Search

Begin New Search Topic Science and Technology Publication Year within 5 Years

651. Modus Operandi of the Largest Russian Cyber-Intelligence Operation of Recent Times – Attack On Solarwinds

Author:
Giorgio Uzarashvili
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
The 2020 attack on SolarWinds is one of the largest cyber-intelligence campaigns in US history which inflicted significant damage on agencies such as the US Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).1 Incidentally, SolarWinds is a US-registered company that provides a wide range of IT-related services to the private and public sectors, including tools used for the remote management of the network’s infrastructure.2 Later, in April of this year, the attack was officially attributed to the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (СВР - Служба Внешней Разведки). Its consequences were severe not only due to the fact that the attacker, with high probability, gained access to at least part of the information held by the above-mentioned US agencies, but also primarily for the demonstrative effect of this operation. In particular, the attacker demonstrated that no one is protected against Russian cyber-intelligence actors, including the agencies directly in charge of ensuring the information security of the national critical infrastructure throughout the country. Consequently, the attack on SolarWinds negatively affected the US not only in terms of security, more specifically cyber security, but it also poses a significant challenge to its reputation. Namely, this incident questions whether or not US security forces have highly qualified personnel and appropriate technical equipment to protect significant information assets and prevent similar attacks. Moreover, there is a threat that this precedent will encourage similar actions by other hostile actors against the US in the future, primarily China and Iran.
Topic:
Security, Intelligence, Science and Technology, and Cybersecurity
Political Geography:
Russia and United States of America

652. The European Perspective of the Anti-Western Information Warfare

Author:
Erekle Iantbelidze
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
The transfer of the international political reality to a new multi-polar prism makes geopolitics, as one of the directions of interdisciplinary education, more important in the current situation. The development of digital and scientific technologies has moved the phenomenon of the balance of power to a new stage and for a number of states and intergovernmental organizations, the term geopolitics has become the flagship of security strategy, cultural domination and democratic processes. In terms of the new “geopolitical commission,” the action plan of Ursula von der Leyen rests on two main principles – Europe’s climate and digital transition (European Parliament, 2020). Therefore, in the conditions of a war of values, geopolitics and digitalization, technological development has become a super-important component that the European Union is attempting to bring to the forefront as it wrestles with the world’s foremost states (China, India, Russia, Turkey). As the EU’s top diplomat, Josep Borrell, stated, Europe must not become a playground for other great powers and it must take the role of a geopolitical leader in the world (Barigazzi, 2019). It must also be pointed out that the geopolitical nature of Europe also envisages the development and gradual expansion of its neighborhood policy. That said, the associated partners within the Eastern Partnership (EaP) format (Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine) have bigger ambitions and goals than the development of the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) and the full implementation of the Association Agreement (AA) (European Commission, 2019).
Topic:
Science and Technology, European Union, Geopolitics, and Free Trade
Political Geography:
Europe

653. ‘Designed in Ethiopia’ and ‘Made in China’: Sino-Ethiopian technology collaboration in South-South relations

Author:
Jos Meester
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
This policy brief provides an examination of China’s rise in relation to its African partners. It takes into account geopolitical concerns, but homes in on China’s Belt and Road Initiative, its means of expanding into Africa. It examines the role of the Digital Silk Road in the use of Chinese artificial intelligence and technology transfers on surveillance and the risks of repression. The brief aims to move beyond the politicised narratives surrounding Chinese involvement in Africa by testing them against practical initiatives on the ground. It examines Ethiopia, particularly its burgeoning tech hub known as the ‘Sheba Valley’, in order to understand China’s role in development in African countries. Ethiopia is a critical case because of: the country’s strong relations with China, leading Ethiopia to model its developmental state model on the Chinese one and incentivising civil servants to learn from the Chinese experience; Ethiopia’s attempt to develop its relatively advanced ICT hub (the Sheba Valley) in collaboration with China’s Shenzhen-based ICT hub; Ethiopia’s historically heavy surveillance and repressive practices, in part modelled on China’s practice of prioritising development over democratic reform.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Science and Technology, Geopolitics, Surveillance, Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and Artificial Intelligence
Political Geography:
Africa, China, Asia, and Ethiopia

654. Towards open and secure digital connectivity: Europe’s and Taiwan’s paths after the world’s first digital pandemic

Author:
Brigitte Dekker, Xiaoxue Martin, and Maaike Okano-Heijmans
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
Surveillance capitalism and digital authoritarianism have become facts of life in recent years. Set against the US–China trade–tech–data standoff, the European Union (EU) and its member states are navigating their course of open strategic autonomy, assessing how to position themselves in the digital age. Synergies and coordination with like-minded partners – including the United States (US) and countries in the Indo-Pacific – seem inevitable. This raises the question of to what extent Taiwan can be a partner for closer cooperation on digital matters. Can the EU, and specifically the Netherlands, and Taiwan move beyond diverging priorities, and promote a human-centred approach to the digital domain by leveraging their economic, scientific and cultural ties? In answering this question, this Clingendael Report examines the approaches of both sides to strengthening resilient societies, so-called ‘Big Tech’ regulation and digital development assistance. Findings suggest that while the underlying strategic interests and goals of Taiwan and Europe on digital connectivity align, priorities and strengths diverge. China’s growing influence and assertive behaviour pose a substantial challenge to both sides’ open, inclusive democracies, economic competitiveness and standard-setting power. As Europe and Taiwan improve policies domestically, as well as in and with third countries, especially in the Indo-Pacific region, they can benefit from each other’s complementary skills in specific digitalisation and digital connectivity domains.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Authoritarianism, Surveillance, Pandemic, and Digitalization
Political Geography:
Europe, Taiwan, and Asia

655. Europe’s Capacity to Act in the Global Tech Race: Charting a Path for Europe in Times of Major Technological Disruption

Author:
Kaan Sahin and Tyson Barker
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
Technological leadership has become a central dimension of geopolitical power. In this development, the primary front in the emerging tech power rivalry is between the US (United States of America) and China (People’s Republic of China). The European Union (EU) has fallen behind and needs to catch-up. The stakes in this race are high and will have an impact on economic competition, national security and broader values-based notions of political order. This study sheds light on Europe’s approach to technological mastery. This study looks into the progress of the EU and its member states across selected technological fields and their global entanglements with other nations and technology actors.
Topic:
Development, Economics, Science and Technology, European Union, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
China, Europe, and United States of America

656. The Hidden G2 for Democratic Tech Governance is the EU-US Relationship: A Starter Kit

Author:
Tyson Barker
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
The EU and the United States are expected to launch a Trade and Technology Council (TTC) on the sidelines of the US-EU Summit in mid-June, which could present a rare opportunity to jumpstart the EU-US technology relationship. Against the backdrop of rapid technological change, a transatlantic digital technology community could be a 21st-century answer to the Coal and Steal Community – a big democratic project that reaches across borders, knits like-minded communities together in a manner that reinforces shared values, and codifies standards of market access, increased interdependence, and intensified political dialogue.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Governance, European Union, Democracy, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:
Europe and United States of America

657. Broadband Access - Connecting America

Author:
Committee for Economic Development of the Conference Board
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Conference Board
Abstract:
With most Americans dependent on reliable, high-quality, high-speed internet services to work, train, consult with doctors, or attend school from home, the COVID-19 pandemic vividly demonstrates that affordability and access barriers leave too many families behind. As America’s leaders in business and policy work toward a postpandemic economic recovery that delivers increasing prosperity for American families and preserves our nation’s economic leadership, they must also build toward a vision of a fully wired nation that meets the internet needs of all its citizens. Innovation and competition in information technology have been essential to delivering a higher quality of life and modern commerce, and they will be integral to lasting solutions that close two stubborn gaps that leave a minority of Americans behind. First, millions of Americans—particularly in the least densely populated areas—lack access to reliable high-quality internet services that could connect them to essential educational, employment, and entrepreneurial opportunities. Second, large numbers of low-income Americans with physical access to such services cannot afford them at current market prices, leaving them “underserved,” with less economic opportunity than their higher-income peers. In too many areas, a lack of competition among providers contributes to underservice. As needed internet speeds and associated hardware and technologies have advanced, closing these high-speed internet service gaps—increasing economic opportunity and strengthening businesses and communities—is essential. Policymakers must leverage the dynamism and innovation of the private market, increase competition in the provision of services, and invest wisely to close the gaps, boost deployment and affordability, and meet the universal service and critical technologies goals that have motivated nearly a century of federal telecommunications law.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Communications, Infrastructure, Internet, Economy, and Business
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

658. Digital Activism and Authoritarian Adaptation in the Middle East

Author:
Larry Diamond, Eileen Donahoe, Ahmed Shaheed, Benjamin Greenacre, James Shires, Alexei Abrahams, Joshua Tucker, Xiao Qiang, Marwa Fatafta, Andrew Leber, Alexei Abrahams, Marc Owen Jones, Afef Abroughi, Mohamed Najem, Mahsa Alimardani, Mona Elswah, Alexandra A. Siegel, H. Akin Unver, Ahmet Kurnaz, Anita Gohdes, and Zachary Steinert-Threlkeld
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Project on Middle East Political Science (POMEPS)
Abstract:
The Project on Middle East Political Science partnered with Stanford University’s Center for Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law and its Global Digital Policy Incubator for an innovative two week online seminar to explore the issues surrounding digital activism and authoritarianism. This workshop was built upon more than a decade of our collaboration on issues related to the internet and politics in the Middle East, beginning in 2011 with a series of workshops in the “Blogs and Bullets” project supported by the United States Institute for Peace and the PeaceTech Lab. This new collaboration brought together more than a dozen scholars and practitioners with deep experience in digital policy and activism, some focused on the Middle East and others offering a global and comparative perspective. POMEPS STUDIES 43 collects essays from that workshop, shaped by two weeks of public and private discussion.
Topic:
Security, Civil War, Government, Human Rights, Science and Technology, Infrastructure, Authoritarianism, Political Activism, Democracy, Media, Inequality, Social Media, Surveillance, Borders, Digital Culture, and Cyberspace
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Middle East, and North Africa

659. A Prudential Personalist Ethical Appraisal of Human Cloning

Author:
Peter O.O. Ottuh
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
Numerous uncertainties are hanging over the biotechnology of human cloning which has prompted medical ethicists and religious organizations to ask questions that bordered on its ethical and religious considerations. In cloning humans, ethical and religious issues arise both in its clinical and laboratory settings hence, the morality of manipulating human genes is the foremost ethical issue among scientists and religious scholars. Therefore, this paper evaluated the human cloning technology using the personalism and prudential personalism ethical-religious models to arrive at a workable moral paradigm. To achieve this objective, the paper employed the phenomenological and critical-literary literature review methods. The paper argued that previous ethical and religious researches have not adequately employed the ‘ideal’ ethical models to appraise the morality of human cloning hence; using the personalism and prudential personalism ethical-religious models were appropriate to reveal that every human life has worth and its commodification is an aberration. The paper concluded that based on the paradigm of prudential personalist ethics, cloning humans (especially, human reproductive cloning) negates respect for human life, human dignity, and communal goods hence it should not be practiced.
Topic:
Religion, Science and Technology, Ethics, Emerging Technology, and Cloning
Political Geography:
Global Focus

660. Unpacking US Cyber Sanctions

Author:
Allison Peters and Pierce MacConaghy
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Third Way
Abstract:
Malicious cyber activity poses one of the greatest threats to America’s national, economic, and personal security. Yet, the perpetrators of these crimes largely operate with pure impunity and face little consequences for their actions. This is particularly the case for cybercriminals who cost the US economy anywhere from $57 billion to $109 billion in 2016 alone.1 Since 2015, the United States has imposed targeted sanctions (e.g., asset freezes, travel bans) on over 300 individuals and entities in response to malicious cyber activity.2 Many of these sanctions were issued under the cyber-related sanctions program administered by the Department of Treasury and established by a series of Executive Orders under Presidents Obama and Trump and bills passed by Congress.3 Sanctions have largely been imposed on individuals with ties to Iran, Russia, and North Korea, and, in about half of these cases, sanctions have followed indictments. An overwhelming majority of these sanctions have targeted individuals with suspected links to government entities and, only recently, have cyber sanctions targeted cybercriminals.4 As targeted sanctions increasingly become a tool deployed by the US government to punish malicious cyber actors, it remains unclear whether they are having an impact in changing behavior. Research on the impact of sanctions more broadly indicates that sanctions can be an effective tool to impose consequences on bad actors and change their actions when employed multilaterally, as part of a coherent strategy, and effectively messaged.5 However, imposing sanctions on malicious cyber actors without continuously reassessing their impact and the expected reciprocal actions by the target(s), risks a number of potentially negative outcomes. While Congress introduced legislation in the 116th Congress to impose new or codify existing cyber-related sanctions into law,6 it has not exercised the necessary oversight over the Executive Branch’s strategy in issuing cyber-related sanctions and determining their efficacy. With other countries now following America’s lead in issuing these sanctions, the time is ripe for the new Congress to push for an inter-agency, holistic assessment of the impact of US cyber-related sanctions.7 And with cybercrime increasingly threatening all sectors of the US economy, Congress must call for an evaluation as to whether sanctions on non-state cybercriminals should increasingly be used.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Sanctions, Cyberspace, and Digitalization
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America