Experts explain why cyberattacks haven’t played a huge role in the Russia-Ukraine war
Cyber operations have yet to replace military invasion
A tactical role for cyberattacks?
It’s common in modern warfare for new technologies to substitute for traditional military tactics. For example, the U.S. has made extensive use of drones, including in conflicts in Yemen and Pakistan where crewed aircraft and ground forces would be difficult or impossible to use. Because drones allow the U.S. to fight on the cheap with much less risk, they substitute for other forms of warfare.
In theory, cyber operations could have played a similar tactical role in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. But the Russian government hasyet to use cyber operationsin a manner that is clearly coordinated with military units and designed to smooth the advance of ground or air forces. When Russia invaded Ukraine, hackersdisrupted access to satellite communicationsfor thousands of people, and it was apparently aconcern for Ukrainian defense officials. But overall, Ukraine has managed tomaintain internet accessandcellphone servicefor most of the country.
Russia hassophisticatedcyber capabilities, and its hackers haveworked their way into Ukrainian networksfor many years. This raises the question of why Russia has not, for the most part,used cyber operations to provide tactical supportfor its military campaigns in Ukraine, at least until this point.
Separate roles
In recent studies, we examined whether cyber operations mostly serve as complements to, or substitutes for, conventional conflict. Inone analysis, we examined conventionalmilitary campaigns around the worldover a 10-year period using theMilitarized Interstate Disputesdataset of all armed conflicts. We also focused onthe conflicts in Syria and eastern Ukraine. Our results suggest that cyber operations are generally not being used as either.
Instead, nations tend to use these two types of operations independently from each other because each mode of conflict serves different objectives, and cyberwarfare is most effective for gathering intelligence, stealing technology or winning public opinion or diplomatic debates.
In contrast, nations use traditional forms of conflict to control tangible assets, such as capturing resources, or occupying territory. The various goals offered by Russian President Vladimir Putin for invading Ukraine, such aspreventing Ukraine from joining NATO,replacing the government, orcountering fictitious Ukrainian weapons of mass destruction, require occupying territory.
There may be other reasons for the lack of overlap between cyber and conventional fronts in Ukraine. The Russian military could consider cyber operations ineffective for its purposes. The newness of cyber operations as a tool of war makes itdifficult to coordinatewith conventional military operations. Also, military targets might not be accessible to hackers because they might lack internet connectivity.
In any event,evidencethat the Russian government intends to use cyber operations tocomplementmilitary operations isthin. Our findings suggest hacking groups in previous conflicts faced considerable difficulties in responding to battlefield events, much less shaping them.
How Russia is using cyber operations
The main target of Russia’s digital campaign in Ukraine is ordinary Ukrainians. To date, Russian cyber operations have sought tosow panic and fear, destabilizing the country from within, bydemonstrating the country’s inability to defend its infrastructure, for example, by defacing or disabling websites.
In addition, Russia has been using information campaigns to attempt to win the “hearts and minds” of Ukrainians. Prior to the start of the conflict, White House press secretary Jen Psaki warned of a2,000% increase from the daily average in NovemberinRussian-language social media content. This suggests that the purpose of these information operations was to make the case for Russia’s intervention onhumanitarian groundsand to build support for intervention among the Ukrainian public. The Russian government’sdomestic actionsemphasize the value its leadership places on information operations.
A supporting role
Hackers’ actions tend to occur out of the public eye, rather than in the flamboyantly violent manner favored by Hollywood cyber villains, which means it’s difficult to know for sure what’s happening. Nevertheless, the lack of overlap between cyber and conventional military operations makes sense operationally and strategically. This is not to say that the informational focus of cyber operations has no effect on military operations. Good intelligence isessential for successin any military conflict.
We believe Russia is likely to continue conducting information campaigns to influence Ukrainians, its domestic public, and international audiences. Russia is also likely to seek to further penetrate Ukrainian networks to access information that potentially assists its military operations. But because cyber operations have not been thoroughly integrated into its military campaigns so far, cyber operations are likely to continue playing a secondary role in the conflict.
Article byNadiya Kostyuk, Assistant Professor of Public Policy,Georgia Institute of TechnologyandErik Gartzke, Professor of Political Science,University of California San Diego
This article is republished fromThe Conversationunder a Creative Commons license. Read theoriginal article.
Story byThe Conversation
An independent news and commentary website produced by academics and journalists.An independent news and commentary website produced by academics and journalists.
Get the TNW newsletter
Get the most important tech news in your inbox each week.
