Article 5 and the Baltics
I just went out for a run, and despite this being the most perfect city for running I've ever seen--no people, no cars, no allergens, no hazards, cool weather, endless beautiful running paths by the sea--I was the only runner out there except for Anonymous Guy From the Pentagon. I met him because of course I got lost (you'd think if you ran along the coast, that couldn't happen, but apparently it can). I asked him for directions; he said he was running my way, so we ran a while together. He didn't tell me his name and I didn't ask. And yes, this kind of thing only happens to me, but that's because I go looking for it.
Anyway: Remember how last week I noted the Pentagon's not-so-veiled warning to hackers? Seems there's a subtlety to this story I missed. In 2007, Estonia was massively cyber-attacked following a dustup over the relocation of a Soviet war memorial:
A three-week wave of massive cyber-attacks on the small Baltic country of Estonia, the first known incidence of such an assault on a state, is causing alarm across the western alliance, with NATO urgently examining the offensive and its implications.
While Russia and Estonia are embroiled in their worst dispute since the collapse of the Soviet Union, a row that erupted at the end of last month over the Estonians' removal of the Bronze Soldier Soviet war memorial in central Tallinn, the country has been subjected to a barrage of cyber warfare, disabling the websites of government ministries, political parties, newspapers, banks, and companies.
And last week, the head of EUCOM noted that a team of cyber security experts had just concluded a “strategic assessment” of Latvia.
Now, we all know what the ambiguously-worded but highly important Article 5 says, don't we?
The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
So, you tell me: The Pentagon has just told the world that if you take down our power grid, we may put a missile down your smokestack. And supposedly, an attack on any member of NATO is an attack on all of NATO.
What do you think: We all know NATO's not going to be putting a missile down a Muscovite smokestack over a cyber-attack on Latvia. I mean, come on.
But as Anonymous Pentagon Guy asked--and I'm guessing the question did not come out of nowhere--what is the appropriate response? You can't really just ignore that, can you?
- Comment (9)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
Comments :
May '11
Re: Article 5 and the Baltics
Our Cold War response to Soviet stunts was the "proportional response". Intended to take an eye for an eye, but careful not to escalate. The old Cold War approaches were frequently miss-applied (especially by the Left) in cases where the problem didn't have the ability to provoke Armageddon. A matched cyber-attack on a single Russian facility or project should send the appropriate message.
Aug '10
Re: Article 5 and the Baltics
The Russian invasion of Georgia was also preluded with a cyber attack.... which belies the notion that it was in response to Georgian attacks on seperatists.
Claire, this is the reason that the new NATO cyber security center is established in Estonia.
The US is simply extending the doctrine of proportional response to cyberspace, asserting that the US reserves the right to respond assymetrically (via a different medium).
May '10
Re: Article 5 and the Baltics
Claire, buy a small gps. It allows you to wander randomly around an unknown city and still have a fair idea of where you are, even if it doesn't have a built-in map. I used one in Rome and wandered for hours.
Abolish NATO.
Dec '10
Re: Article 5 and the Baltics
As a Ricochet member with family in and around Riga, I just want to see I'm tickled to even see Latvia in a post.
And, as much as it pains me to say it, I also concur that NATO should be abolished. A cyber-attack on Estonia or Latvia should be met with a shrug from the US. And, perhaps, flying a few hacker advisers on over to help the Estonians and/or Latvians devise their own stuxnet response which they each diplomatically 'own.'
Feb '10
Re: Article 5 and the Baltics
We hired a developer from Estonia as a consultant for a bit last year. Excellent technical skills.
Unfortunately, we lost his full-time contributions when he decided to go back to school to get a master's degree in... cyber warfare defense. At the time I thought it was a bit arcane, a very narrow niche-- but of course, interesting if you are into that kind of thing.
Now I understand a bit more of the background on why this would be big in Estonia.
Edited on Jun 5, 2011 at 6:46amFeb '10
Re: Article 5 and the Baltics
From the looks of it, we may be needing to fly a few hacker advisers from Estonia over to help us in the future.
What goes around, comes around. Don't be so hasty to cut alliances.
Apr '11
Re: Article 5 and the Baltics
Claire, I have a few thoughts on the first paragraph. Do you think that there is little running in Istanbul because everyone is too busy smoking for such a healthy activity? Having lived in Eastern Europe before (if you'll generalize Istanbul into Eastern Europe for me) and seen the voracious appetite for all things tobacco, I just can't picture them - or the characters of Mad Men for that matter - going out for a nice run on a Sunday afternoon. In my mind because it's just not apart of the culture, and running usually isn't the greatest activity for smokers. I could be way off base, but I picture the rise of American running to be an inverse relationship with the decline of cigarette smoking. Not sure if the two fit so neatly together, but I think they are definitely related.
Apr '11
Re: Article 5 and the Baltics
Revision to my post above. Just saw that you were in the Baltic states after all! I think my points are still valid, just scratch Istanbul and sub in any predominantly smoking culture.
Dec '10
Re: Article 5 and the Baltics
Busy System Admin
From the looks of it, we may be needing to fly a few hacker advisers from Estonia over to help us in the future.
What goes around, comes around. Don't be so hasty to cut alliances. · Jun 5 at 6:48am
Excellent point. But we can certainly have a treaty with the Baltic States *without* that anachronism NATO.