I'm seeing a trend here.  I've noticed an increasing anger with Chinese cyber-espionage over the past few months.  I'm thinking of the ONCIX report that openly accused the Chinese government of stealing billions of dollars of intellectual property.  I'm thinking of the Washington Post editorial that demanded the Obama administration confront China.  I'm thinking of US lawmakers, on both sides of the aisle, calling Chinese espionage intolerable.  I'm thinking of Jack Goldsmith's op-ed in the Washington Post arguing that US offensive cyber capabilities don't work against Chinese cyber-espionage.  I'm thinking of the London Conference where the participants all but named China as one of the worst cyber-offenders.  In short,  people have had enough of Chinese cyber-espionage, and I think they've reached a breaking point.

I mention this breaking point because I believe that in 2012, the Obama administration will have to react.  Last night I came across two great articles, providing two completely different views.  The first, an article written by Loren Thompson for Forbes, argued that the new year must bring a new shift in foreign policy for the Obama administration.  Mr. Thompson argued that the Obama administration must react to Chinese cyber-espionage in 2012.  The Obama administration has strong evidence that hacker groups connected to the Chinese government are attacking US systems; we've got attribution.  The Obama administration also has the incentive with an upcoming election and strong rhetoric from Republic candidates.  However, the question remains, how does the Obama administration deal with Chinese cyber-espionage?

Mr. Thompson notes that the Obama administration has favored a non-confrontational approach with China in that it has declined to label the Chinese as currency manipulators and declined to sell fighter jets to Taiwan.  I recognize the value of the non-confrontational approach.  However, Mr. Thompson argues, and I agree, that the scale of Chinese cyber-espionage has gotten too big to ignore.  We've watched as the Chinese have stolen billions of dollars worth of American intellectual property.  We've watched as the equivalent of thousands of American jobs have fled overseas.  Chinese cyber-espionage has degraded our nation's economic and military strength.  The non-confrontational approach has its merits, but it doesn't appear to be working here.  Mr. Thompson concludes that the Obama administration must act forcefully or the Chinese may become emboldened, and "undertake far worse offenses."

That brings us to the second article, written by Graham Webster for Al-Jazeera.  Mr. Webster considered the claim that the US and China are headed towards a cyber cold war.  In doing so, Mr. Webster cautioned against the use of loose-fitting metaphors like "cold war", and believes that there is no use for a bi-polar strategic landscape when both the US and China are so economically interdependent.  Mr. Webster goes on to argue that the US also engages in online espionage, we should focus on cyber vulnerabilities themselves rather than the countries exploiting them, attribution is still uncertain, and "the world can't afford chest-thumping."

***

So there we have it.  I know this is awfully simplistic, but I think these two articles represent the hawk and the dove.  It's probably no surprise that I agree with Mr. Thompson's hawkish view. 

To that end, I disagree with most of Mr. Webster's arguments.  I think the US and China are in a cyberwar, in that the systematic Chinese cyber-espionage has clearly damaged US military and economic interests.  Although attribution will always have some level of uncertainty, the NSA has strong evidence that hacker groups related to the Chinese government are perpetrating these attacks.  In a closed society like China, these groups don't operate without the government's blessing.  The US can confront China on its cyber-espionage without precipitating some global cyberwar or falling into a bi-polar strategic landscape.  Moreover, it's really difficult to divorce cyber vulnerabilities from the countries that exploit them.  There's a reason that the Chinese conduct such pervasive cyber-espionage, and the fact that China exploits a cyber vulnerability (as opposed to the Dutch, or British, or Israelis) may change how we respond. 

The Obama administration's approach towards China will define 2012.  International politics is a delicate game, but the non-confrontational approach can only go so far.  Here, the Chinese need to be confronted.  That confrontation doesn't require some cyber cold war, or "chest-thumping", as the US could utilize diplomatic channels in a firm, but fair, way.  However, we can't continue to watch US intellectual property flee our shores.  Something must be done.

***

The Forbes article, titled U.S. Headed For Cyberwar Showdown With China In 2012, can be found here.

The Al-Jazeera article, titled Cyber Cold War haunts the US and China, can be found here.

***

I'd love to know your thoughts on the US response to Chinese cyber-espionage.  Comments are encouraged.

I'm seeing a trend here.  I've noticed an increasing anger with Chinese cyber-espionage over the past few months.  I'm thinking of the ONCIX report that openly accused the Chinese government of stealing billions of dollars of intellectual property.  I'm thinking of the Washington Post editorial that demanded the Obama administration confront China.  I'm thinking of US lawmakers, on both sides of the aisle, calling Chinese espionage intolerable.  I'm thinking of Jack Goldsmith's op-ed in the Washington Post arguing that US offensive cyber capabilities don't work against Chinese cyber-espionage.  I'm thinking of the London Conference where the participants all but named China as one of the worst cyber-offenders.  In short,  people have had enough of Chinese cyber-espionage, and I think they've reached a breaking point.

I mention this breaking point because I believe that in 2012, the Obama administration will have to react.  Last night I came across two great articles, providing two completely different views.  The first, an article written by Loren Thompson for Forbes, argued that the new year must bring a new shift in foreign policy for the Obama administration.  Mr. Thompson argued that the Obama administration must react to Chinese cyber-espionage in 2012.  The Obama administration has strong evidence that hacker groups connected to the Chinese government are attacking US systems; we've got attribution.  The Obama administration also has the incentive with an upcoming election and strong rhetoric from Republic candidates.  However, the question remains, how does the Obama administration deal with Chinese cyber-espionage?

Mr. Thompson notes that the Obama administration has favored a non-confrontational approach with China in that it has declined to label the Chinese as currency manipulators and declined to sell fighter jets to Taiwan.  I recognize the value of the non-confrontational approach.  However, Mr. Thompson argues, and I agree, that the scale of Chinese cyber-espionage has gotten too big to ignore.  We've watched as the Chinese have stolen billions of dollars worth of American intellectual property.  We've watched as the equivalent of thousands of American jobs have fled overseas.  Chinese cyber-espionage has degraded our nation's economic and military strength.  The non-confrontational approach has its merits, but it doesn't appear to be working here.  Mr. Thompson concludes that the Obama administration must act forcefully or the Chinese may become emboldened, and "undertake far worse offenses."

That brings us to the second article, written by Graham Webster for Al-Jazeera.  Mr. Webster considered the claim that the US and China are headed towards a cyber cold war.  In doing so, Mr. Webster cautioned against the use of loose-fitting metaphors like "cold war", and believes that there is no use for a bi-polar strategic landscape when both the US and China are so economically interdependent.  Mr. Webster goes on to argue that the US also engages in online espionage, we should focus on cyber vulnerabilities themselves rather than the countries exploiting them, attribution is still uncertain, and "the world can't afford chest-thumping."

***

So there we have it.  I know this is awfully simplistic, but I think these two articles represent the hawk and the dove.  It's probably no surprise that I agree with Mr. Thompson's hawkish view. 

To that end, I disagree with most of Mr. Webster's arguments.  I think the US and China are in a cyberwar, in that the systematic Chinese cyber-espionage has clearly damaged US military and economic interests.  Although attribution will always have some level of uncertainty, the NSA has strong evidence that hacker groups related to the Chinese government are perpetrating these attacks.  In a closed society like China, these groups don't operate without the government's blessing.  The US can confront China on its cyber-espionage without precipitating some global cyberwar or falling into a bi-polar strategic landscape.  Moreover, it's really difficult to divorce cyber vulnerabilities from the countries that exploit them.  There's a reason that the Chinese conduct such pervasive cyber-espionage, and the fact that China exploits a cyber vulnerability (as opposed to the Dutch, or British, or Israelis) may change how we respond. 

The Obama administration's approach towards China will define 2012.  International politics is a delicate game, but the non-confrontational approach can only go so far.  Here, the Chinese need to be confronted.  That confrontation doesn't require some cyber cold war, or "chest-thumping", as the US could utilize diplomatic channels in a firm, but fair, way.  However, we can't continue to watch US intellectual property flee our shores.  Something must be done.

***

The Forbes article, titled U.S. Headed For Cyberwar Showdown With China In 2012, can be found here.

The Al-Jazeera article, titled Cyber Cold War haunts the US and China, can be found here.

***

I'd love to know your thoughts on the US response to Chinese cyber-espionage.  Comments are encouraged.