Google and info-war in “state-sponsored attacks” warning: raises many questions
Google and info-war in “state-sponsored attacks” warning: raises many questions
Joachim de Villiers and Lee Jay Walker
Modern Tokyo Times
The information war is gathering apace in many areas and the importance of social networking is going from strength to strength. It does appear that Google is doing a noble thing by protecting individuals from state-sponsored attacks. However, the initiative does raise some important questions because will this be used against all nations?
In the age of technology and social networking new areas are opening up and the ongoing chaos in Egypt, Libya, Syria, and Tunisia, is a witness to the power of social media and the internet. However, in nations which are extremely modern like Israel or in countries which are on great terms with America, for example Saudi Arabia, it is clear that you have had little impact from all the regional chaos.
Obviously the factors will be very different because one nation is democratic while the other is despotic. Despite this, the Palestinian question remains within the body politic of Israel. Similarly, in Saudi Arabia you would have thought that the so-called “Arab Spring” would have hit this nation given the draconian nature of this country. Despite both Israel and Saudi Arabia facing the rise of social networking and at least “some awakening” in certain areas, relatively little happened.
Therefore is social networking being used and manipulated against governments deemed unfriendly to the interests of America and important regional nations like Saudi Arabia? This is the problem because all nations have unique factors and the development stage is very different. Of course, Google may state that they aren’t targeting specific governments and supporting any personal agendas but questions are being raised by this new initiative.
Harel Chorev, Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies at Tel Aviv University, comments that “The unfolding of the Arab Spring protests sheds light on the significant role of social media in the Middle East’s contemporary political arena. The emergence of Social Media has been a groundbreaking development that has made a crucial contribution to regime transformation in some cases, and on some of the post-revolutionary countries’ political culture. Still, it must be understood that Social Media is not the reason behind the Arab Spring uprisings; rather, it is a powerful tool for the organization of protests. The root causes of the uprisings are the social, economic and political issues in each country, along with global problems such as the rising prices of essential products. In addition, it should be noted that the weight and patterns of the Social Media phenomenon differ from one country to another.”
Harel Chorev also comments that “Currently, and as shown during the overthrow of both the Egyptian and Tunisian presidents, SNS can serve as a foundation for coalitions which cut across social and political lines and which are built around a unifying goal — e.g. ousting the regime — even if the members are not unified on any other issue. Further, the individual SNS user, sitting alone at home or in an internet café, can see the multitudes who share his views. The notion that so many others share the same goals empowers the individual to take action, e.g. to participate in street protests. This internalization process, occurring in millions of users, can be the final push that releases masses of protestors to the streets.”
Therefore, while the alerts against “state-sponsored attacks” can be used for noble reasons, it can also be manipulated by governments which have an interest in gaining from this. Also, some nations will deem this new “internal social tool” to be a threat to internal national security. This means that Google may be viewed to be “an outside agent” who is protecting anti-government individuals (other important areas) from being pursued – this raises many questions because will friendly governments and organizations also be protected and so forth?
Eric Grosse, Vice-President of Google’s security engineering, comments “You might ask how we know this activity is state-sponsored…We can’t go into the details without giving away information that would be helpful to these bad actors, but our detailed analysis – as well as victim reports – strongly suggests the involvement of states or groups that are state-sponsored.”
In an article by Josh Rogin (Foreign Policy–The Cable) it is stated that “While last week’s announcement and this week’s announcement are both being presented by Google as user based initiatives not directed at foreign governments, Google CEO Eric Schmidt has been speaking out publicly and forcefully in recent months about the potential negative role governments can play in circumventing internet freedom.”
“While threats come from individuals and even groups of people, the biggest problem will be activities stemming from nations that seek to do harm” commented Eric Schmidt.
Individuals will be divided by this new feature by Google. The same applies to nations which will welcome this new initiative and other nations which will view this with suspicion. It is clear that the internet and social networking can bypass many traditional areas and be manipulated by so-called “progressive forces” and “dark forces.”
Therefore, Google is either enhancing the rights of individuals and organizations which seek to challenge the status quo by informing them of current dangers related to security. Or alternatively Google may be deemed to be a “shadow agent” which is following their own internal objectives. After all, will Google warn individuals and governments being attacked by areas which they disapprove? Also, what is the definition behind what is deemed to be “state-sponsored attacks,” on one side, and “national security” on the other side?
http://moderntokyotimes.com/2011/10/20/social-media-and-other-revolutions/
