Guy-Philippe Goldstein: How cyberattacks threaten real-world peace

Translator: Elisabeth Buffard Reviewer: Veronica Martinez Starnes

Prevodilac: Dragana Mokan Lektor: Ivana Korom

Good afternoon.

Dobar dan.

If you have followed

Ako ste pratili

diplomatic news in the past weeks,

diplomatske vesti prethodnih nedelja,

you may have heard of a kind of crisis

možda ste čuli za neku vrstu krize

between China and the U.S.

koja je izbila između Kine i SAD

regarding cyberattacks

u vezi sa sajber napadima

against the American company Google.

na američku kompaniju Google.

Many things have been said about this.

O ovome se mnogo pričalo.

Some people have called a cyberwar

Pojedinici su nazvali sajber ratom

what may actually be

ono što bi u stvari mogla da bude

just a spy operation --

samo špijunska operacija -

and obviously, a quite mishandled one.

i to, kao što je očigledno, vrlo nesupešna.

However, this episode reveals

Pa ipak, ovaj događaj otkriva

the growing anxiety in the Western world

rastuću uznemirenost u Zapadnom svetu

regarding these emerging cyber weapons.

u vezi sa sajber oružjem

It so happens that these weapons are dangerous.

Ovo oružje je zaista opasno.

They're of a new nature:

I drugačije je:

they could lead the world

i moglo bi da odvede svet

into a digital conflict

u digitalni sukob

that could turn into an armed struggle.

koji bi mogao da preraste u oružanu borbu.

These virtual weapons can also destroy the physical world.

Ovo virtuelno oružje može da uništi i fizički svet.

In 1982, in the middle of the Cold War

Usred Hladnog rata, 1982. godine

in Soviet Siberia,

u sovjetskom Sibiru,

a pipeline exploded with a burst of 3 kilotons,

eksplodirao je cevovod jačinom od 3 kilotone

the equivalent of a fourth of the Hiroshima bomb.

što je jednako četvrtini eksplozije u Hirošimi.

Now we know today -- this was revealed

Danas znamo -- otkrio je

by Thomas Reed,

Tomas Rid

Ronald Reagan's former U.S. Air Force Secretary --

bivši američki vojni sekretar Ronalda Regana --

this explosion was actually the result

da je ova eksplozija u stvari bila rezultat

of a CIA sabotage operation,

operacije i sabotaže koju je sprovela CIA

in which they had managed

koja je uspela

to infiltrate the IT management systems

da infiltrira IT menadžment sisteme

of that pipeline.

tog cevovoda.

More recently, the U.S. government revealed

U skorije vreme, američka vlada je otkrila

that in September 2008, more than 3 million people

da je u septembru 2008. godine, više od 3 miliona ljudi

in the state of Espirito Santo in Brazil

u državi Espirito Santo u Brazilu

were plunged into darkness,

ostalo u mraku

victims of a blackmail operation from cyber pirates.

kao žrtve ucenjivačke operacije sajber pirata.

Even more worrying for the Americans,

Jos više zabrinjavajuće za Amerikance,

in December 2008 the holiest of holies,

na Božić decembra 2008. godine,

the IT systems of CENTCOM,

IT sisteme CENTCOM-a,

the central command

centralne komande

managing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,

koja upravlja ratovima u Iraku i Afganistanu,

may have been infiltrated by hackers

su infiltirirali hakeri

who used these:

koji su upotrebili:

plain but infected USB keys.

najobičnije ali inficirane USB memorije.

And with these keys, they may have been able

I tako su pomoću njih, bili u mogućnosti

to get inside CENTCOM's systems,

da uđu unutar CENTCOM sistema,

to see and hear everything,

da vide i čuju sve,

and maybe even infect some of them.

i možda i inficiraju neke od njih.

As a result, the Americans take the threat very seriously.

To je rezultiralo time da Amerikanci shvate ovo kao veoma ozbiljnu pretnju.

I'll quote General James Cartwright,

Citiraću generala Džejmsa Kartrajta,

Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,

potpredsednika Združenog generalštaba

who says in a report to Congress

koji u izveštaju za Kongres kaže

that cyberattacks could be as powerful as

da bi sajber napadi mogli da budu jednako moćni

weapons of mass destruction.

kao i oružje za masovno uništenje.

Moreover, the Americans have decided

Osim toga, Amerikanci su odlučili

to spend over 30 billion dollars

da potroše više od 30 milijardi dolara

in the next five years

u sledećih pet godina

to build up their cyberwar capabilities.

da izgrade svoje kapacitete za sajber rat.

And across the world today, we see

I danas, širom sveta, vidimo

a sort of cyber arms race,

neku vrstu trke u sajber naoružanju,

with cyberwar units

sa postrojenjima za sajber rat

built up by countries like North Korea

koja se grade u zemljama kao sto su Severna Koreja

or even Iran.

ili čak Iran.

Yet, what you'll never hear

Pa ipak, ono sto nećete nikad čuti

from spokespeople

od predstavnika

from the Pentagon or the French Department of Defence

iz Pentagona ili francuskog Ministarstva za Odbranu

is that the question isn't really

jeste da pitanje nije zapravo

who's the enemy, but actually

ko je neprijatelj, nego

the very nature of cyber weapons.

sama priroda sajber oružja.

And to understand why, we must look at how,

I da bismo razumeli zašto, mi moramo da pogledamo kako su,

through the ages, military technologies

kroz vekove, vojne tehnologije

have maintained or destroyed

održavale ili uništavale

world peace.

svetski mir.

For example,

Na primer,

if we'd had TEDxParis

da smo imali TEDxParis

350 years ago,

pre 350 godina,

we would have talked about the military innovation of the day --

mi bismo pričali o vojnoj inovaciji,

the massive Vauban-style fortifications --

masivnom utvrđenju u stilu Vauban

and we could have predicted

i predvideli bismo

a period of stability in the world or in Europe.

period stabilnosti u svetu ili u Evropi,

which was indeed the case in Europe

što je zaista i bio slučaj u Evropi

between 1650 and 1750.

od 1650. do 1750.

Similarly, if we'd had this talk

Isto tako, da smo imali ovaj govor

30 or 40 years ago, we would have seen

pre 30 ili 40 godina, videli bismo

how the rise of nuclear weapons,

kako porast nuklearnog oružja,

and the threat of mutually assured destruction they imply,

i opasnost od sigurnog uzajamnog uništenja koje ono implicira,

prevents a direct fight between the two superpowers.

sprečava direktnu borbu između dve super sile.

However, if we'd had this talk 60 years ago,

Pa ipak, da smo imali ovaj govor pre 60 godina,

we would have seen how the emergence

videli bismo kako pojava

of new aircraft and tank technologies,

novih tehnologija u izradi aviona i tenkova,

which give the advantage to the attacker,

koje daju prednost napadaču,

make the Blitzkrieg doctrine very credible

čini Blickrigovu doktrinu veoma verodostojnom

and thus create the possibility of war in Europe.

i tako stvara mogućnost rata u Evropi.

So military technologies

Dakle vojne tehnologije

can influence the course of the world,

mogu da utiču na svetski tok

can make or break world peace --

mogu da stvore ili unište svetski mir --

and there lies the issue with cyber weapons.

i tu leži problematika sajber oružja.

The first issue:

Prvi problem:

Imagine a potential enemy announcing

Zamislite potencijalnog neprijatelja kako izjavljuje

they're building a cyberwar unit,

da gradi postrojenje za sajber rat

but only for their country's defense.

ali samo zbog odbrane svoje zemlje.

Okay, but what distinguishes it

U redu, ali šta je to što ga razlikuje

from an offensive unit?

od postrojenja za napad?

It gets even more complicated

Postaje još komplikovanije

when the doctrines of use become ambiguous.

kada doktrine upotrebe postaju dvosmislene.

Just 3 years ago, both the U.S. and France

Pre tri godine i SAD i Francuska

were saying they were investing militarily in cyberspace,

su izjavile da vrše vojne investicije u sajber prostoru,

strictly to defend their IT systems.

strogo da bi odbranile svoje IT sisteme.

But today both countries say

Ali danas obe zemlje kažu

the best defense is to attack.

da je napad najbolja odbrana.

And so, they're joining China,

I tako se one pridružuju Kini,

whose doctrine of use for 15 years has been

čiji je princip delovanja već 15 godina bio

both defensive and offensive.

i odbrambeni i napadački.

The second issue:

Drugi problem:

Your country could be under cyberattack

Vaša zemlja bi mogla biti pod sajber napadom

with entire regions plunged into total darkness,

sa celim regijama u totalnom mraku

and you may not even know

a vi ne biste čak ni znali

who's attacking you.

ko vas napada.

Cyber weapons have this peculiar feature:

Sajber oružje ima to čudno svojstvo:

they can be used

ono može biti upotrebljeno

without leaving traces.

a da ne ostavi nikakav trag.

This gives a tremendous advantage to the attacker,

To daje neverovatnu prednost napadaču,

because the defender

zato što onaj koji se brani

doesn't know who to fight back against.

ne zna protiv koga se bori.

And if the defender retaliates against the wrong adversary,

A ako se onaj koji se brani osveti pogrešnom protivniku,

they risk making one more enemy

rizikuje da stvori još jednog neprijatelja

and ending up diplomatically isolated.

i da padne u diplomatsku izolaciju.

This issue isn't just theoretical.

Ovaj problem nije samo teorijski.

In May 2007, Estonia was the victim of cyberattacks,

U maju 2007.godine, Estonija je bila žrtva sajber napada,

that damaged its communication

koji su oštetili njenu komunikaciju

and banking systems.

i bankarske sisteme.

Estonia accused Russia.

Estonija je optužila Rusiju.

But NATO, though it defends Estonia,

Ali je NATO, iako brani Estoniju,

reacted very prudently. Why?

reagovao vrlo promišljeno. Zašto?

Because NATO couldn't be 100% sure

Zato što NATO nije mogao da bude 100% siguran

that the Kremlin was indeed behind these attacks.

da je Kremlj zaista iza ovih napada.

So to sum up, on the one hand,

Dakle da rezimiramo, sa jedne strane,

when a possible enemy announces

kada mogući neprijatelj najavi

they're building a cyberwar unit,

da gradi postrojenje za sajber rat,

you don't know whether it's for attack

vi ne znate da li je to za napad

or defense.

ili za odbranu.

On the other hand,

Sa druge strane,

we know that these weapons give an advantage to attacking.

mi znamo da ovo oružje daje prednost napadaču.

In a major article published in 1978,

U važnom članku objavljenom 1978.,

Professor Robert Jervis of Columbia University in New York

profesor Robert Džervis sa Kolumbijskog univerziteta u Njujorku

described a model to understand

opisao je model koji može da pomogne pri razumevanju

how conflicts could arise.

načina nastajanja konflikta.

In this context,

U ovom kontekstu,

when you don't know if the potential enemy

kada vi ne znate da li se potencijalni neprijatelj

is preparing for defense or attack,

sprema za odbranu ili napad

and if the weapons give an advantage to attacking,

i da li oružje daje prednost napadaču,

then this environment is

tada će se u ovom okruženju

most likely to spark a conflict.

najverovatnije razviti konflikt.

This is the environment that's being created

Ovakvo okruženje stvara

by cyber weapons today,

sajber oružje danas,

and historically it was the environment in Europe

a istorijski gledano to je bilo okruženje u Evropi

at the onset of World War I.

na početku Prvog svetskog rata.

So cyber weapons

Dakle sajber oružje je

are dangerous by nature,

opasno po prirodi,

but in addition, they're emerging

ali se dodatno pojavljuje

in a much more unstable environment.

u mnogo nestabilnijem okruženju.

If you remember the Cold War,

Ako se sećate Hladnog rata,

it was a very hard game,

to je bila jako teška igra,

but a stable one played only by two players,

ali stabilna, koju je igralo samo dva igrača,

which allowed for some coordination between the two superpowers.

koja su dozvoljavala neku koordinaciju između dve super moći.

Today we're moving to a multipolar world

Danas živimo u multipolarnom svetu

in which coordination is much more complicated,

u kojem je koordinacija mnogo komplikovanija,

as we have seen at Copenhagen.

kao što smo to videli u Kopenhagenu.

And this coordination may become even trickier

I ova koordinacija može da postane još zahtevnija

with the introduction of cyber weapons.

sa uvođenjem sajber oružja.

Why? Because no nation

Zašto? Zato što nijedna nacija

knows for sure whether its neighbor

ne zna za sigurno da li će je njen komšija

is about to attack.

napasti.

So nations may live under the threat

Tako da države mogu da žive pod pretnjom

of what Nobel Prize winner Thomas Schelling

onoga što je dobitnik Nobelove nagrade Tomas Šeling

called the "reciprocal fear of surprise attack,"

nazvao "recipročnim strahom od iznenadnog napada"

as I don't know if my neighbor

jer ja ne znam da li će me moj komšija

is about to attack me or not --

napasti ili ne --

I may never know --

možda nikada necu saznati --

so I might take the upper hand

zato ću ga možda preduhitriti

and attack first.

i napasti prvi.

Just last week,

Prošle nedelje,

in a New York Times article dated January 26, 2010,

u članku u Njujork Tajmsu od 26. januara 2010. godine.

it was revealed for the first time that

po prvi put je otkriveno

officials at the National Security Agency

da su zvaničnici NASA-e

were considering the possibility of preemptive attacks

razmatrali mogućnosti preventivnih napada

in cases where the U.S. was about

u slučajevima kada bi SAD-u pretili

to be cyberattacked.

sajber napadi.

And these preemptive attacks

I ovi preventivni napadi

might not just remain

možda ne bi ostali samo

in cyberspace.

u sajber prostoru.

In May 2009, General Kevin Chilton,

U maju 2009. godine, general Kevin Čilton,

commander of the U.S. nuclear forces,

zapovednik američkih nuklearnih snaga,

stated that in the event of cyberattacks against the U.S.,

izjavio je da bi u slučaju sajber napada protiv SAD-a

all options would be on the table.

sve opcije bile u igri.

Cyber weapons do not replace

Sajber oružje ne zamenjuje

conventional or nuclear weapons --

konvencionalno ili nuklearno oružje

they just add a new layer to the existing system of terror.

ono samo dodaje novi sloj već postojećem sistemu terora.

But in doing so, they also add their own risk

Ali se pritom dodaje i rizik

of triggering a conflict --

od pokretanja konflikta --

as we've just seen, a very important risk --

kao što smo upravo videli, veoma važan rizik,

and a risk we may have to confront

i rizik sa kojim ćemo morati da se suočimo

with a collective security solution

sa zajedničkim rešenjem o bezbednosti

which includes all of us:

koje uključuje sve nas:

European allies, NATO members,

evropske saveznike, članove NATO-a,

our American friends and allies,

američke prijatelje i saveznike,

our other Western allies,

druge zapadne saveznike

and maybe, by forcing their hand a little,

i možda , uz malo prisile

our Russian and Chinese partners.

naše ruske i kineske partnere.

The information technologies

Informativne tehnologije

Joël de Rosnay was talking about,

o kojima priča Joël de Rosnay,

which were historically born from military research,

koje su rođene tokom istorije iz vojnih istraživanja

are today on the verge of developing

danas su na ivici toga da razviju

an offensive capability of destruction,

napadačke kapacitete destrukcije

which could tomorrow, if we're not careful,

koji bi sutra, ako nismo pažljivi,

completely destroy world peace.

mogli da u potpunosti unište svetski mir.

Thank you.

Hvala.

(Applause)

(Aplauz)