Tinfect wrote:"And why should they not, Ambassador? If a State were to breach networks of your Government that contain highly-controlled information, do you mean to tell me that your Government would not act? How is it reasonable to consider an explicitly hostile action that threatens the security of your Nation as not being an Act of War simply because it does not involve the aiming of a Weapon?"
"Because Sciongrad believes in restraint and proportional response. Consider the following: someone steals my purse. I respond by pulling out a gun and shooting them in the head. That's not how reasonable people behave and it certainly is not how reasonable governments, committed to the ideals of peace espoused by the World Assembly, behave."
OOC: Please don't assume that the position of the Imperium is representative of my actual beliefs. In any case, while such a thing would absolutely be a disproportionate response, and that the threat of Military Action, and maybe some serious trade sanctions, would be far more appropriate, I do actually believe that there is justification for treating cyberattacks as an explicitly hostile action. I do not believe that Nations should be in the business of spying on States that they are not actively at war with. In a world where an attack on a local digital infrastructure has the possibility of causing a large-scale disaster, we need to start taking cyberattacks far more seriously.
OOC: I didn't mean to imply that I thought you actually believed that, but I was trying to clarify what you actually meant. I wasn't sure if your IC position was as extreme as it seemed. The OOC parallel was meant solely for me to understand Tinfect's IC attitude. And for what it's worth, no one is saying that spying is not a hostile act. But in the real world, no government would ever go to war over a cyberattack. It just wouldn't happen. The U.S. was caught spying on major allies a couple of years ago. No wars. Russian state spies allegedly hacked into the DNC recently. No wars. Cyberattacks are hostile actions that often damage relations between countries, but they are not casus belli. Unfortunately, as I explained before, the resolution we're discussing may allow nations greater flexibility in deciding whether or not cyberattacks constitute legitimate casus belli.
