In the recent period, the term “cyber war” has occupied a large part of the concerns of a number of countries – especially the most important – and organizations and partisan currents, and has strongly entered into the comparisons of conflict and confrontation between multiple parties.
On the twentieth of last April, the Israeli Civil Aviation Authority, the official broadcasting agency (Kan) and the 9th TV channel announced that their official websites were subject to cyber attacks, which disrupted the websites and caused confusion in the work. system of these settings.
Two days later, the websites of Turkish political, security and media institutions, such as the Presidency of the Republic, the Bayraktar Military Company specializing in the production of drones, and the Anatolia News Agency were subjected to similar cyberattacks.
At a time when “Israel” was not late in pointing the finger at Iran and its affiliates and was supported by it, in exchange for Turkey’s silence on this, a largely unknown party, the “Iraqi Electronic Resistance”, the took initiative in its responsibility for carrying out the aforementioned attacks.This explained in separate statements the details of the attacks and their motives.
Regarding the cyber attack on “Israel”, she explained that it targeted the Ben Gurion Airport website, the websites of several major banks, and various security and media institutions.
With regard to the attack on Turkey, which was called “the activities of the martyr Marwan al-Yazidi”, it – according to the statement from the implementation agency – came in response to the call of the Iraqi consul by the Turkish Foreign Ministry , and the continuation of the Turkish aggression on Iraqi lands, by striking several cities and towns in the governors Dohuk and Sulaymaniyah and Erbil, and not ceasing to violate national sovereignty.
There is no doubt that these attacks represent a qualitative development and an important shift in the nature of conflict and confrontation and their tools, which are not related to the calculations of traditional offensive and defensive military capabilities and capabilities, as much as they related to employment. of scientific technologies within the framework of the information and communication revolution to achieve the maximum possible gains and achievements, which would confuse the opponent, if not weaken him.
It is striking and well-known that over the past ten years the term “cyber war” has occupied a large part of the concerns of a number of countries – especially the most important – and organizations and partisan currents, and strongly in the comparisons of conflict and confrontation between multiple parties, as is the case with a country launching attacks An electronic or cyber threat to the economic and security interests of another country, or to influence and manipulate the results and data of the elections. Perhaps what is rumored about Russia’s role in leading the US presidential election in 2016, in which Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton competed, and ended in the interests of the former, is one of the testimonies of the influence of the cyber factor in political conflict and competition.
One of the researchers says: “Regarding the level of tools and resources used in the intervention process, the Russians have shown a practical understanding of the ongoing transformations in the concept of power and its uses. Power no longer means to military and economic possessions, but rather lies in the use of the available capabilities, according to an effective strategy to achieve the desired goals. The lesson is in the results, not in the resources, and as long as there is great diversity in these sources is to achieve the desired results., their proper use is one of the manifestations of power in the present era, and perhaps the means of information technology and the Internet are of the most prominent and diverse.
While the general context, through various periods, has been that the great powers influence the policies of other less competent countries, and more than that, define and decide those policies, in a way that matches their interests, orientations and calculations. But for the first world power – the United States of America – to be subject to penetration, threat and great influence, without taking advantage of its enormous military capabilities, it is undoubtedly a very important shift in tools, indicators and trajectories. of the conflict, note that some sources confirm that in 2014 the United States alone was subjected to more than 100,000 electronic attacks, and for multiple offenses, the majority of which were parties, groups or individuals affiliated with countries whose political, economic, military and financial capabilities and capabilities are not comparable to those of the largest world power and its capabilities.
The concept of cyber warfare is proposed as “military-led electronic attacks that invade global electronic systems and everything that depends on technology, to damage computers and devices that use the global internet, which can lead to catastrophic results, such as theft of private data , and other disasters that could be worldwide, such as nuclear wars and others. “
As far as the concept of electronic or cyber armies is concerned, specialists and interested parties define it as “a group of electronic experts in the field of programming and information technology.” These groups are affiliated with the governments of countries. Consequently, the electronic armies were established for political motives, so that their work was hidden and out of sight, due to its sensitivity and danger, and sometimes it takes on an offensive character, and other times a defensive character.
And as the major international powers, such as the United States and others, became aware of the impact of the cyber factor, its role and impact in ensuring superiority and avoiding potential threats and risks, they began to establish electronic armies, as systems no less important than intelligence services, security agencies, media and banking financial systems.
During the era of former President Donald Trump (2016-2020), the United States announced that it was raising the level of cyber security to the level of a unified combat command. Consequently, the establishment of the US Electronic Operations Unit was approved as an independent unit, not affiliated with or affiliated with any other force.
Before that, in 2015, China established its own electronic army, under the name “Chinese Blue Army”.
As far as Russia is concerned, in 2017 it announced its possession of a cyber army with the aim of protecting the Russian cyberspace, by identifying the sources of attacks against Russia and improving and developing its capabilities to ensure the country’s electronic protection . The same thing was done by Britain in 2015, not to mention “Israel”, which paid a lot of attention to this aspect, due to the nature of its sensitive security situation and the large number of its enemies and adversaries, and the development of the capabilities of these opponents and enemies, in all aspects and fields, as is the case with Iran and the Lebanese Hezbollah And the Palestinian resistance movements, then some Iraqi factions, which somehow fall under the umbrella of the resistance axis. .
Perhaps the recent electronic attacks by the Iraqi resistance against Israeli and Turkish targets contain very important signs and indicators, as their goals go beyond their immediate results, and are linked to what other steps they can take, according to their technical capabilities, taking into account the fact that the arena of their movement and efficiency is not far from the arena.The Iranian movement and the movement of the whole of the resistance axis speaks. This is what is causing great concern for “Tel Aviv” about this, which was clearly expressed by Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, in a speech at the annual National Cyber Conference at Tel Aviv University, on the twenty-first of July 2021, as “Cyber Attacks “is one of the biggest existential threats to Israeli national security and global national security,” he said. “If an evil country in the past had to send planes with soldiers and bombs, the best way today is a cyber attack. All that is needed is brains, knowledge, experience and good communication.” With the internet, it’s easy, “adding:” We, as a “state,” have to defend ourselves. That is why we have created one national electronic authority, whose role is to monitor all industries in Israel – water, electricity, etc. – and this authority is also responsible for the market special “.
In other words, Bennett wanted to say that whoever owns a large and advanced military arsenal and a strong, well-trained army and enjoys broad international support, must think a thousand times before taking any military action against a small entity. which is none of that.
At a time when “Israel” has come a long way in its plans to electronically infiltrate Arab and Islamic political systems and societies, and the Pegasus espionage program is one of its examples and evidence, but over time it has become vulnerable turned into cyber-targeting, which often entails huge financial costs. Today, there are many politicians, security leaders, experts and researchers, within the Israeli political corridors and intellectual forums, who argue that the danger of cyberattacks arising from the enemies of “Israel” should be expected more than thinking and planning how to to confront missiles and planes!
And when the blatant Israeli concern and the extraordinary and very great interest of the major international powers in building, developing and activating their cyber capabilities and electronic armies are linked to the cyber attacks of the Iraqi electronic resistance on parties that threaten Iraqi political, security , social and economic systems, such as “Tel Aviv” and Ankara, At that time it will be possible to draw the initial perceptions and horizons of the nature and tools of the wars of the next stage or stages, and the extent of their impact on the balance of power and conflict comparisons, especially in light of the evaporation and deterioration of the traditional frameworks and classifications of the concept of adults and children in the arenas of conflict and convergence.