Discussion Question: Is cyber the greatest future threat the US faces? If so, explain why. If cyber is not the greatest future threat, what is and why? My answer to the question is yes.
- With planning comes preparedness and when we are prepared we are more resilient. There is no question that we can learn a great deal from our allies about how to secure the homeland. We have adopted many policing strategies for Europe over the years. Logically, since many countries have had far greater experience dealing with terrorists, we should be able to learn from their approaches.
Today, more than ever, cyberspace has grown into a substantive part of everyday society for many people. More and more, people’s dependence of the internet is at an all-time high. From paying bills to attending school, cyberspace is critical. Similarly, its governance, in particular it security, has also become even more serious. Along with the seriousness of protections such as anti- viruses and firewalls, the issue and struggle between national security and the basic individual rights and the rules that restrict the imposition by the government to exert unrestricted power has also been heightened. Securing cyberspace is difficult due to the global implications. This is where we need to work together. It requires cooperation not only within our country – between federal, state, local authorities and the private sector, but also with the international community.
Privacy is a bedrock of the nation’s freedoms. Every American citizen has the right to think, to differ, to worship, to create households, to pursue intimate relationships. All of this is supposed to be done, at least it depends on the reasonable tacit assumption that the government will not be intruding, watching, or listening in. After the September 11, 2001 attacks, an array of new policies quickly changed the lives of many Americans. Two initiatives called the Total Information Awareness (TIA) and Terrorism Information and Prevention Systems (TIPS) followed by the USA Patriot Act, increased the powers of government and law enforcement. With zeal and excitement for privacy and civil liberties erosion, the government used technology to spy on Americans. When data is collected and manipulated by businesses and other entities, privacy is threatened (Drozdova, 2000).
So, how is it possible to strike a balance or weigh the trade-offs between security and freedom? Since it is clearly a presidential-level policy goal and issue, how should governmental leaders respond to cybersecurity, since most policy makers want both an open internet and a secure internet? It must be noted that the majority of the nation has never liked the idea of the government having full access to their personal phone calls and emails; even for the purpose of attempting to prevent terrorism. Concerns of the Bush Administration authorizing law enforcement and other federal agencies such as the National Security Agency to monitor emails and phone calls without warrants or court permission grew immensely after September 11, 2001.
Security of the nation is a fundamental goal for its leaders. This is often the duty of regional, local, national governmental authorities (local law enforcement, FBI, etc.). The nation has seen tremendous variety of threats since the September 11, 2001 attacks, from mass murders, kidnappings, terrorist attacks to natural disasters. The methods and tools in which security is obtained and maintained vary as well. There are adoption of laws and establishment of institutions that help maintain security, yet others include the use of technology. Since our technology is a critical infrastructure, the security of it is a sub-branch of national security. But, where security and civil liberties meet, there should also be established mechanisms supporting both.
Some contend that the interference of civil liberties in the name of “common good” and national security is essential. However, is civil liberties and privacy not also about the “common good”? Some would answer this question with a resounding “YES” (Klitou, 2014). The infringement of privacy and civil liberties should be minimized, especially in a democratic state. For many, when civil liberties and privacy are violated and infringed, security is minimized.
As previously discussed, the United States history has clear examples of previous expansion of powers in times of emergencies and war that have done nothing to safeguard civil liberties, but instead degraded them as the price of public safety. So, are we going to continue to be limited to a zero-sum game in that the only way to truly be secured is to accept the diminution of civil liberties? William Safire, does not believe so. As a matter of fact, he has been a strong opponent of the concept of Total Information Awareness. He has described it as an over-reaching dossier of everyday American’s private life obtained via the internet. Like many other programs and policies, Safire believes that concerns related to this program should be taken seriously and should consider American’s history as an example if these kinds of programs or policies are not taken seriously.
When President Obama issued Executive Order 13636, “Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity” on February 12, 2013, the order called for the development of a framework that can mitigate cybersecurity risks. Identifying it as a serious economic and national security challenge, cybersecurity was quickly placed at the top of the then President’s agency and ordered many in his cabinet to review the efforts in which we defended United States information and communications infrastructure. Today, the issue still remains.
References
Drozdova, E. A. (2000). Civil Liberties and Security in Cyberspace. New York City: Center for International Security and Cooperation. Retrieved from https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/drozdova.pdf
Klitou, D. (2014). Privacy, liberty and security. Privacy-Invading Technologies and Privacy by Design. Information Technology and Law Series, 25, 13-25. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-026-8_2
Leone, R. C., & Anrig, G. (2003). The War on our Freedoms Civil Liberties in an Age of Terrorism. Cambridge, MA: The Century Foundation.
