Copyright © 2009 by Chester B Cabalza. All Rights Reserved.
This paper was presented by Chester B. Cabalza, during the 2nd Singapore Graduate Forum on Southeast Asia Studies of the Asia Research Institute of the National University of Singapore, on 26-27 July 2007, at the NUS, Bukit Timah Campus.
Introduction
The twenty-first century has beckoned the rapid and massive importance of the information age. The boom of the Internet, Information and Communication Technology (ICT) system, wireless and 3G technologies have indeed inescapably transformed today and tomorrow’s pace of living. The birth of the dotcom era, likewise decongests and shrinks the world into a global village. In effect, terrorists have learned and acquired the technology, and exploit it as a weapon of destruction in its pursuit to use cyberterrorism.
As information and communication technologies continue to invade and pervade human life; the risks for cyberterrorism, without doubt, will continue to grow. Certainly the use of technology in cyberterrorists attacks is plausible. Our very global way of life depends on the secure and safe operations of critical systems that depend on cyberspace. Ensuring cyber security requires a high degree of competency and technical expertise from concerned agencies. Likewise, on the part of cyber users who frequently enter the realm of cyberzones as part of their daily routines, should be cautioned by becoming targets of cyberterrorists.
Cyberspace has led to some government and private experts to conclude that terrorists are at the threshold of using the Internet as a direct instrument of bloodshed. The new threat bears little resemblance to familiar financial disruptions by hackers for viruses and worms. American Intelligence reports that this capability is used for communicating with terrorist cells in Southeast Asia as well as throughout the world for gathering and mining intelligence on potential targets, spreading propaganda and recruiting.
A primary cause of alarm is the reality that cyberterrorism is another tool of destruction as are explosives and other deadly weapons. Furthermore, the resources to launch a cyber attack are very easy to access and one may not even know that the attack has taken place until only sometime after it was launched.
The perceived notion that terrorist groups may employ IT as useful medium does not robotically mean that information infrastructure will constitute the next target. For terrorists to exploit it, extended use and familiarization with technology is a necessary step before deciding to turn against their enemies.
In the process of acquiring and learning the use of IT for strategic and organizational purposes, cyberterrorists will more likely apply it as an offensive weapon to destroy and disrupt.
Contending Definitions of Terrorism and Cyberterrorism
Terrorism (Vorobieva: 2002) is a multi-faceted phenomenon. It contains political, legal, psychological, philosophical, historical, technological and other components. Terrorism constitutes the illegitimate use of force and is premeditated, deliberate, systematic murder, mayhem, and threatening of the innocent to create fear and intimidation in order to gain a political or tactical advantage, usually to influence an audience, as articulated by Walter Lacquer and James Poland.
On the other hand, cyberterrorism is any premeditated, politically motivated attack against information, computer systems, computer programs, and data that results in violence against non-combatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents.
In my own personal view, terrorism resembles an iceberg, with the tip of shocking attacks, e.g. cyberterrorism, and with the base of multidisciplinary issues like religious radicalization and poverty. To annihilate and wipe out an iceberg, one must destroy it from the base. Similarly, terrorism should be properly addressed by resolving the issues that support the tip.
Cyberterrorism Threats in Southeast Asia
In Southeast Asia, audio-visual, print and especially the Internet have now emerged as the principal medium to disseminate jihadi ideologies and as tools for recruitment. For example, al Qaeda documents and training CDs have been found in Thai Islamic schools. Given this scenario, the propagation of malicious websites, unregulated Internet access, and basically the use of IT has led government experts and some scholars to document and understand this explosive phenomenon.
Furthermore, this paper shall categorically contribute to the study of cyberterrorism and its implications to the growing issues of international terrorism and globalization. It will fill in gaps of research on cyberterrorism in Southeast Asia. Also, it will certainly address issues and concerns within the region that needs to be studied for future and further researches.
In Southeast Asia, domestic terrorism overlaps with global terrorism that often exploits local grievances and resentments. The symbolic repercussions of terrorism can mine root causes ranging from hatred, discrimination, loose policies, poverty, and religious fundamentalism.
Hence, the resilience of terrorist groups in the region comes from robust networking among fundamentalist groups using the cyberspace as mode of communication, recruitment, logistics and operations.
Cyberterrorism and Globalization
There are many authors who have written extensively on the course of globalization and international terrorism. But Thomas Friedman (2005), N. Jayaram (2002), and Benedict Anderson (1983) are three interesting scholars who apparently caught my attention and keenly used their bright ideas as primary sources in writing my related literature and theoretical framework for this paper. Their insights are very strong in addressing and narrating the current course of history in our post-modern society, paving a great way into a more global and inter-connected society where the wisdom or knowledge are merited in a competitive world of Information Technology (IT).
There are western and few Asian authors that should be given magnitude, especially in enlightening me of their discourses about broad concepts like globalization (Blassof 2002; N. Jayaram 2002; Hague & Harrop 2004; Friedman 2005), terrorism and cyberterrorism (Quarles 2000; Denning 2000; Simon 2001; Rolfe 2002; Rosario 2002; Vorobieva 2002; Abuza 2003, Buzan & Waever 2003, Collin 2003, Banlaoi 2004; Dillon 2004, Khan 2004; Friedman 2005); and “imagined-community” (Anderson 1983; N. Jayaram 2002).
The initial theoretical framework that comes to my mind into understanding terrorism vis a vis cyberterrorism, as one of its branches is the underlying factor that Anderson's historical examination of the concoction of nationalism seems to have merits. However, he leaves open the idea that it is an ongoing and dynamic process. His framework lays the foundation for future examinations of "imagined communities" in new forms, especially when his popularized notion of “imagined communities” could be transformed into a virtual reality whereas the incursion of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) via the borders of cyberspace is now being felt.
It is a fact that today, we are all functioning in a world fundamentally characterized by objects in motion. There is a tremendous mobility brought about by globalization where immense flood of capital, ideas, labor, profits and technology are rapidly moving across the four bounds of the earth. The explosive growth of cyber cafés in the so-called new economy and wisdom market affirm the net’s comfy uses and trendy functions that permit dissemination of any kind of data through images, music, speech, text and video. It surmounts distance and pays scant regard to territorial boundaries. But sad to say, with cheap accessibility for all, cyberterrorists can now gauge the opportunities to wave and secure publicity. Their superior aptitude for technologies offers them advanced prospects to shape and control the content of their websites and manipulate the images and texts of their foes.
The appalling side of the Internet is the quiet emergence of hundreds of uncensored websites that cling to radicalism and rampant disinformation that entice cyber users to join cyberterrorists in their war. Recruiters exploit the medium of interactive Internet technology to wander in online chat rooms, searching for fellow brethren to sympathize with their cause and ideologies. Knowing the strengths of any terrorist groups, especially in their grand mission to instill fright to sundry citizens and cyber users. It could also cause economic mess for countries that turn against them. As seen by some analysts, since the Information Superhighway trespasses a country’s sovereignty, given that there is little regulation on the Internet; cyber attackers can mete out wide-scale reparations, malicious and damaging softwares that ultimately would create havoc without fear of prosecution.
Beyond all these perks for cyber attackers in the countenance of Internet’s viability to merge together comrades in brotherhood - be it ethnic, political and religious in nature; it has also created a new forum for worldwide information warfare and a novel force in transforming today’s geopolitics in a globalizing transborder universe. Without much ado, cyberterrorists will grab every opportunities and issues to foster their ideals in the net’s increasing bastion of freedom of expression that will resonate effectively with their own fellows and supporters.
The consequence of ‘virtual global community’ influx bridged by the supreme netscape paves a way for every cyber users to empathize with their own roots and cultures. For instance, as ably articulated by Friedman, the Internet would help coagulate the revival of Muslim identity and solidarity with Muslims in one country much able to see and commiserate with the struggles of their brethren in another country. With the Internet’s free flowing information, it would certainly indoctrinate a curious brethren who has access to a jihadi website. At the end, it would be graceful gain for a terrorist as he espouses the objectives of the group; especially if the group he wants to belong to suffers extreme profiling and marginalization against the ‘Others’. Indeed, this ‘virtual global community’ has an appeal to younger generations who may have entrée and exposure to seditious information through the Internet, cable or satellite TV where images and texts are potent sources for propaganda and wiles to spread out terror. This gives them various options to post and spread prisms of terrorism.
Precisely, in this age where ideology or ideas have a very powerful way of shaping a person’s cognition, facilitating the person to adopt pseudo-personality. The terrorist groups exert authoritative persuasion over their members. The sense of belonging and exclusivity diminishes the individual’s personal and moral judgment. This is the power that can make violence against the perceived enemy not just acceptable but necessary. As the new ambassadors of political and religious fundamentalism, they can stimulate or carry out attacks by summoning and undermining loose policies of the “Others” that don’t subscribe to their cause at the expense of their own beliefs and welfare. Their apparent angst are either posted in jihadi websites or disseminated through CD-ROMs.
The fluidity of cyberspace absorbed by the ‘virtual global community’ could succumb further tension and deepen international debate due to escalating schism and difference among conflicting groups.
Government and Private Vulnerability
It would not be surprising, if by all means government official websites usually hosted by sometimes sloppy private industry Internet Service Providers (ISP) could increase espionage from cyberterrorists and cause massive electronic attacks due to lack of security mechanisms on computer systems. Besides violations can occur when an unauthorized user illegally accesses network computers that are forbidden to access. There’s a leeway that cyberterrorists could scythe critical and vital military, commercial or monetary institutions from remote locations to disrupt the free world’s defense and communications systems. Possibly, attackers could hack into computer systems for information gathering or data altering, sabotage, and installing malicious codes. These malicious codes may be distorted in the form of Trojans, worms, and viruses. There are also Deadly Distributed Denial of Service (DdoS) attacks which employ “zombie” machines that are controlled by a master server. It has the ability for taking down entire networks.
Meanwhile, cyberterrorists could also apply information hiding by means of stegonography where one can simply take one piece of information and hides it with another picture or document. This well-planned strategy could cripple infrastructures and bug down key government sites and services. Cyberterrorists have the clout to destroy and disrupt critical infrastructures in split seconds. With just the hit of a keystroke, one can send a fatal blow by simply sitting in his armchair, from thousand of miles away. That could wreak greater threats to a wider gamut of annihilation from a mere nuisance to larger national security problem.
Therefore, in reality there exist scores of cyberterrorists that I would like to call them as cyber bugs because they keep on distracting the stream of Information Superhighway. There are also fears escalating among experts that countries may be progressively vulnerable to major attack by hackers and cyber bugs. They consider that both civil and military institutions, as well as key companies, are in danger of a cyber attack – possibly as a ground for terrorist attack on the country or simply as a challenge for expert young computer geeks. They need to be halted; albeit their mushrooming websites couldn’t be prohibited because with all due respect, they are accorded with all the rights and privileges to engage in the cyberspace; in whatever means there is. So, the initial course to silently crash these cyber bugs is to write laws on terrorism and give teeth to decrees that would cover cyberterrorism.
I exactly remember the case of a Filipino cyber geek who created the famed “I Love You” bug that rapidly troubled the fall of London stock market when it was accidentally launched and drove controversies worldwide. At that time, there was no available Philippine criminal cyber law to prosecute the accused. But that circumstance ignited the brilliant minds of our lawmakers to consider writing laws on cyber crimes.
The problem with jurisdictional and lack of laws in some countries may impede investigations. But once a government, and also a regional bloc, e.g. the ASEAN, enacts agreements in countering terrorism; the task of enforcing rules would legitimize the prosecution and extradition of criminals vis a vis terrorists in a current deterritorialized community. Cyberterrorism is now being fought at the international level and recently the UN formed Counter Terrorism Committee responsible for coordinating cyberterrorism-related response and information exchange. Meanwhile, our prosecutors and lawyers need not only learn cyberterrorism laws but they must also be trained conscientiously to ride with the use of fast-changing fads of technology and the many surprises of the Internet.
In a flat world as described by Thomas Friedman; in his metaphor to imply the “playing field is flat” in a competitive sense; blazes up the dissertation that local connects with global vis a vis global affects local will certainly influence the internationalization and mainstreaming of terrorism blended with political and religious zeal based from robust networking empowered by the revolution of the ICT.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Southeast Asia provides a topography that makes it clear to conduct terrorist operations, with features such as thousand of small islands, very large, difficult-to-patrol coastline, and some large land areas that are only tenuously under the control of central governments.
Since the cyber infrastructures apparently affect worldwide security and lifestyles of cyber users, the world is flatly decongested. In a scenario like this, issues of globalization and nationalistic uprisings of peoples with various faiths and ideologies may impinge on the complex issue of global terrorism where terrorists now engage on the use of the cyberspace as a convenient mode to ebb fear and disrupt.
In a region like Southeast Asia, which has experienced various faces and prisms of terrorism, it is necessary for the region’s most diverse nation-states to have a cyber security coordination center and forge agreements based from the following recommendations:
1. Build cooperation and networks for intelligence reports among ASEAN countries.
2. Engage in government and private cooperation.
3. Intensive research on the security of the region’s infostructures.
4. Minimize duplication of efforts.
5. Organize fora for stakeholders (e.g. enforcers, prosecutors and cyber users).
6. Undertake the collection and analysis of cyber security related information.
Hence, the government and private industry cooperation and international treatises are necessary, mainly because:
1. Cyberterrorism is multi-jurisdictional and cuts across border.
2. It increases and ignites high-awareness level on cyberterrorism.
3. Law enforcement is hampered by lack of private cooperation.
4. Very few treatise or conventions that address computer crimes across borders exist today.
Since, terrorism is multi-dimensional, social problems should also be prescribed to resolve social ills that undermine national, regional and global security. Hence, it is necessary to address issues by:
1. Educating the minors who frequently use the Internet to spread peace and understanding instead of hatred and war campaigns.
2. Sustainable development and livelihood in communities where terrorist are based to eradicate poverty.
With the help and presence of cyberspace to virtually merge together the borderless zones of the region through ICT and the Internet, fighting cyberterrorism has become a daunting task among the governments of Southeast Asian states. Since cyberterrorists are at the stage of familiarization and comprehensive use of these cutting-edged technologies in their own gains, on the other side of the coin, law enforcers and government authorities must as well acquire the knowledge and enact laws to cope with the changing times and the fast advancement of technology in a flat and globalizing world.
The big leap was made by ASEAN leaders with the signing of the ASEAN Convention on Counter Terrorism will optimistically help prosecute terrorist and cyberterrorists to its full extent and for governments to exchange intelligence and extradite suspected terrorists in a borderless regional bloc.
At the end, proper handling of terrorism related information through the use of various cyber investigative techniques is very significant to help eliminate or reduce such threats. Sustained training programs on cyberterrorism among governments of Southeast Asia will be helpful to continuously develop and improve the competency and skills of law enforcers in confronting such threats in the region.
References
Abuza, Zacharya. (2003). Militant Islam in Southeast Asia: Crucible of Terror. Lynne Rienner.
Aguilar, Carmencita. ed. (2002). Political Culture and Globalization. International Federation of Social Science Organizations, Manila: CSSP Publication.
Anderson, Benedict, (1983). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, London: Verso.
Banlaoi, Rommel C. (2004). War on Terrorism in Southeast Asia, Manila: Rex Book Store, Inc.
Beech, Hannah. (2007). “A Call To Prayer” Time Magazine, 5 March 2007 issue, p.17.
Josef Blazof. (2002). Political Culture and Globalization, In Carmencita T Aguilar, Political Culture and Globalization. International Federation of Social Science Organizations (IFFSO), CSSP Publication, Quezon City: Philippines.
Buzan, B., and Waever, O., (2003). Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security, Cambridge University Press.
Collins A., (2003). Security and Southeast Asia: Domestic, Regional and Global Issues. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
Denning, D. (2000), Cyberterrorism, http://www.cs.georgetown.edu/~denning/infosec/cyberterror-GD.doc, accessed on 16 January 2007.
_________. (2000) Activism, Hacktivism, and Cyberterrorism: The Internet as a Tool for Influencing Foreign Policy, http://www.nautilus.org/info-policy/workshop/papers/denning.html, accessed on 16 January 2007.
Diaz de Rivera, Tim M., (2004). An Overview of Cyberterrorism: New Facts and Lessons Learned, Power Point Presentation, 3rd Advanced Disaster Management Training Course, 3-6 May 2004, Honor Hall, National Defense College of the Philippines, Academic Row, Camp Aguinaldo, Quezon City, Philippines.
Dillon, D., (2004) Southeast Asia and the Brotherhood of Terrorism, Washington: The Heritage Foundation.
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), http://www.crime-research.org/articles/putting_cyberterrorism/, accessed on 16 January 2007.
Hague, Rod and Harrop, Martin. (2004). Comparative Government and Politics: An Introduction, 6th Edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies and Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism, US Department of State. (12-13 April 2006), Terrorism in Southeast Asia: The Threat and Response, Report of an International Conference. Singapore.
Friedman, Thomas L., (2005). The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Khan, Muqtedar M.A., (2004). Teaching Globalization in the Era of Terrorism, USA: University of Richmond.
Lewis, J.A., (2002) Assessing the Risk of Cyberterrorism, Cyber war and other Cyber threats, Center for Strategic and International Studies, http://www.csis.org/tech/0211_lewis.pdf, accessed on 16 January 2007.
Manalo, Rosario G., (2002). Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and the Fight Against Terrorism. Quezon City, Philippines: National Security Review, Volume XX Number 1, NDCP
N. Jayaram. (2000). Globalization, Cyberspace, and Culture: Deterritorialised Community and Imagined Civilisation (The Case of Indian Diaspora), In Carmencita T Aguilar, Political Culture and Globalization, International Federation of Social Science Organizations (IFFSO). Quezon City: Philippines: CSSP Publication.
Simon, Sheldon W. (2002). “Southeast Asia and the US War on Terrorism”, NBR Analysis Vol. 13 No.4.
Quarles, Chester L., (2000). Terrorism: Avoidance and Survival. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America.
Rolfe, Jim. (2002). “Security in Southeast Asia: It’s not about the war on terrorism,” Asia Pacific Center for Security Studies.
Tay, Simon C., (2001). East Asia After 11 Sept. (paper delivered at the Opening Plenary Session of the World Economic Forum, East Asia Summit held in Hong Kong on 29 October 2001).
US Department of State, Washington D. C., and the US Embassy Manila (22 May – 2 June 2006), Investigating Cyber Terrorism (A Training Manual), in cooperation with the National Defense College of the Philippines.
Vorobieva, L., (2002). International Co-operation in the Fight Against Terrorism, In Noor, E., and Hassan, M., (eds.), Terrorism: Perspective for the Asia Pacific, 11th Meeting of the CSCAP Working Group on Comprehensive and Co-operative Security, Malaysia: Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS).
No comments:
Post a Comment