Choosing between Persistent Engagement and Deterrence in the American Cybersecurity Strategy

The article examines the adoption by the United States of a new policy for ensuring cybersecurity, a strategy of peristent engagement in cyberspace, and how it is related to the strategy of cyber deterrence that remained dominant for a long time. The strategy of persistent engagement implies the constant conduct of cyber operations that do not reach the level of an armed conflict and combining purely defensive activities with offense. Such strategy is designed to prevent US rivals from carrying out malicious actions in cyberspace and to preserve strategic advantages of the United States by imposing additional costs on opponents and creating tactical friction for them. According to experts, persistent engagement perfectly suits the unique characteristics of cyberspace (interconnectedness and the condition of constant contact), unlike a strategy of deterrence that is suitable for traditional areas of military operations. Nevertheless, the US leadership is not ready to abandon the cyber deterrence strategy, and it is looking for ways to conceptually combine the two strategies. The paper presents the key characteristics of persistent engagement, some of which are: 1) cyber operations do not reach the level of an armed conflict; 2) persistent engagement is not an armed conflict; 3) creating "tactical friction" and imposing costs on US opponents; 4) preventive defense. Expert opinions on the prospects of persistent engagement are presented and analyzed. The paper demonstrates the analysis potential advantages and drawbacks of this approach. American specialists expect that persistent engagement will lead to an automatic formation of criteria for acceptable behavior in the process of strategic competition. Among the obvious drawbacks of the analyzed approach, one can single out a possible international escalation due to its application. The author analyzes the transformation of the “conceptual” status of cyberspace and the institutional changes, caused by this new strategic approach. The conclusions regarding the prospects for this strategy are ambiguous. Its effectiveness, safety and risks will become known only with time during the actual application of this strategy and the accumulation of empirical experience. The relevance of the work is due to the current strategic situation between the United States and Russia. Understanding the United States' approaches to cybersecurity and the key strategic changes in them is crucial not only to formulate Russia`s cybersecurity policy, but also to build a constructive dialogue with the United States on cybersecurity issues.

1. Aggarwal K.V., Reddie A.W. (2019). Cyber Industrial Policy in an Era of Strategic Competition. Center for Long­Term Cybersecurity. May. 17 p. URL: https://cltc.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/CLTC_Cyber_Industrial_Policy.pdf (accessed: 07.01.2020).

2. Bebber R. (2017). Treating Information as a Strategic Resource to Win the “Information War”. Orbis. Vol. 61. No. 3. P. 394–403.

3. Chilton K., Weaver G. (2009). Waging Deterrence in the Twenty-First Century. Strategic Studies Quarterly. Vol. 3. No. 1. P. 31–42.

4. Clarke R., Knake R. (2011). Cyber War: The Next Threat to National Security and What to Do About It. N.Y.: Ecco. 320 p.

5. Fischerkeller M.P., Harknett R.J. (2017). Deterrence is Not a Credible Strategy for Cyberspace. Orbis. Vol. 61. No. 3. P. 381–393.

6. Fischerkeller M.P., Harknett R.J. (2018). Persistent Engagement, Agreed Competition, Cyberspace Interaction Dynamics, and Escalation. Institute for Defense Analyses. 23 p. URL: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/832e/16cb7fcd6f732454b26ca86de31f2e8cd7c6.pdf?_ga=2.89625439.559095083.1578310623-1262708193.1578310623 (accessed: 18.12.2019).

7. Jasper S. (2017). Strategic Cyber Deterrence: The Active Cyber Defense Option. N.Y.: Rowman & Littlefield. 270 p.

8. Geers K. (2010). The Challenge of Cyber Attack Deterrence. Computer Law & Security Review. No. 26. P. 298–303.

9. Goldman E.O. (2020). From Reaction to Action: Adopting a Competitive Posture in Cyber Diplomacy. Texas National Security Review. Special Issue: Cyber Competition. Fall. URL: https://tnsr.org/category/special-issue-cyber-competition/ (accessed: 30.11.2020).

10. Goodman W. (2010). Cyber Deterrence: Tougher in Theory than in Practice? Strategic Studies Quarterly. Vol. 4. No. 3. P. 102–135.

11. Harknett R.J., Callaghan J.P., Kauffman R. (2010). Leaving Deterrence Behind: WarFighting and National Cybersecurity. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management. Vol. 7. No. 1. P. 1–24.

12. Harknett R.J., Goldman E. (2016). The Search for Cyber Fundamentals. Jiw. Vol. 15. No. 2. URL: https://www.jinfowar.com/journal/volume-15-issue-2/search-cyber-fundamentals (accessed: 29.12.2019).

13. Healey J., Caudill S. (2020). Success of Persistent Engagement in Cyberspace. Strategic Studies Quarterly. Spring. Vol. 14. No. 1. P. 9–15. URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26891881?seq=1# metadata_info_tab_contents (accessed: 30.11.2020).

14. Healey J. (2019). The implications of persistent (and permanent) engagement in cyberspace. Journal of Cybersecurity. Vol. 5. No. 1. URL: https://academic.oup.com/cybersecurity/article/5/1/tyz008/5554878 (accessed: 22.01.2020).

15. Libicki M.C. (2009). Cyberdeterrence and Cyberwar. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation. 238 p.

16. Libicki M.C. (2017). It Takes More than Offensive Capability to Have an Effective Cyberdeterrence Posture: Testimony presented before the House Armed Services Committee. RAND Corporation. March 1. 12 p. URL: https://www.rand.org/pubs/testimonies/CT465.html (accessed: 29.06.2020).

17. Lynn W.J. (2010). Defending a New Domain: The Pentagon's Cyberstrategy. Foreign Affairs. Vol. 89. No. 5. P. 97–108.

18. Meakins J. (2018). Living in (Digital) Denial Russia’s Approach to Cyber Deterrence. Euro­Atlantic Security Report. European Leadership Network. 14 p. URL: https://www.europeanleadershipnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Living-in-Digital-Denial-Russia%E2%80%99s-Approach-to-CyberDeterrence.pdf (accessed: 01.12.2019).

19. Nakasone P.M. (2019). A Cyber Force for Persistent Operations. Joint Force Quarterly. Vol. 92. P. 10–14.

20. Nakasone P.M., Sulmeyer M. (2020). How to Compete in Cyberspace. Foreign Affairs. August 25. URL: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2020-08-25/cybersecurity (accessed: 27.11.2020).

21. Nye J. S. (2016). Deterrence and Dissuasion in Cyberspace. International Security. Vol. 41. No. 3. P. 44–71.

22. Nye J.S. (2011). Nuclear Lessons for Cyber Security. Strategic Studies Quarterly. Vol. 5. No. 4. P. 18–38.

23. Philbin M.J. (2013). Cyber Deterrence: An Old Concept in a New Domain. Carlisle: U.S. Army War College. 24 p.

24. Shakirov O. (2020). Budushchee rossijsko-amerikanskih otnoshenij: analiticheskaya zapiska [The Future of U.S.–Russia Relations : analytic note]. Rossijskij sovet po mezhdunarodnym delam. September 15. 10 p. URL: https://russiancouncil.ru/papers/Russia-USA-PolicyBrief31.pdf (accessed: 05.12.2020).

25. Smirnov A. (2018). Novejshie kiberstrategii SSHA – preambula vojny? [Revision of the U.S. cyberstrategy under Donald Trump: preamble for aggression?]. Mezhdunarodnye processy. No. 4 (55). P. 181–192.

26. Snyder G.H. (1961). Deterrence and Defense: Toward a Theory of National Security. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 306 p.

27. Sokolsky R., Rumer E. (2020). U.S.-Russian Relations in 2030. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 19 p. URL: https://carnegieendowment.org/files/SokolskyRumer_US-Russia-2030_final1.pdf (accessed: 05.12.2020).

28. Sterner E. (2011). Retaliatory Deterrence in Cyberspace. Strategic Studies Quarterly. Vol. 5. No. 1. P. 62–80.

29. Sulmeyer M. (2018). How the U.S. Can Play Cyber-Offense: Deterrence Isn't Enough. Foreign Affairs. 29. URL: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/world/2018-03-22/how-us-can-play-cyber-offense (accessed: 09.01.2020).

30. Zinchenko A.V., Tolstuhina A.Ju. (2018). Mir ili vojna v kiberprostranstve? [Peace or war in cyberspace?]. Mezhdunarodnaya zhizn'. No. 9. P. 82–90.

31. Zinovieva E.S. (2019). Kibersderzhivanie i cifrovaya dilemma bezopasnosti v amerikanskom ekspertnom diskurse [Concepts of cyberdeterrence and digital security dilemma in the US academic literature]. Mezhdunarodnye processy. No. 3 (58). P. 51–65.