“ as an academic fashion’, Journal of Strategic Studies, in this issue.
76 Note that some authors do not understand gray zone activities to constitute a form of warfare. See, for example, Michael J. Mazarr, Mastering The Gray Zone: Understanding a Changing Era of Conflict (Carlisle: Strategic Studies Institute, 2015). In these cases, the concept of gray zone fits among the alternative perspectives on cyber power discussed in the previous section.
77 Elizabeth J. Troeder, A Whole-of-Government Approach to Gray Zone Warfare (Carlisle: US Army War College Press, 2019).
78 See, for example, Jahara W. Matisek, ‘Shades of Gray Deterrence: Issues of Fighting in the Gray Zone’, Journal of Strategic Security 10/3 (2017), 1–26; Omer Dostri, ‘The Reemergence of Gray-Zone Warfare in Modern Conflict’, Military Review, 2020, https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/Military-Review/English-Edition-Archives/January-February-2020/Dostri-Gray-Zone/.
79 George Kennan, Policy Planning Staff Memorandum, May 1948.
80 Mark Galeotti, Russian Political War: Moving Beyond the Hybrid (London: Routledge, 2019).
81 Thomas Paterson and Lauren Hanley, ‘Political Warfare in the Digital Age: Cyber Subversion, Information Operations and ‘deep Fakes’, Australian Journal of International Affairs 74/4 (2020), 439–54.
82 Available at: https://www.usmcu.edu/Outreach/Marine-Corps-University-Press/MCU-Journal/JAMS-Vol-12-No1/.
83 Benjamin Jensen and Ryan C. Maness, ‘Fancy Bears and Digital Trolls: Cyber Strategy with a Russian Twist’, Journal of Strategic Studies 42/2 (2019), 212; Similar argument is also advanced in Brandon Valeriano and Benjamin Jensen, ‘Innovation and the Proper Context of Cyber Operations: The Path to Avoid Cyber War’, Marine Corps Gazette 105/2 (2021), 39–43.
84 Christopher Whyte, ‘Beyond Tit-for-Tat in Cyberspace: Political Warfare and Lateral Sources of Escalation Online’, European Journal of International Security 5 (2020), 196.
85 Donald Stoker and Craig Whiteside, ‘Blurred Lines: Gray-Zone Conflict and Hybrid War-Two Failures of American Strategic Thinking’, Naval War College Review 73/1 (2020), 1–37.
86 Adam Elkus, ‘50 Shades of Gray: Why the Gray Wars Concept Lacks Strategic Sense’, War on the Rocks (blog), 2015, https://warontherocks.com/2015/12/50-shades-of-gray-why-the-gray-wars-concept-lacks-strategic-sense/.
87 Jeffrey Michaels and Chiara Libiseller, ‘Introduction’, Journal of Strategic Studies, in this issue.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Samuel Zilincik
Samuel Zilincik is a doctoral student of security and strategic studies at Masaryk and Leiden Universities and a lecturer at the University of Defence in the Czech Republic. His research interests include military strategy in general and its emotional aspects in particular.
Isabelle Duyvesteyn
Isabelle Duyvesteyn is Professor of International Studies at Leiden University in the Netherlands. She obtained her PhD from the Department of War Studies at King’s College in London and has worked on issues related to strategy, contemporary war and peace, as well as rebel governance and legitimacy.