Contested Cyberspace and Rising Powers
2013; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 34; Issue: 6 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1080/01436597.2013.802502
ISSN1360-2241
Autores Tópico(s)Social Media and Politics
ResumoAbstract Abstract The USA developed and has therefore historically played a lead role in cyberspace. Yet rising powers, including brics , have been increasingly challenging the established regime. China and Russia submitted a joint proposal on information security to the United Nations in 2011. India, Brazil, and South Africa have been focusing on the information society since their 2003 Brasilia Declaration. These initiatives demonstrate that cyberspace has become hotly contested. However, there is still a need to explain this divergence. Are rising powers challenging the USA because of their national interests, the urge to maximise their security, or do factors such as values and political structures explain the different trajectories vis-à-vis the hegemon? This article examines the foreign policies of brics from 1995 to date, explaining the influence of different path-dependent origins, of the systemic shift and the type of political system, together with rising civil society pressure. Acknowledgement We would like to thank Thorsten Benner, Michael Brzsoka, Nico Jaspers, Caroline van Kampen, Rebecca MacKinnon, Matthew Stephen, and Oliver Stuenkel for their very helpful comments. Hannes Ebert would also like to acknowledge the support of the Volkswagen Foundation for his research. Notes 1 As demonstrated, for example, in the G8 Summit 2011 'Deauville Declaration'. 'G8 Deauville Declaration: Renewed Commitment for Freedom and Democracy', 2011, at http://www.g8.utoronto.ca/summit/2011deauville/2011-declaration-en.html, accessed 22 January 2013. See also itu, 'One third of the world's population is online', 2011, at http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/facts/2011/material/ICTFactsFigures2011.pdf, accessed 2 December 2012. 2 S Huntington, 'Culture, power, and democracy', in M Plattner & A Smolar (eds), Globalization, Power, and Democracy, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000, p 6. 3 E Sköns, 'US Military Expenditure', in: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) (ed), SIPRI Yearbook 2013: Armaments, Disarmament, and International Security, Oxford: Oxford University Press, p 135; and International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), 'Chapter Two: Comparative defence statistics', Military Balance, 113(1), p 45. 4 Recent double-digit growth rates of patent filings in many rising powers indicate strong innovation-based economic growth also for the future. See A Van Agtmael, 'Think again: the brics', Foreign Policy, 2012, at http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/10/08/think_again_the_brics?page=full, accessed 13 December 2012. On the importance of 'network power', see Daniel Flemes , 'Network powers: strategies of change in the multipolar system', Third World Quarterly, 34(6) 2013, pp 1016-36. 5 E Noss, 'A battle for the soul of the Internet', cnet News, 8 June 2005, at http://news.cnet.com/A%20battle%20for%20the%20soul%20of%20the%20Internet/2010-1071_3-5737647.html, accessed 8 March 2013. 6 O Stuenkel, 'Keep brics and ibsa separate', The Diplomat, 13 August 2012, at http://thediplomat.com/the-editor/2012/08/13/keep-the-brics-and-ibsa-seperate/, accessed 27 February 2013. 7 Most recently, brics decided to jointly construct a new submarine cable system that links their economies, which are still 'connected to each other via telecommunications hubs in Europe and the USA resulting in high costs, and the risk of potential interception of critical financial security information by non brics entities'. 'Brics cable unveiled for direct and cohesive communications services between Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa', Submarine Telecoms Forum, 16 April 2012, at http://www.subtelforum.com/articles/2012/brics-cable-unveiled-for-direct-and-cohesive-communcations-services-between-brazil-russia-india-china-and-south-africa/, accessed 18 February 2013. 8 For example, see JM Spade, China's Cyber Power and America's National Security, Philadelphia, PA: US Army War College, 2011. 9 Brazilian Ministry of External Relations, '1st ibsa Summit Declaration', 2006, at http://www.itamaraty.gov.br/temas-mais-informacoes/saiba-mais-ibas/documentos-emitidos-pelos-chefes-de-estado-e-de/1st-ibsa-summit-declaration/view, accessed 22 January 2013. 10 DM Kliman & R Fontaine, Global Swing States: Brazil, India, Indonesia, Turkey, and the Future of International Order, Washington, DC: German Marshall Fund/Center for a New American Security, 2012. 11 MD Stephen, 'Rising regional powers and international institutions: the foreign policy orientations of India, Brazil and South Africa', Global Society, 26(3), 2012, p 292. 12 JS Nye, 'Nuclear lessons for cyber security?', Strategic Studies Quarterly, Winter 2011, pp 19–20. 13 JS Nye, The Future of Power, New York: PublicAffairs, 2011, pp xv–xviii. 14 White House, Cyberspace Policy Review: Assuring a Trusted and Resilient Information and Communications Infrastructure, Washington, DC: United States Government, 2009, p 1. 15 JS Nye, Cyber Power, Cambridge, MA: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, 2010, p 3. 16 J Goldsmith & T Wu, Who Controls the Internet? Illusions of a Borderless World, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006, p 23; and J Reagle, Why the Internet Is Good, 1999, at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/archived_content/people/reagle/regulation-19990326.html, accessed 22 January 2013. 17 DW Drezner, 'The global governance of the Internet: bringing the state back in', Political Science Quarterly, 119(3), 2004, p 478. 18 Nye, Cyber Power, pp 1, 19. 19 R Deibert & R Rohozinski, 'Liberation vs control: the future of cyberspace', Journal of Democracy, 21(4), 2010, p 46. 20 ML Mueller, Networks and States: The Global Politics of Internet Governance, Cambridge, MA: mit Press, 2010, p 7. 21 M Davies, C Clark & D Legare, Proceedings of the Twenty-fourth Internet Engineering Task Force, 1992, at http://www.ietf.org/old/2009/proceedings/prior29/IETF24.pdf, accessed 25 February 2013. 22 W Kleinwächter, 'The history of Internet governance', 2009, at http://www.intgov.net/papers/35, accessed 24 February 2013. See also JP Barlow, 'A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace', 1996, at http://www.worldtrans.org/sov/cyberindependence.html, accessed 8 February 2013. 23 Internet Society, '2012 Internet Hall of Fame inductees', 2012, at http://www.internethalloffame.org/inductees, accessed 25 February 2013. 24 L DeNardis, Protocol Politics: The Globalization of Internet Governance, Cambridge, MA: mit Press, 2009, p 110. 25 icann, 'idn cctld Fast Track String Evaluation Completion', 2013, at http://www.icann.org/en/resources/idn/fast-track/string-evaluation-completion, accessed 24 February 2013. 26 Mueller, Networks and States, pp 232–235, 70–71. 27 JM Burns, Leadership, New York: Harper and Row, 1978, p 18. 28 D Nabers, 'Power, leadership, and hegemony in international politics: the case of East Asia', Review of International Studies, 36(4), 2010, p 935. 29 For an inventory list of counter-hegemonic foreign policy strategies, see H Ebert, D Flemes & G Strüver, The Politics of Contestation in Asia: How Japan and Pakistan Deal with Their Rising Neighbors, Hamburg: German Institute of Global and Area Studies (giga), 2012, p 8. 30 United Nations Working Group on Internet Governance (wgig), Report of the Working Group on Internet Governance, Geneva: wgig, 2005, p 4. 31 W Kleinwächter, 'The history of Internet governance', in C Möller & A Armouroux (eds), Governing the Internet: Freedom and Regulation in the osce Region, Vienna: osce, p 56. 32 Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (iana), 'Report on the Delegation of the .台灣 and .台湾 ("Taiwan") Domains Representing Taiwan, Province of China in Chinese to Taiwan Network Information Center', 2010, at http://www.iana.org/reports/2010/taiwan-report-07jun2010.html. 33 WJ Lynn III, 'Defending a new domain: the Pentagon's cyberstrategy', Foreign Affairs, 89(5), 2010, p 101. 34 C Tilly, Coercion, Capital, and European States: ad 990–1990, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1990. 35 N Choucri, Cyberpolitics in International Relations: Context, Connectivity, and Content, Cambridge, MA: mit Press, 2012, p 39. 36 Mueller, Networks and States, pp 255–259. 37 J Carr, 'Online crimes against children', Freedom from Fear, July 2010, pp 26–29. 38 S Schelin & GD Garson, 'E-government', in H Bidgoli (ed), The Internet Encyclopedia, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley, 2004, p 591. 39 WM Arkin, 'The cyber bomb in Yugoslavia', Washington Post, 25 October 1999; and J Borger, 'Pentagon kept the lid on cyberwar in Kosovo', Guardian, 9 November 1999. 40 G7 Ministerial Conference on the Global Information Society: Ministerial Conference Summary, 1995, at http://aei.pitt.edu/33414/1/A161.pdf, accessed 15 November 2012. 41 GJ Ikenberry, Strategic Reactions to American Preeminence: Great Power Politics in the Age of Unipolarity, Washington, DC: United States National Intelligence Council, 2003, p 14. 42 South African Department of Defence, 'South African Defence Review 2012', 2012, at http://www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction?id=163572, accessed 8 February 2013. 43 'Cyber war: sabotaging the system', cbs News, 2010, at http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-5555565.html, accessed 3 January 2013. 44 R Pandit, 'Army gearing up for cyber warfare', Times of India, 7 July 2005. 45 2012 Norton Cybercrime Report, 2012, at http://now-static.norton.com/now/en/pu/images/Promotions/2012/cybercrimeReport/2012_Norton_Cybercrime_Report_Master_FINAL_050912.pdf, accessed 21 January 2013. 46 Stuenkel, 'Keep brics and ibsa separate'. 47 G7 Ministerial Conference on the Global Information Society. 48 ibsa, 'Brasilia Declaration', 2003, at http://www.ibsa-trilateral.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=48<emid=27, accessed 2 December 2012. 49 G Lechini, 'Middle powers: ibsa and the new South–South cooperation', nacla Report on the Americas, October 2007, p 29. 50 Noss, 'A battle for the soul of the Internet'. 51 Mueller, Networks and States, p 60. 52 DP Fidler, 'Internet governance and international law: the controversy concerning revision of the international telecommunication regulations', American Society of International Law Insights, 17(6), 2013, pp 156-163. 53 KN Cukier, 'The wsis wars: an analysis of the politicization of the Internet', in D Staffacher & W Kleinwächter (eds), The World Summit on the Information Society: Moving from the Past into the Future, New York: United Nations Information and Communication Technologies Task Force, 2005, pp 161–162. 54 C Afonso, 'A scenario for a new Internet governance', in WJ Drake (ed), Reforming Internet Governance: Perspectives from the Working Group on Internet Governance, New York: United Nations Publications, 2005, p 201. 55 W Siganga, 'The case for national Internet governance mechanisms', in Drake, Reforming Internet Governance, pp 156–158. 56 ML Mueller, 'China and global Internet governance: a tiger by the tail', in RJ Deibert, J Palfrey, R Rohozinski & JL Zittrain (eds), Access Contested: Security, Identity and Resistance in Asian Cyberspace, Cambridge, MA: mit Press, 2011, pp 182–185. 57 Government of the Russian Federation, 'Prime Minister Vladimir Putin meets with Secretary General of the itu Hamadoun Toure', 2011, at https://itunews.itu.int/En/1444-Prime-Minister-Vladimir-Putin-reaffirms-the-Russian-Federations-support-for-ITU.note.aspx, accessed 3 February 2013. 58 Mueller, Networks and States, p 246. 59 Ibid, p 257. 60 JA Lewis, 'Why privacy and cyber security clash', in KM Lord & S Travis (eds), America's Cyber Future. Security and Prosperity in the Information Age, Washington, DC: Center for a New American Security, 2011, p 129. 61 'India–Brazil–South Africa Dialogue Forum Fourth Summit of Heads of State/Government Brasilia Declaration, 2010', 2010, at http://www.ibsa-trilateral.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=102&Itemid=46, accessed 3 January 2013. 62 'India–Brazil–South Africa (ibsa) Dialogue Forum Fifth Summit of Heads of State and Government Tshwane Declaration, October 18, 2011', 2011, at http://www.thepresidency.gov.za/pebble.asp?relid=5053, accessed 3 January 2013. 63 it for Change, 'A Development Agenda in Internet Governance Outlining Global Public Policy Issues and Exploring New Institutional Options', 2011, at http://www.culturalivre.org.br/artigos/dev_agenda_ig.pdf, accessed 2 December 2013. 64 'ibsa Multi-stakeholder Meeting on Global Internet Governance', 2011, at http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/09/02/ibsa-net-governance-meeting-summary, accessed 4 January 2013. 65 S Bamzai, 'Muzzlers of the free Internet: India is lobbying for bureaucrats to run the worldwide web', 2012, at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2220692/How-India-helped-bunch-bureaucrats-custodians-Internet.html, accessed 15 January 2013. 66 'India's Statement Proposing UN Committee for Internet-related policy, 66th Session of the unga, New York, October 26, 2011', 2011, at http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/india-statement-un-cirp, accessed 15 January 2013. 67 igp, 'A United Nations Committee for Internet-related Policies? A fair assessment', 2011, at http://www.internetgovernance.org/2011/10/29/a-united-nations-committee-for-internet-related-policies-a-fair-assessment/, accessed 3 January 2013. 68 G7 Ministerial Conference on the Global Information Society. 69 Brazil is the only country of the bric group standing ground on Internet freedom. See 'The new politics of the Internet: everything is connected', The Economist, 5 January 2013. 70 L Kaspar & M Maciel, Proposed itr Revisions and their Implications for Freedom of Expression Online: Influencing the Debate in Brazil, London: Global Partners and Associates, 2012. 71 R Lemos 'Brazil is the only bric country standing ground on Internet freedom. Here is why', 2012, at https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/rlemos/brazil-only-bric-country-standing-ground-internet-freedom-here-why/, accessed 2 December 2012. 72 Bamzai, 'Muzzlers of the free Internet'. 73 'India Inc opposes global Internet monitoring body', Business Standard (Delhi), 20 September 2012. 74 S Singh, 'Civil society & industry oppose India's plans to modify ITRs', The Hindu, 23 November 2012. 75 S Singh, 'World divided, India undecided as 193 nations gear up to decide the future of net & Mobile', The Hindu, 16 September 2012. 76 S Singh, 'Internet governance needs consensus, says Sibal', The Hindu, 30 September 2012. 77 S Singh, 'On Internet rules, India now more willing to say icann', The Hindu, 13 October 2012. 78 Best Bits, 'Statement of civil society members and groups participating in the "Best Bits" pre-igf meeting at Baku, 3–4 November, 2012', 2012, at http://bestbits.igf-online.net/statement/, accessed 11 February 2013. 79 T Maurer, Cyber Norm Emergence at the United Nations—An Analysis of the Activities at the UN Regarding Cyber-security, Cambridge, MA: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, 2011; and unga, Resolution 53/70: Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security, 1999, at http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/53/70&Lang=E, accessed 23 January 2013. 80 F Gady & G Austin, Russia, the United States, and Cyber Diplomacy: Opening the Doors, New York: EastWest Institute, 2010. 81 Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, 'National Security Concept of the Russian Federation', 2000, at http://www.mid.ru/bdomp/ns-osndoc.nsf/..., accessed 28 January 2013. 82 RJ Deibert & M Crete-Nishihata, 'Global governance and the spread of cyberspace controls', Global Governance, 18(3), 2012, p 346. 83 RJ Deibert, 'Tracking the emerging arms race in cyberspace', Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 67(1), 2011, p 6. 84 E Tikk-Ringas, Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunication in the Context of International Security: Work of the UN First Committee 1998–2012, Geneva: ICT4Peace Publishing, 2012. 85 unga, Developments in the Field of Information and Teleommunications in the Context of International Security, A/64/129, New York: United Nations General Assembly, 2009. 86 Comite Gestor da Internet no Brasil, Resolução—Princípios Para a Governanca e Uso Da Internet no Brasil, 2009, at http://www.cgi.br/regulamentacao/resolucao2009-003.htm, accessed 2 February 2013. 87 'South African law on cybercrime', 2013, at http://cybercrime.org.za/law/, accessed 29 January 2013. 88 nato, 'nato and cyber defence', 2013, at http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_78170.htm, accessed 22 January 2013. 89 DE Sanger, 'Obama ordered wave of cyberattacks against Iran', New York Times, 1 June 2012. 90 E Morozov, 'Iran elections: a Twitter revolution?', Washington Post, 17 June 2009; and J Naughton, 'Yet another Facebook revolution: why are we so surprised? ', Guardian, 23 January 2011. 91 Deibert & M Crete-Nishihata, 'Global governance and the spread of cyberspace controls', p 348. 92 Freedom House, Freedom in the World 2013. 93 Mueller, Networks and States, p 189. 94 Deibert & Crete-Nishihata, 'Global governance and the spread of cyberspace controls', p 348. 95 Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China, 'China, Russia and other countries submit the Document of International Code of Conduct for Information Security to the United Nations', 2011, at http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/wjdt/wshd/t858978.htm, accessed 2 February 2013. 96 Internet Observatory—Brazilian Observatory for Digital Policies, policy report, São Paolo: fgv/cgi, 2011, p 90. 97 unga, International Code of Conduct for Information Security, 2011, at http://isocbg.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/un-information-secutiy-code-ru.pdf, accessed 23 November 2013. 98 Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, 'Draft Convention on International Information Security', 2011, at http://rusemb.org.uk/policycontact/52, accessed 28 January 2013. 99 Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, 'Seminar on International Information Security', 2012, at http://rusembassy.in/index.php?option=com..., accessed 28 January 2013. 100 White House, Fact Sheet on US–India Strengthening Cooperation on Cybersecurity, Washington, DC: White House Office of the Press Secretary, 2010. 101 CR Mohan, India, the United States and the Global Commons, Washington, DC: Center for a New American Security, 2010. 102 US Department of Homeland Security, 'United States and India sign cybersecurity agreement', 19 July 2011, at http://www.dhs.gov/news/2011/07/19/united-states-and-india-sign-cybersecurity-agreement, accessed 3 November 2012. 103 JA Lewis & K Timlin, Cybersecurity and Cyberwarfare: Preliminary Assessment of National Doctrine and Organization, Geneva: United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, 2011, pp 7–8. 104 GJ Ikenberry, 'The future of the liberal world order', Foreign Affairs, May/June 2011. 105 T Risse-Kappen, Cooperation Among Democracies: The European Influence on US Foreign Policy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1997, pp 4, 12. 106 Goldsmith & Wu, Who Controls the Internet? p 90. 107 Ikenberry, 'The future of the liberal world order', p 57.
Referência(s)