Slashdot Mirror
How China Will Use Cyber Warfare To Leapfrog Foes
The Walking Dude writes "A lengthy article published in Culture Mandala details how China is using cyber warfare (PDF) as an asymmetric means to obtain technology transfer and market dominance. Case studies of Estonia, Georgia, and Project Chanology point towards a new auxiliary arm of traditional warfare. Political hackers and common Web 2.0 users, referred to as useful idiots (PDF), are being manipulated through PSYOPS and propaganda to enhance government agendas."
I've long had the feeling that many people claiming to be Americans on this board and elsewhere simply aren't. They make the claim in order to make their America bashing sound more like introspection than an outright attack, and therefore more "insightful" than "trolling".
"I know that every word that man just said is true, because it's EXACTLY what I wanted to hear." -- Space Ghost
"Information Warfare" (IW), sometimes called Information Operations (IO), spans several arenas, from the purely technical to the social and psychological. The goals and missions of IO and intelligence in general, particularly against and within non-free societies, will constantly be at odds with the democratic nature of the United States and the West. Even so, the United States currently doesn't appear to acknowledge the scope of the information campaigns China has executed against it. The thought in some circles that China isn't the danger others believe it to be is apparently proof that China's long-standing information campaigns to convince Americans of just that appear to be working quite well. China's motives are strategic rather than tactical in nature; that is, they do not necessarily serve any direct or immediate specific purpose, but rather serve to create influence in its own favor over long periods of time. For this reason, many in the US see China as something of a misunderstood ally, while China simultaneously builds out its military capability.
While cyber warfare is now routinely considered in various analyses of China and other nations, the larger question of why China is so diligently pursuing this path is overlooked. China's activities in this realm are assumed to be part of a natural technological progression. However, a study of literature examining China's efforts in Information Warfare viewed against the backdrop of the importance of the Information Revolution which is sweeping the globe paints a picture of a nation looking to the information realm as a critical and key mechanism to modernize its military capabilities. Similar to how the Industrial Revolution ushered in a new era and greatly enhanced nations' abilities to wage war, the Information Revolution again could change the face of conflict. China's motivations for expanding its cyber warfare capabilities against the United States may transcend that of simple technological evolution, and warrant a deeper examination. Why, then, can China be expected to expand its Information Warfare capabilities, particularly with respect to the United States?
The US Army War College's Strategic Studies Institute encapsulates these findings in one simple thought: to China's leadership, it could mean a pathway to modernization that would obviate the need for costly and time-consuming interim modernization. "IW offers opportunities to win wars without the traditional clash of arms" (Yoshihara 2001). Indeed, China appears to be focused on the notion of such asymmetric warfare. Yoshihara (2001) goes on to explore the current state of Chinese IW and IO philosophy. The focus of Chinese theoreticians appears squarely focused on the possibility of IW offering China a decisive option to defeat a superior adversary by crippling its command and control capabilities. Moreover, Yoshihara (2001) notes that some Chinese military scholars consider the notion of victory without conventional battle; not only via disabling information-based attacks in the electronic realm, but even via more subtle psychological operations (PSYOP) designed to alter and shape an adversary's thinking.
Part of China's motivations for the intense focus on the information realm stems from China's fascination with recent conflicts driven by information. China witnessed the decisive US tactical victory in the Persian Gulf War, and wondered how such practice could be applied by its own military. China is cognizant of the fact that it, too, will be subject to information-based attacks as it becomes more dependent on information-based systems. China's focus is on building a high technology war-fighting machine, with the prospect of skipping costly interim steps to modernize its military capabilities.
Pervasive in the Chinese writing on IW is the notion of shaping the environment to facilitate military objectives; critically, the Chinese "view information warfare as a tool to counter the overwhelming military superiority of the United States" (Armistead 2001). It is this thought
And when they've achieved their goals how will they feel when the next superpower does them the same way?
It's not like the current superpower doesn't use "cyber warfare" to obtain technology transfer and market dominance (search for "Published cases".
There's nothing really new here, except for possibly some alternate methodologies.
Donate free food here
"Useful idiots" in this document is referring SOLELY to the 'patriotic hackers' - ie unofficial pro-China hackers who cheerfully attack anti-Chinese or other targets of opportunity without official support or sanction.
The Useful Idiots that the summary refers to have been around forever: people who are easily manipulated by professional intelligence services without a great deal of effort because they are naive, idealistic, or simply ignorant - such as the Red Army Faction, the German anti-nuke movement, and protests against Reagan in the 80s.
-Styopa
It's a lot easier to perform the manufacturing for a competing country and then just copy their design. It amazes me how naive American companies are when they outsource to China and then are amazed when their products are copied.
Except that financially destroying the USA would not destroy the USA's military capabilities. When the USA is faced with a catastrophic economic failure, the course of action will be military intervention, conquering some other nation and using its resources to boost our economy. Case in point, 30 year predictions on oil show major supply shortages, so we invade Iraq.
This is not exactly a new strategy; in the history of the world, whenever a powerful nation/empire is in need of resources, it conquers some other nation in order to obtain those resources.
Palm trees and 8
I'm aghast in the rise of these spiteful comments over the last couple of days. Do you really think this kind of sniping is going to have an effect on the election, now two days away? I now reside overseas and no longer participate in the American political process, so I've got no dog in this fight, but I'd really like to see discussion fora stay civil even when election day is coming up.
But in a real sense America can use all the bashing it can get. Seriously. Time to wake up. The fact that you think it matters whether criticism comes from within or without is, it seems, proof of this. Speaking in the broadest terms, America (corporately, I don't mean every single individual) has developed a tendency to view everything 'religiously' rather than empirically. There are white hats and black hats, not right actions and wrong actions. There are us and them, not cooperative-minded people and antagonistic people. This underlies everything from teaching non-science in science classes, to voting for people you know are wrong for the job because of the party they belong to, to making social policy decisions on the basis of whether or not they seem too 'socialistic' rather than looking at what effect (positive or negative) they would have, to choosing friends and enemies among other nations without stopping to think about their internal structures and agendas.
So, now, having said that, I'm not an American. Does that make me a troll? Because like most other non-Americans I do not want to be your enemy. But the key point is that the reason I don't want to be your enemy is not, if you will, that I'm afraid of afraid of rabid dogs and I don't want to meet your war machine in a dark alley, but because I'd like to see the world become a better place, and it would be just great if America (which used to hold itself up as a beacon of hope in this regard) would at least join in.
So there you have it. I'm un-American. I'm wearing the black hat. Mod me troll and make me go away. Because, I guess, it's easier than understanding that much of the rest of the world—specifically, those parts of it where we still believe that the political process can work and wars should no longer be necessary—has lost its respect for you as a power.
GP's point was that the US is a HUGE importer of Chinese consumer goods, and that if the US economy went under, the Chinese economy would take a massive hit, too. Of course this is arguable, I don't have numbers on exports & imports from china, but I suspect the US isn't quite as important as many would like to believe. Still, there's no point trying to get the US economy to tank when there's profit to be had from it.
True , the US is only a part of it , but if the American economy suffers , there's no doubt the European market will suffer to .
So China wouldn't just lose sales from the US : there would be a global depression. And that will definitely hurt China too.
Slipping shoelaces ?
He isn't running for election in Europe or the rest of the world, he is running in the U.S. Only U.S. citizens have a say-so.
It really doesn't matter what anyone else thinks or classifies him or his opponents as.
Gone!
You are clearly not an American, b/c your criticisms are characteratures of the polar extremes of America that Europeans (not all, just the lazy-thinking ones) love to lampoon and use as examples of American demise to make them feel better about themselves. Few Americans vote party lines (if at all, but that's a different issue), the school boards who put creationism in the science curriculum are quickly voted out of office in the following election (even in Kansas), and I think if you bothered to meet some normal Americans (rather than the party operatives who play ones on TV), you would find that Americans have a very pragmatic approach to everyday life, which includes views on life, business, and policy.
I would also not attach our foreign policy blunders to the collective views of the American people. The administration has consistently been a lone cowboy (pun intended) in this area - very few viewpoints had a place at the table in the last 8 years (even our own secretary of state was sidelined). Many of us lament the moral high ground our country has lost since the end of the cold war because of the lapses in judgment with regards to torture, just war, and diplomacy that a handful of reckless unelected officials with too much power have conducted on our behalf.
"The administration has consistently been a lone cowboy (pun intended) in this area"
It's easy to blame those in power, but as a nation you voted the fuckers in (or at the very least you let them steal the election without massive Ukraine style protests in the streets), so you do bear part of the responsibility.
It's the old Evil-thrives-where-good-people-do-nothing deal.
Wow talk about a post that lacks links with reality.
First Guam and Puerto Rico have had votes, multiple times, on what they want to have happen to them, votes keep coming up as keep it as is. The ball is currently in their courts and they don't want to rock the boat from the current benefits they are receiving. Personally I think we should give them a set date when they have to decide and force the to decide.
What kind of joke is this about the military bases being a havens of criminals??? As a general rule if you commit a crime on base you will be tried by the US or turned over to the locals, if you do something off base you will be almost always be tried by the local government, this is in the SOFA, the main benefit you get is that you be held on the military base during the time up to the trial. In addition to local government penalties you also face the chance of the military trial and punishment.
The rape case of Christopher A. Barberi was against US citizens while on a military base and back in the USA, so it fell under US law and a military court, if done off base and a German citizen based on past cases it would of been handled over to the German courts. The light sentence is because he could not be charged for some of the crimes because of statue of limitations and their were questions about the reliability of the girl to the point of having relatives saying she was lying. The case in Japan where you had an accused raped not being tried by the Japanese court systems was because the accuser said she lied about the accusation so the Japanese government dropped the case, the person was still tried by the military court because of actions before it was dropped.