Dopo anni di lettura forte, capita di passare in rassegna i numerosi libri che mi hanno intrattenuto e che oggi mostrano la loro costa, uno di fianco all’altro, sui ripiani della libreria di casa. Non c’è nessun dubbio sul fatto che la mia preferenza per la lettura di romanzi superi senza difficoltà quella relativa a libri di ogni altro genere.
When I was working on my recent three-fold research papers on intelligence analysis, I came across a journal article that fascinated me quite a lot since I’ve read the title. It was the case in which the content I read was exactly as good as my expectations (which are usually extremely high when they come to peer-review scientific papers). Indeed, since I started studying war theory and the philosophy of war, Clausewitz’s On War was mandatory reading. Interestingly, Clausewitz is inversely proportionally considered in intelligence and war studies. If he is one of the founding fathers of the modern understanding of war (and rightly so, notwithstanding many critics), he is almost entirely dismissed in the intelligence domain. Yes, true, he stated that intelligence is unreliable by nature, that the commander should avoid to trust intelligence (too much), and that uncertainty is inherently part of war and warfare… and so he couldn’t be said a big supporter of intelligence in general. Is this sufficient to discharge his work? So, when I read An Outline of a Clausewitzian Theory of IntelligenceI finally found a partial vindication of my long-lasting necessity to see Clausewitz better considered within the intelligence studies and, more broadly, intelligence. But even more importantly, in an age that prizes all that comes from the last technological invention but the human brain, it is always healthy to remember how our world is ultimately unpredictable and dominated by an intrinsic uncertainty. The efforts of the last seventy years were to prove that everything has its own place as if nature and human beings are only tiny cogged wheels, in spite of all suggested by history and by ordinary life (actually). Then, after such a reading, I almost felt obliged to contact Dr Lillbacka to have a deeper conversation about these topics. This interview is part of this discussion which, I hope, you will find as fascinating as insightful. In addition, I invite the readers to discover Lillbacka’s publications, which are as rich as rigorous. There is no question that not everything can be covered in a single interview but I hope you will find so much to think about prediction, friction, and uncertainty that, at least, you will be enriched as much as I did. It is then with my distinct pleasure to publish the interview on Scuola Filosofica – for those who don’t know it yet; it is one of the leading cultural blogs in Italy. In the name of Scuola Filosofica Team, our readers, and myself, Giangiuseppe Pili, Ralf: thank you!
Since the beginning of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine in 2014, international security research has been extensively shaped by increased focus on information operations and hybrid warfare. The Kremlin’s use of multiple instruments of power, including cyberattacks, conventional troops, economic pressure and massive disinformation campaigns, has threatened security of not only Ukraine, but many Western democracies as well. Although foreign experts’ analysis of the Russian hybrid warfare often takes into account vulnerabilities and mistakes made by Ukraine, it seems to accord less attention to the multiple ways in which the country succeeds in handling Russian aggression. While Ukraine has been a testing ground of new-generation warfare techniques, it has also conducted testing of many diverse countermeasures to mitigate them. To enrich international discussion on the Russian hybrid warfare with the knowledge of Ukrainian strategies and solutions towards it, we have invited to our series Alina Frolova, an experienced professional in the field of strategic, government and crisis communications based in Ukraine. Before assuming her current position as Deputy Chairman of the Centre for Defence Strategies in Kyiv, Alina has served as a public official in the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine and Ministry of Information Policy of Ukraine, where she facilitated implementation of strategic and government communications amid the ongoing conflict. In our interview with Alina, we discuss the importance of strategic communications and key factors behind their success, the most effective mechanisms against foreign influences, recent escalation along the Ukrainian border, as well as Ukraine’s image abroad and the country’s progress in the pursuit of NATO membership thus far. On behalf of the Scuola Filosofica Team, our readers, and myself, Roman Kolodii, Alina: thank you!
1# Alina, how would you like to present yourself to the international readers of Scuola Filosofica?
Alina Frolova, Deputy Chairman, Centre for Defence Strategies, Founder of StratcomUA (Center for Strategic Communications), Deputy Minister of Defence of Ukraine 2019-2020.
Onorato di aver scritto un capitolo nel libro uscito per il Sole 24 Ore! Questa volta è sugli scacchi e sull’intelligence e strategia, imparare a pensare con l’arte della guerra! Il libro è curato da UniChess con un impressionante elenco di autori! Grazie a Roberto Mogranzini per averlo organizzato e a tutti i contributors per il loro lavoro! Dal libro sulla guerra e gli scacchi edito per Le Due Torri e l’articolo pubblicato sull’American Intelligence Journal… al Sole24Ore! Sarà in edicola da questo martedì, mi dicono, ma lo potrete trovare anche in libreria! Un grazie a Eugenio Dessy per aver letto in anteprima quando… non sapeva dove sarebbe uscito: Eugenio, grazie!
With current expansion of digital practices to mitigate the effects of Covid-19, well-calibrated cybersecurity strategies have become even more relevant than ever. Such instances as recent attempts to steal data on Covid vaccines through cyber-intrusions, for instance, demonstrate how dangerous and malicious cyber-threats can be during healthcare emergencies, especially if orchestrated by foreign governments. Indeed, in recent years, many experts began to view cyberspace not so much as no-man’s land but rather a battlefield where individual states can engage in confrontation for the sake of asymmetrical gains. Such scholarship, however, often focuses on government-centric perceptions of cyberspace-related events and presumes disruptive potential of cyber-technologies in situations where, in fact, it is not that pronounced. These habits of thought often preclude a more accurate and better informed appreciation of the role of cyber-threats, especially in terms of their effectiveness, as well as their mitigation through non-government efforts. For this interview, we have invited Dr Lennart Maschmeyer, an expert in cybersecurity, whose work examines existing blind spots and biases regarding cyber-operations and promotes more inclusive cyber-threat reporting among non-state actors. He is a senior researcher at the Center for Security Studies (ETH Zurich), a university-affiliated think tank in Switzerland offering security policy expertise in research, teaching, and consulting activities. Apart from his academic research, Lennart has been also involved in coordination of better cyber-threat reporting between commercial cyber-threat intelligence firms and civil society actors. In our interview, we discuss the character of modern cybersecurity threats, the role of digital technologies, including social media, in Russian influence operations, the importance of cyber-threat reporting, and dominant trends that would shape the nearest future of cybersecurity and strategy worldwide. On behalf of the Scuola Filosofica Team, our readers, and myself, Roman Kolodii, Lennart: thank you!
#1 Lennart, how would you like to present yourself to the international readers of Scuola Filosofica?
I am a senior researcher at the Center for Security Studies at ETH Zurich where I examine the opportunities information technology provides for actors to project power in world politics. Specifically, I focus on how technological change has altered the quality of covert operations as an instrument in strategy. Cyber operations are often perceived as a novel instrument, yet my research shows close similarities to subversive intelligence operations both concerning strategic role and operational constraints. What is probably new about cyber conflict is the outsize role played by non-state actors, especially commercial cyber threat intelligence firms whose reporting often constitutes the main, sometimes the only source of data on ‘cyber attacks’. Because these firms are profit-driven, so is their reporting—and this produces selection bias in what is, and what is not reported. This bias distorts how policy makers, academics and the public perceive cyber conflict, and my secondary topic of interests is studying these biases.
Un retaggio degli sciagurati studi tecnici della mia formazione scolastica è certamente la statistica.
In realtà, il tentativo di avvicinarmi al vero, attraverso numeri e percentuali, non può essere considerato del tutto in discordanza con un’attività riflessiva estremamente fervida. Anzi, proprio la vivacità della mente è la naturale conseguenza di tutta la formazione umanistica e filantropica che è successa a quella scolastica.
Esiste un campo nel quale la matematica, la scienza dei numeri, si prefigge dall’inizio alla fine l’obiettivo di risalire la verità. Qua non c’è sorte che interferisce nella ricerca e nel risultato, il calcolo domina su ogni altra componente. Se poi alla scienza si affianca la fantasia, allora si ha a che fare con una materia eccelsa, difficilmente declassificabile. Parlo degli scacchi, attività che non poteva non entrare nella mia vita.
– Un’equazione non significa niente per me a meno che non esprima un pensiero di Dio –
Secondo Emmanuel Levinas, la casa è la condizione di base tramite cui qualsiasi uomo può attivarsi. Così si conoscerà a livello intellettuale, ci si manterrà in vita, si prenderanno le decisioni pratiche ecc… Tutti gli uomini esistono nel loro mondo dal momento che si trovano in quello. Ma va precisata la fenomenologia del caso[1]. L’uomo si situa nel suo ambiente di vita nella misura in cui ha qualcosa. Martin Heidegger sostiene che ognuno di noi è essenzialmente “gettato”, al momento di nascere. Tale trovarsi per Emmanuel Levinas esprime pure (nel contempo) l’uomo ad una “proprietà”… in se stesso. Dunque subentra la percezione d’un dimorare? Più precisamente, ogni persona è tale siccome si fa “gettare” nel proprio mondo… “partendo da se stessa”. In altre parole, alla nascita noi già stiamo “avendo”. E’ un’occasione ove s’esprime la “proprietà… di sé”, grazie al possesso dell’intimità. Allora Emmanuel Levinas apre al simbolismo. Se l’uomo è tale nella misura in cui “parte”… da se stesso, ne deriva che egli va “dimorando”. Si respinge il soggettivismo dell’idealismo. Anzi, la coscienza di qualcuno si dà solo nella misura in cui essa può “dimorare”… sul proprio mondo di vita.
Intelligence & Interview has one mission but several goals. One of them is to expand the culture of different national intelligence experiences within the Intelligence Studies framework, which is the international scientific standard and community. Coupled with it, the translation in Italian will reinforce the international ties for the Italian readership. We are doing our best to include as many different nationalities and perspectives as possible. First, the (international) Intelligence Studies are still focused more on the Anglosphere intelligence experience than anything else. But only in Europe, we have so many different approaches to intelligence (in practice) and to intelligence studies (in theory) that we cannot and should not be satisfied with the status quo. As I consider myself much more oriented in international intelligence studies than on the national research (though along with my colleague – Fabrizio Minniti – we already published a paper on Italian intelligence), I strongly believe and advocate for a more integrated and broad discussion on intelligence. Then, for this reason, we already explored several intelligence perspectives (in order of publication: Zimbabwe & Africa, Italy, France, Greece, the Netherlands). However, we hosted scholars from many other countries to bring their knowledge and experience (USA, Canada, UK…). With this aim in mind, it is my pleasure to publish this Interview with two outstanding experts, very experienced professionals, Robin Libert and Guy Rapaille. This is the first “double” Intelligence & Interview, which makes me particularly happy with it. I want to thank Mr. Davide Madeddu for his early translation from French. I want also to thank Giacomo Carrus for his work on the English version of this interview. Without further ados, it is then with my distinct pleasure to publish the Interview on Scuola Filosofica – for those who don’t know it yet; it is one of the leading cultural blogs in Italy. In the name of Scuola Filosofica Team, our readers, and myself, Giangiuseppe Pili, Robin and Guy: thank you!
#1 Mr Robin Libert and Mr Guy Rapaille, let’s start from the basics. How would you like to present yourself to the International readers and Philosophical School (Scuola Filosofica)?
In the modern digital era, the importance of cybersecurity cannot be stressed enough. As recent developments have shown, the security of personal data and trade secrets, the protection of critical information infrastructure, even the integrity of democratic processes as such all depend on the smooth functioning of cybersecurity mechanisms. This especially holds true in the current Covid-19 reality, where increased digital consumption and massive readjustments of ways of life and work through cyber-technologies all multiply the possibilities for major digital assets to be compromised. In popular imagination, however, cybersecurity is still closely connected to the technicalities of the field, the so-called hard cybersecurity, while the soft – i.e. legal, political, socioeconomic, cultural, and ethical – dimensions of it remain yet understudied. To narrow this gap, we have invited to our interview series Lucie Kadlecová, an expert in cybersecurity policy and governance. She is a PhD candidate at Institute of International Studies, Charles University (Czechia) and a senior associate in strategy and threat intelligence for Estonian cybersecurity company CybExer Technologies. Both Czechia and Estonia are well-known hubs of cyber-technological expertise, so Lucie Kadlecová’s experience in academia and industry in both countries can help highlight the key trends in this field from the insider’s perspective. In our interview, we discuss cyber security strategy of the EU, the role of non-state actors and public-private partnerships in cybersecurity governance, the importance of cyber hygiene and gender equality in the field, as well as the prospects for enhanced cooperation between industry and academia in tackling cybersecurity challenges worldwide. On behalf of the Scuola Filosofica Team, our readers, and myself, Roman Kolodii, Lucie: thank you!
#1 Lucie Kadlecová,[1] how would you like to present yourself to the international readers of Scuola Filosofica?
I suppose I could be described as either a professional with an academic background or as an academic with professional experience, depending on the reader’s point of view. By nature, I am more of a professional who likes hands-on experience. That’s why I am deeply grateful for my previous experience working as a trainee for international organizations such as NATO, and helping to build the then-quickly growing Czech National Cyber Security Centre years ago. At the same time, however, I could see a gap between practice and academia in the “soft topics” of cyber security such as international relations and international law in the Czech Republic as well as around Europe. This feeling encouraged me to pursue my PhD, and to start teaching and publishing about these topics in order to contribute to closing this gap. At the same time, academic experience from King’s College London, Charles University in Prague, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as well as other interactions in the academic world shaped my way of thinking about cyber security and its “soft” aspects.
Traditional energy resources like oil and gas have long played an essential role in international politics. Nowadays, however, there is a global trend which motivates countries to gradually replace their traditional energy production and consumption with renewables. This raises a question: how would geopolitical ambitions of states affect the harnessing of renewable energy and vice versa? To discuss this topic, I have invited Dr Svitlana Andruschenko, an expert in energy and geopolitics based in Ukraine. She is an associate professor at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv and an invited lecturer on geopolitics and geostrategy at Chu Hai College of Higher Education (Hong Kong). Ukraine has been closely associated abroad with the recent Russian aggression since 2014, but its history can say a lot about the challenges of energy security as well. It was in Ukraine’s Chernobyl where the largest nuclear disaster in history occurred in 1986. Ukraine had also owned the world’s third nuclear stockpile before renouncing it in the mid-1990s. Finally, Ukraine has had a long history of conflicts with Russia over gas transit through Ukraine to Europe. This all makes the Ukrainian case study particularly relevant. In this interview with Dr Svitlana Andrushchenko, we will discuss Russia’s energy exports, the Chernobyl heritage in Ukraine’s energy policies, security implications of renewable energy, as well as energy diplomacy as such. On behalf of Scuola Filosofica Team, our readers, and myself, Roman Kolodii, Svitlana: thank you!