#Civilization VI: Rise and Fall - Logic Review

[mslizshowbizrant]

The Cyberworld vs. State Sovereignty

Report from: PLSI120 “International Politics”  California State University Author: Elizabeth Rose McAdams-DaCosta, Political Student Posted: January 11, 2020 To: The President of the United States Research Question: How cyberthreats can affect state and state sovereignty. Introduction:                        The Treaty of Westphalia was the first agreement decided upon to cover a state’s sovereignty right. The idea behind this agreement was for all states to hold their power to rule within their own recognized borders. It is popular between state leaders because most wish to rule over their state without interference or influences from outsiders that can cause a leader to lose control of the territory. Often state leaders disagree with how to rule a nation. Especially in cases involving human rights, expression, communications, religion, and currency. Therefore, the agreement for state sovereignty rights was decided upon to stop each country from pushing another to take up its traditional norms, laws, and beliefs. But still communicate in terms of trade, foreign aid, and transportation of goods and people to focus on global disasters or crises, that can plague any country. Although the Treaty of Westphalia was established in 1648, today, we look over how our communications with other states have become more convenient with the use of the internet. Now anyone can communicate with individuals globally. This has allowed citizens to share information and establish relationships. The routine has become popular with citizens and because of this has also become popular with businesses, governments and state leaders alike since each seeks often to get citizens to participate within their interest. Due to such use, social media platforms have become the most popular way to communicate and run businesses globally. But due to such convenience has also made it easy for corruption to form further within businesses, governments, and political affairs.            Evidence:                        As citizens communicate with others in different states, they share information that can cause a conflict. These days we see on popular social media sites citizens in different states post videos of human rights violations taking place within their borders. For example, according to an article from Haaretz, a Middle Eastern news company, Iran’s government had recently shut down the internet because of a protest movement. And recently according to Fox News, a movement is also taking place in Hong Kong as its citizens have been influenced by noticing democratic practices taking place within the United States. Citizens have decided to stand up to their government and push for change. In both instances, we see a country’s state leader placing the blame on the United States, for encouraging the spread of democracy with the use of internet communications. The result has called for America’s current actors to threaten sanctions to bend the will of other state leaders and welcome democracy into their states to combat human rights violations. In these examples, we see communications used by citizens in cyberspace to spread awareness beyond borders do not only alert key states and its actors but alert the hegemon state to its role to protect citizens from such violations despite a state’s sovereignty right.

Each of the current events shows information was shared globally and had alerted other state leaders along with their citizens to intervene despite state sovereignty that otherwise allows the practice to take place according to the laws of that land. There are government tools a state leader can use against another to bend the will of its leader. Sanctions, boycotts, and embargos, for example, can be placed to cut off a flow of goods in trade deals created and weaken another state's economy. But the fact of any government tool used to control what another country is doing automatically undermines a state sovereignty right. The cyberworld by itself serves as a communication tool that allows a flow of information to take place without any restrictions. Therefore, as a tool used by our state leaders, it can automatically be used to undermine a state’s sovereignty. Yet under the Treaty of Westphalia of 1648, a state should be able to decide what information is flowing to it and from it if that information can cause a leader or government to lose control of its state. But the treaty does not include the use of the cyberworld nor how to evade cyberthreats considering those who wrote it could not have predicted the communication systems we use today. And so, just as when the constitution was written, cyberspace was not written under any guidelines.                        Today these services given to communicate globally are established through multinational corporations who are only in business to make money. Because of this, they show little care of corruption forming if it means to keep themselves in power. Laws that are written both nationally and internationally have now placed them at the negotiation table often when the time comes for state leaders to decide government affairs because if it was not for their services people could not benefit. This makes businesses more prone to ignore the sovereignty of any state to attract its best customers and increase their chances of survival. In such cases as this, another example we face today occurred during the presidential election of 2016. Concerning America's previous presidential election, a rumor spread throughout every news media company that Russia was involved with using social media platforms on the internet to reach out to citizens and divide America’s country’s people with the use of propaganda and cyber soft power, for hate to grow during the debate season. Propaganda has a long history of its own. But today it takes a new form of what is called MEMES and fake news articles shared over the internet. The goal behind using it is to use it as a cyber soft power to convey information strategically and quickly. Robert Jervis, a political scholar, says it best in his book “The Logic of Images in International Relations (1970)” when he describes the effects of propaganda to be of indices:            “Indices are statements or activities that carry some inherent evidence that the image projected is correct because they are believed to be inextricably linked to the actors' capabilities and intentions.”

Review of Literature:                        The cyberworld although it is powerful, people of corruption no matter what state they are in under the right computer training can choose to hack a government or business system. If there is a lack of cybersecurity regarding state borders it would leave a group of individuals who are willing to hack and steal the identities of people to carry out a set goal more likely; otherwise is called cyber-crimes. Such actions involve cyber hard power, as it allows the targeting of cybersecurity systems. A hacker under these terms may as well be considered a thief; as their goals can range from crashing systems to installing viruses. Or from stealing data for travel and business use to stealing data for warfare purposes.                         Another example taking place falls under scenarios where a terrorist organization may connect on social media platforms in closed groups and recruit members to discuss plans that would result in targeting specific areas to establish political movements. Some that lead to a demand in a state’s leader to fulfill the group's interest and change certain laws. Currently, we face issues with a corrupted group called Isis who fits this very description as they are a group that is known to carry out any action possible to undermine sovereignty rights other states may hold; possibly due to religious influences they plan to spread globally. Such groups that form hold a strong set goal but usually force citizens home to the state to recognize their differences and, call for nationalism. But in a country, such as America this only creates a clash of civilizations since America was founded on immigration and then written under constitutional law to treat all equal. According to Samuel P. Huntington, author of the article A Clash of Civilizations:

“Civilizations are dynamic; they rise and fall; they divide and merge. And, as any student of history knows, civilizations disappear and are buried in the sands of time.”

                       It was he who believed the civilizations would clash the moment identity between states collided. And figured the world would be shaped based on the most powerful states. The constitution of the United States, however, fits under the structure of western practices. Although when the constitution was originally established in 1778 these rights were only applied to white men until citizens fought for change by calling for civil war. Because of so many movements over time, the citizens have fought for our country to reform and to be a haven for all to gravitate towards to seek opportunity and claim refuge. Making America much more vulnerable to conflicts between its citizens that disapprove of sharing territory with outsiders who do not fit the same traditional norms, religions, and practices.

                       Looking back on the history of our country, we see that it may not have the best history but that it is ours. We can either stand to protect it or let others take it from us. That is the idea of state sovereignty in all perspectives. Although the constitutional laws of our country are meant to care for all citizens of its nation, it is lacking to apply our laws to protect us completely in cases involving cyberspace. For instance, in looking over our constitutional rights, we understand that we have three that are meant to protect our rights to equal protection, privacy, property and to hold fair elections. Each current event mentioned thus far, it has been noted that the current cybersecurity we do have has yet to be applied to protect our current ways to communicate. Anytime we choose to sign up for a social media platform or at times visit a website its terms and conditions of usage go against the ideas of privacy by using tracking cookies to collect data on a user, to sell that information to other businesses. Most businesses today choose to run databases online or AI computers to handle customers. Therefore, has forced everyone including those who never wanted to communicate with the use of the internet to now do so. And if we continue to look over our current government actors and state leader’s desires. We see they wish to increase the use of the internet with the use of AI and possibly upgrading to 5G services. We can see that the internet looks as if it will be around for decades. This alone is a reason a movement should form to create better cybersecurity for all people to establish safety. These days however the only coverage we have seems to be sold to the people and businesses who can afford to pay for it. This leaves anyone who cannot afford the extra charge at risk of being hacked, cyber attacked, stalked or in some cases having their identities stolen in a country that is supposed to cover equal protection of all citizens. Looking at various websites we come across cybersecurity systems for both single life, families and businesses for sale. But all at different prices for different forms of protection to be covered.

                       Privacy is breached the moment a business creates a contract that goes against the law of the constitution to protect citizens. Despite this, because of a signed contract, a business will still gather information on a person to pass onto others and get away with it. How do we know such information passed on is not used against citizens later despite constitutional rights? How do we know if such details gathered will not prevent citizens from equal opportunities when seeking employment? The idea that our government systems along with its key actors rely so heavily on the same services to communicate. This practice increases chances that a hacker or spy no matter where they are located will break into cybersecurity systems for selfish purposes.

Conclusion:                                         Since when do we need to pay for our rights to be protected under the constitution? The 14th Amendment gives us the right to equal protection. The 5th, for the rights to privacy and property, based on chattel. The 24th Amendment gave us the right to vote and hold fair democratic elections. Not at one point does our constitutional rights indicate that we need to pay for any of our rights as citizens regardless of how advanced our ways to communicate become overtime. And if the presidential election of 2016 was indeed targeted by government actors in different states plus can continue to be targeted if placed on systems that have chances of being hacked, then is this not our rights to fair elections placed on the line? Adding to this we have also noticed such broad communications over the internet may have placed other countries to think negatively of the United States due to influence to stand for democracy. How do we know we will not be targeted by other state leaders as a result? Unless we force our leaders to care, it seems we have only a few amendments that our leaders may not count towards open global communications if it cost them nor their negotiators any form of power. The answer is to stand up for cybersecurity protections to be free of charge so all citizens will be fully protected under the constitutional law our country promotes. In general, a business should not be given a right to present any contract that allows it to perform unlawful practices that may put citizens, states, and governments at risk. The strategy gives only them the power to allow key state leaders to undermine state sovereignty by using them for global communication purposes. And just because a business is offering services through cyberspace, does not mean the business practices nor the cyber world should then be placed above the law. Works Cited: The Clash of Civilizations? By Samuel P. Huntington Publisher: Council of Foreign Relations. Foreign Affairs Vol 72, No, 3 (1993) pp. 22-49 The Logic of Images in International Relations By Robert Jervis Publisher: Princeton University Press, 1970. Pp. 281 Americas Founding Documents Publisher: National Archives and Records Administration Link: https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs The U.S Constitution Publisher: Legal Information Institute (LII), 1992 Link: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution With Brutal Sophistication and No Internet, Iran Was Quick to Stamp Out Protest By: Amos Harel and Yaniv Kubovich Publisher: HAARETZ, News Article, November 27, 2019 Link: https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/iran/.premium-iran-learns-its-lesson-suppress-protests-as-quickly-as-possible-1.8189189 How Trump just upped the Ante with China over Trade deal: Expert Panel By: Matt London Publisher: Fox News, News Article, November 26, 2019 Link: https://www.foxnews.com/media/trump-china-trade-deal-muslim-camps Aura Identity Guard Aura Company, All Rights Reserved, 2019 Link:https://www.identityguard.com/save20?campid=1394&mktp=idprotectionreview Cyber Risk Management Chubb Company, 2019 Link:https://www.chubb.com/us-en/cyber-risk-management/#products-services                                        

[guylogicgaming]

Civilization VI: Rise and Fall - Logic Review