[UNOCT] The fight against cyberterrorism: How far is too far?

Written by Ars Technica


“Is terrorism inevitable? Judging based on the world and its current state, the answer is without a doubt, yes.” 


An increasingly interconnected world may mean an increasingly high occurrence of cyberterrorist events.   [Image source: Adobe Stock]


As the UN Office of Counter-Terrorism (UNOCT) convened for their first committee session of the day; and as delegates began to make their speeches, it soon became clear that the UNOCT was off to an inspiringly enthusiastic start. Russian Colonel-General Igor Sirotkin advocated strongly for more decisive counter-terrorism measures due to the inevitable nature of terrorist attacks, a sentiment echoed by the majority of the UNOCT.



United We Stand, Divided We Fall


Right off the bat, delegates from prominent countries began to stress the importance of international cooperation. Malaysian Commissioner Zamri bin Yahya told the committee that regardless of nationality or country, everyone would be equally hurt by terrorism and as such ought to contribute their full effort towards the cause of counter-terrorism. 


A Technological Era


In a decisive move, Brigadier General Zakariyya Mansoor of the Maldives took ahold of council debate and urged its members to focus on the issue of cyberterrorism first before moving on to tackle bioterrorism. “Cyber attacks are much more frequent and much harder to safeguard against,” he urged, “especially because they’re not physical.” 


Convinced, the UNOCT moved forward in a full consensus, to begin with the issue of cyberterrorism first.



The Least of These


As the UNOCT began to discuss internal cybersecurity, a key concern soon grew to large to be ignored. How would less economically developed countries (commonly referred to as LEDCs) keep up with their First World counterparts? 


The UNOCT soon decided that it would be unfair to expect the same level of technological infrastructure from these LEDCs, and concluded that the best solution would be to have more economically developed countries (MEDCs) support LEDCs economically, with the reasoning that a robust cybersecurity network would benefit all member states of the UNOCT.


However, not everyone was satisfied with this proposal. In a firmly worded press release, the Director of Nadav Argaman of Israel stated:


 “This is a dog-eat-dog world and society. A country not implementing measures to combat cyberterrorism is their own bad. It would harm their country, not anyone else's. Same with the idea of MEDCs helping out LEDCs. Being realistic, most MEDCs would only help if there was a benefit with helping that country. They wouldn't simply waste their money and resources helping out a country out of good will.”


It remains to be seen how the delegates who proposed this policy will respond.





Trouble in Paradise


Unfortunately, while committee debate started off with cheerful cooperation, tensions soon grew as the UNOCT began to focus on the details of their proposals. 


The technological task force proposed by Canadian Director-General Jennifer Loten was soon criticised due to worries of sovereignty, while the authoritarian cybersecurity policies of some UNOCT member states, such as China, were heavily critiqued by certain delegates, namely Executive Director Abby Johnson, of America.


This turn of events was certainly worrying, but there is still a possibility that the delegates of the UNOCT will manage to use their time to reach a compromise.



A Rose By Any Other Name


The delegates of the UNOCT soon grew troubled when the delegate of Germany pointed out that the council had not even begun to define the term of “terrorism”. As of now, there is no official United Nations definition for the term, a fact which has been a significant hindrance to the harmonisation of counter-terrorism measures of UNOCT member states.


However, there is still hope that the UNOCT will be able to come to an agreement regarding this issue. If they succeed in doing so, it will be a much-needed step forward in the field of cooperative counter-terrorism.



What Comes Next


While the UNOCT enjoyed a smooth start to their discussions, they have now found themselves facing much more troubled waters. However, they have also made notable progress in their discussion of cyberterrorism. One can only hope that the two opposing blocs formed within the UNOCT will be able to reconcile their differences enough to establish a framework for action against global terrorism. After all, that is what the UNOCT was founded for.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

[UNHCR] Exiting Afghanistan: Biden’s Big Blunder

Written by Wall Street Journal Upon American troops’ evacuation from Afghanistan, Kunduz and other provincial capitals fell to the Taliban within just 48 hours. On April 14, 2:29PM, President Biden announced that “more and endless American military force could not create or sustain a durable Afghan government”. A bold claim, especially since following American troops’ evacuation from Afghanistan, Kunduz and other provincial capitals proceeded to fall to the Taliban within a mere 48 hours. Biden’s controversial decision to pull out American troops from Afghanistan was not received well internationally, with news agencies such as BBC and NPR  stating that “As Kabul falls, Biden backlash grows” and that “Republicans were scathing about the White House’s actions, and Democrats, while acknowledging that President Biden was carrying out the policies of his predecessor, criticized the haphazard manner of the U.S. withdrawal.” In addition, how relinquishing a large amount of support from A...
Read more

[G20] A Delicious Outcome for Food Security

Written by Daily Mail After yet another day of productive discussions, the council of G20 has achieved not one, but multiple agreements and articles, a feat that may seem far-fetched to other councils. Amongst the agreements and discussions said, some key ideas stood out more than others, such as technology that is more sustainable and efficient, together with the use of genetic engineering. Creations of various different aids and funds have also pushed the council to greater heights, ensuring that the council progresses forward as a whole. The council plans to use “a kind of genetic engineering, which is a kind of controversial, as the GMO that we currently have at the moment”, as said by the delegate of Italy, who claims to be the unofficials spokesperson of the G20, alongside the delegate of Spain. The delegate of Italy also stated that, “the council believes that research into mutated genesis will be extremely beneficial in reducing the impact of climate change going forward”, in a...
Read more

[UNCTAD] No More Silence

Written by RT      RT has interviewed the Delegates of New Zealand and the United States of America to better understand their viewpoints regarding the mitigation of fallouts of the US-China Trade War.      RT chose to interview the Delegate of New Zealand based on her claim that the Trade War has not created a great impact on its nation. However, New Zealand also believes in shifting away from the US and China as economic powers.      The Delegate of the USA has remained relatively silent during the council sessions. As one of the large countries in question, RT hopes to find out more about the views of the US regarding the damage they have caused due to the Trade Wars. But can we really stop the silence? Q: To the delegate of New Zealand, you have mentioned that the US-China Trade War has minimal consequences on your nation, so why would you be willing to incur high administrative costs to diversify your supply chain? A: “By switching suppl...
Read more