Subversion, cyber operations, and reverse structural power in world politics

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Lennart Maschmeyer
{"title":"Subversion, cyber operations, and reverse structural power in world politics","authors":"Lennart Maschmeyer","doi":"10.1177/13540661221117051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Russian-sponsored influence campaign targeting the 2016 US Presidential Elections surprised policy-makers and scholars, highlighting a gap in theories of (cyber) power. Russia had used information technologies to project power, yet more subtly than prevailing militarized conceptions of cyber power predicted. Rather than causing damage and disruption, it turned sources of American power into vulnerabilities. Recent scholarship emphasizes this mechanism’s technological novelty. Instead, I argue this campaign demonstrated the importance of an undertheorized instrument of power: subversion. Integrating Intelligence scholarship and International Relations theory, this article develops an innovative theory of subversion as reverse structural power. Structural power shapes structures of interaction and the capacities of structural positions to the benefit of the holder of such power. Subversion reverses these benefits into harms. It exploits vulnerabilities in structures to secretly manipulate them, leveraging the capacities of structural positions to produce outcomes neither expected nor intended by the holders of structural power. Traditional subversion targets social structures, while cyber operations target sociotechnical structures: namely, Information Communications Technologies (ICTs) embedded in modern societies. The targeted structures differ, yet both rely on subversive techniques of exploitation that reverse structural power. Cyber operations are means of subversion. This theory helps explain two unresolved issues in cybersecurity: the capability–vulnerability paradox and the outsize role of non-state actors. Finally, I demonstrate the theory’s utility in a plausibility probe, examining the 2016 Election Interference Campaign. It shows this campaign did not use new “weapons,” but rather integrated traditional and sociotechnical means of subversion.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"29 1","pages":"79 - 103"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221117051","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The Russian-sponsored influence campaign targeting the 2016 US Presidential Elections surprised policy-makers and scholars, highlighting a gap in theories of (cyber) power. Russia had used information technologies to project power, yet more subtly than prevailing militarized conceptions of cyber power predicted. Rather than causing damage and disruption, it turned sources of American power into vulnerabilities. Recent scholarship emphasizes this mechanism’s technological novelty. Instead, I argue this campaign demonstrated the importance of an undertheorized instrument of power: subversion. Integrating Intelligence scholarship and International Relations theory, this article develops an innovative theory of subversion as reverse structural power. Structural power shapes structures of interaction and the capacities of structural positions to the benefit of the holder of such power. Subversion reverses these benefits into harms. It exploits vulnerabilities in structures to secretly manipulate them, leveraging the capacities of structural positions to produce outcomes neither expected nor intended by the holders of structural power. Traditional subversion targets social structures, while cyber operations target sociotechnical structures: namely, Information Communications Technologies (ICTs) embedded in modern societies. The targeted structures differ, yet both rely on subversive techniques of exploitation that reverse structural power. Cyber operations are means of subversion. This theory helps explain two unresolved issues in cybersecurity: the capability–vulnerability paradox and the outsize role of non-state actors. Finally, I demonstrate the theory’s utility in a plausibility probe, examining the 2016 Election Interference Campaign. It shows this campaign did not use new “weapons,” but rather integrated traditional and sociotechnical means of subversion.
颠覆,网络行动,以及世界政治中的逆结构力量
俄罗斯发起的针对2016年美国总统大选的影响力运动令决策者和学者感到惊讶,突显了(网络)权力理论的差距。俄罗斯曾利用信息技术投射力量,但比流行的网络力量军事化概念预测的要微妙。它没有造成破坏和混乱,而是将美国的力量来源变成了脆弱性。最近的学术研究强调了这种机制的技术新颖性。相反,我认为这场运动表明了一种理论不足的权力工具的重要性:颠覆。本文将情报学与国际关系理论相结合,提出了一种创新的颠覆性反结构力量理论。结构性权力塑造了相互作用的结构和结构性职位的能力,有利于这种权力的持有者。颠覆将这些好处转化为危害。它利用结构中的脆弱性来秘密操纵它们,利用结构职位的能力来产生结构权力持有者既不期望也不打算产生的结果。传统颠覆以社会结构为目标,而网络行动以社会技术结构为目标:即嵌入现代社会的信息通信技术。目标结构各不相同,但两者都依赖于颠覆性的剥削技术来逆转结构力量。网络行动是颠覆的手段。这一理论有助于解释网络安全中两个尚未解决的问题:能力-脆弱性悖论和非国家行为者的巨大作用。最后,我在一项合理性调查中展示了该理论的效用,该调查考察了2016年的选举干预运动。这表明这场运动没有使用新的“武器”,而是融合了传统和社会技术的颠覆手段。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
8.80%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: The European Journal of International Relations publishes peer-reviewed scholarly contributions across the full breadth of the field of International Relations, from cutting edge theoretical debates to topics of contemporary and historical interest to scholars and practitioners in the IR community. The journal eschews adherence to any particular school or approach, nor is it either predisposed or restricted to any particular methodology. Theoretically aware empirical analysis and conceptual innovation forms the core of the journal’s dissemination of International Relations scholarship throughout the global academic community. In keeping with its European roots, this includes a commitment to underlying philosophical and normative issues relevant to the field, as well as interaction with related disciplines in the social sciences and humanities. This theoretical and methodological openness aims to produce a European journal with global impact, fostering broad awareness and innovation in a dynamic discipline. Adherence to this broad mandate has underpinned the journal’s emergence as a major and independent worldwide voice across the sub-fields of International Relations scholarship. The Editors embrace and are committed to further developing this inheritance. Above all the journal aims to achieve a representative balance across the diversity of the field and to promote deeper understanding of the rapidly-changing world around us. This includes an active and on-going commitment to facilitating dialogue with the study of global politics in the social sciences and beyond, among others international history, international law, international and development economics, and political/economic geography. The EJIR warmly embraces genuinely interdisciplinary scholarship that actively engages with the broad debates taking place across the contemporary field of international relations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信