Collateral Damage

In an era of antiseptic war, one fought with drones and precision weapons that limit to an amazing degree the collateral damage done by these limited strikes executed during very limited conflicts, we’ve gotten spoiled. We expect war generally to be antiseptic.

And our “leaders” in DC have gotten spoiled, too.

Several large-scale cyberattacks in recent months have prompted a number of lawmakers and policy makers to call for a more forceful response, including suggestions that the US engage in counterattacks that would disable or limit the culprits’ own networks.

But White House officials and some technology security experts remain skeptical that such “offensive” cyberattacks would work, saying they are concerned about the difficulty in targeting specific hackers without causing widespread spillover, among other things.

And so, in the face of this wide-open cyber war being waged against us, these White House officials and those “some others” insist that we do nothing, since what we would do would be imperfect and cause collateral damage.

…cybersecurity experts are mostly split on the merits of retaliation, with some saying it could distract companies from doing more to prevent breaches.

Because defense and offense cannot possibly be carried out simultaneously. Yeah.

Bob Gourley, late of the Defense Intelligence Agency:

Once the planners and everyone looks [into retaliation], it puts it on an escalation ladder we don’t want to be on. The first thing we need to do is protect our systems. Until we do that, we’re almost inviting them to attack, saying “Come on, take our stuff.”

Wait, what? You’re saying that after years of suffering cyberattacks from Russia, the People’s Republic of China, northern Korea, Iran, individuals, you still haven’t bothered to “protect our systems?” How does that work, exactly?

 

Certainly collateral damage should be limited to the extent possible, from both moral and efficiency perspectives. But this is war. Collateral damage is part of the messiness of war. If we let our fear of collateral damage paralyze us, we will lose the war, with catastrophic consequences to us, completely subsuming any collateral damage done us by this war.

It’s for those who sit in leadership chairs in DC to stop wasting their energy looking for excuses to do nothing and instead direct their energy to responding. Forcefully. As tidily as possible, but with recognition that there will be messes, sometimes big ones.

That response must include actually defending our systems, and it must include correcting this failure:

Businesses are largely prohibited by law from a practice known as “hack back,” which could either be done to punish a cyberthief or take back information that was stolen from any specific firm. That has left companies relying on the government’s response, which so far largely has come in the form of sanctions or criminal indictments.

Is Europe Folding?

European Union foreign ministers, citing momentum behind a new peace initiative, on Monday delayed for a week the implementation of sanctions against a new group of individuals and companies in Russia and eastern Ukraine, EU officials said.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius is…hopeful:

Things are beginning—just beginning, we must be careful—to move.

Here’s how things are beginning to move: Russian-backed rebels have renewed their attacks with their objective of expanding their hold on Donetsk Oblast, and Russians and Russian-backed rebels have renewed their assault on Mariupol with the objective here to build a land bridge to Russian occupied Crimea.

In response to Congressional moves for the US—finally—to begin supplying even defensive arms to Ukraine,

Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Garcia-Margallo pleaded with Washington to maintain “unity of action” with Europe.

The honorable gentleman from Spain has misspoken: he meant to say “unity of inaction.” While Ukraine burns.

No, the only peace initiative that has any legitimacy, the only peace agreement that can have any legitimacy, is one in which Russia withdraws from Ukraine. Completely.

Europe seems unwilling to do the things necessary to achieve that.

Their Minds Are Made Up

Don’t confuse them with facts.

Congressmen John Lewis (D, GA), G.K. Butterfield (D, NC), and Earl Blumenauer (D, OR) have announced they’re going to skip out on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to the full Congress on 3 March.

Never mind that this man on the scene might have some expertise about the Middle East and the threats posed by Islamic terrorists and by Iran. President Barack Obama has given them all the wisdom they need.

Blumenauer went so far as to say

I will refuse to be part of a reckless act of political grandstanding[.]

Because gathering actual facts independently of the Democrats’ approved analysis is political grandstanding.

This cowardice, or this arrogance—your call—is inexcusable by men who play a role in determining national policy.

Remember this in the 2016 elections in their districts.

Naïve or Incompetent?

The European Union is targeting 19 individuals linked to the fighting in eastern Ukraine, including five Russians, in a new list of sanctions set for approval on Monday [9 Feb].

Yeah, that’ll show ’em.

The EU now has visa bans and asset freezes on 132 individuals and 28 entities.

This latest is in response to Russia’s and their rebels’ in Ukraine renewed offensives to expand the Donetsk Oblast territory they hold and to seize Mariupol, a key Ukrainian port on the Sea of Azov and a key city on the land bridge to Russian-occupied Crimea that Russia wants so desperately.

Never mind that these hand slaps haven’t bothered Russia’s MFWIC, Vladimir Putin. Never mind that he doesn’t think like western Europeans or Americans, and so is never likely to be bothered by the things that would bother western Europeans or Americans.

On the contrary, Russia has reacted with threats and so much sterner actions by the EU and the US are required. Unfortunately, the leaderships are too naïve or incompetent to take them. This…foolishness…is illustrated by our own Secretary of State John Kerry:

We are not interested in a proxy war. Our objective is to change Russia’s behavior[.]

All while ignoring the fact that to change Russia’s behavior, it’s necessary to (to coin a phrase) incentivize them to change their behavior: arm Ukraine so they have the wherewithal to defeat the Russian and Russian-backed rebels, drive the former out of occupied Ukraine, and recover their national integrity.

Update: The EU has chosen to delay even this latest round while French President François Hollande and German Chancellor Angela Merkel travel to Minsk, the capital of Belarus, to beg Vladimir Putin anew for peace.

Threats

Russian-backed rebels in eastern Ukraine and Russian troops there have renewed their offensive in an effort to expand their hold on the oblast of Donetsk and to seize the Ukrainian Sea of Azov port city of Mariupol as part of opening a land bridge from Russia to Russian-occupied Crimea. In response to this, western European leaders and President Barack Obama are making noises about extending existing sanctions and, perhaps, broadening them to include cutting Russia off from the international financial system. In response to this, Russia threatens.

Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said on Jan 27 that if Russia is cut off from the Swift international payment system as punishment for its actions in Ukraine, its response “will know no limits.” Andrei Kostin, the head of VTB, Russia’s second-largest bank, said excluding Russia from Swift would mean “war.” Igor Ivanov, the former foreign minister, said that a confrontation could involve nuclear weapons.

These are people with whom negotiation is impossible, with whom a negotiated withdrawal of Russia from Ukraine cannot be had.

Threats such as these should make any response impossible other than cutting Russia off from Swift, promptly. And arming Ukraine so they can defend themselves from this Russian aggression.