📰 Both sides disengaging from Pangong lake area, says China
Indian official says tanks, armoured elements being withdrawn, but troops remain.
•China’s military announced on Wednesday that front line troops of India and China had begun disengaging in a “synchronised and organised” manner from the north and southbanks of Pangong lake, where both sides have been locked in a stand-off for months which, an official source in Delhi said, was the first step in the long process of disengagement and de-escalation.
•This restarts the stalled process of disengagement in the most protracted military standoffs between India and China in decades that has resulted in the death of 20 Indian soldiers and an unknown number of Chinese casualties at Galwan on June 15, 2020.
•Defence Minister Rajnath Singh would make a statement in the Rajya Sabha on Thursday on the situation in Ladakh, his office said on Twitter.
•This is the first phase of disengagement with some tanks and armoured elements on the South bank being withdrawn as well as thinning down of troops on the north bank, a Government of India source said. However, troops continue to remain in key positions.
Multi-step process
•It would be a multi-step process for disengagement and de-escalation along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and wouldl take time, said a second government source.
•People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Senior Colonel Wu Qian, spokesman for the Ministry of Defence, said in a statement issued in Beijing: “The Chinese and Indian front line troops at the southern and northern banks of the Pangong Tso Lake start synchronised and organised disengagement from February 10. This move is in accordance with the consensus reached by both sides at the 9th round of China-India Corps Commander Level Meeting.”
•China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin said in a statement: “According to the consensus reached at the Chinese and Indian Foreign Ministers’ meeting in Moscow and the ninth round of commander-level talks between the two sides, the front-line troops of the Chinese and Indian militaries began to conduct simultaneous and planned disengagement in the Pangong Lake area on February 10. We hope the Indian side will work with China to meet each other halfway, strictly implement the consensus reached between the two sides and ensure the smooth implementation of the disengagement process.”
Verification is the key
•Indian government officials said verification after each step would be the key for the process to go forward. While aerial monitoring, using unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), would be done, on the ground, verification at each step would also be done to ensure that the Chinese fully honour the understanding.
•On the south bank, both sides had deployed tanks and armoured vehicles in close proximity, within few hundred metres, after tensions went up end of August.
•During the ninth round of talks held on January 24, both sides were discussing a broad disengagement plan that had been worked out but held up over some specific issues. The talks took place after a long delay with the previous round held on November 6 last.
•While China had insisted on a focus on the south bank (where India in late August moved to occupy strategic heights in response to the PLA’s transgressions in May north of the lake), India had stressed the need for a comprehensive disengagement plan covering all friction points in eastern Ladakh.
•The focus of the Corps Commander talks has been on the north and south banks, which has seen tensions with warning shots also fired in the south last year, the first firing incidents along the border since 1975.
•As part of the first phase of disengagement last June, both sides had pulled back troops by equal distance from Patrolling Points (PP) 14 in Galwan valley and PP15 in Gogra-Hot Springs. It was during the disengagement at Galwan that violent clashes occurred.
•Since the stand-off began in early May, China has moved a large number of troops and equipment close to the LAC in addition to the ingress by its troops inside Indian territory at various places in eastern Ladakh. On the north bank, Chinese troops made ingress from Finger 8 up to Finger 4, blocking Indian patrols. India holds till Finger 4 but claims till Finger 8 as per alignment of the LAC.
•Apart from Pongong lake, another major area of concern for India is the strategic Depsang Plains, where Chinese troops have been blocking Indian Army patrols from going up to the Patrolling Points (PP) 10 to 13 beyond the Y-junction.
Home Ministry presents data in the Rajya Sabha
•Only 2.2 % of cases registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act between the years 2016 and 2019 ended in convictions by court, according to data presented by the Union Home Ministry in the Rajya Sabha.
•Union Minister of State for Home G. Kishan Reddy informed the Upper House that as per the 2019 Crime in India Report compiled by the National Crime Records Bureau, the total number of persons arrested under the Act in 2019 is 1,948.
•“Further, the total number of the persons arrested and the persons convicted in the years from 2016 to 2019 under the UAPA in the country are 5,922 and 132, respectively. The NCRB does not maintain this data on the basis of religion, race, caste or gender,” the Minister stated.
•In another reply, the Minister stated that in the year 2019, as many as 96 persons were arrested for sedition (Section 194A IPC) but only two were convicted and 29 persons were acquitted. Of the 93 cases of sedition, the chargesheet was filed in 40 cases the same year.
•When asked about the steps taken to strengthen the sedition law in the country, the Minister stated, “Amendment of laws is an ongoing process.”
📰 Indian laws must be followed: Government to Twitter
Twitter partially follows govt. order, suspends over 500 accounts; no action against accounts of journalists, politicians
•With the government and Twitter at loggerheads over issues related to content removal and freedom of expression, the Centre on Wednesday expressed “deep disappointment” over Twitter’s partial compliance to its orders “grudgingly” and with substantial delay.
•In a video-conference meeting with Twitter’s vice president-global public policy, Monique Meche, and deputy general counsel and vice president-legal, Jim Baker, Information Technology Secretary Ajay Prakash Sawhney said that while Twitter was free to formulate its own rules and guidelines, Indian laws, which are enacted by the Parliament of India, must be followed irrespective of Twitter’s own rules, according to a Ministry statement.
•An official source told The Hindu that during the meeting, requested by Twitter, the microblogging platform was informed that the government expected full compliance of the blocking orders and the Centre was unlikely to revisit its list.
•The U.S.-headquartered firm has been under fire from the government over non-compliance to block 250 accounts using hashtags related to “farmer genocide”, and about 1,178 accounts that security agencies suspect are backed by Khalistani sympathisers and Pakistan.
•The meeting follows a blog post by Twitter, where it said it had withheld “a portion of the accounts identified in the blocking orders given by the government”. It, however, added that no action had been taken against the accounts of news media entities, journalists, activists and politicians. “To do so, we believe, would violate their fundamental right to free expression under Indian law. We informed MeitY (Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology) of our enforcement actions today, February 10, 2021,” Twitter said.
•In a detailed blog post, Twitter also added that it had taken a range of enforcement actions, including permanent suspension of accounts in certain cases, against more than 500 accounts escalated across all Ministry of Electronics and IT (MeitY) orders for clear violations of Twitter’s Rules.
•“At any point in time, lawful order given by an authorised/empowered entity... is not up for negotiations,” the source said, adding that similar orders were sent to other platforms, including YouTube and Facebook, and they had complied with the orders.
•The Ministry statement added that the Secretary had told Twitter representatives that while India had a robust mechanism for protection of freedom of speech and expression, “freedom of expression is not absolute and it is subject to reasonable restrictions as mentioned in Article 19 (2) of the Constitution of India”.
•On the issue of the use of the hashtag related to “farmer genocide” on Twitter, the Secretary “expressed strong displeasure on the way Twitter acted after an emergency order was issued to remove this hashtag and content related to that. Spreading misinformation using an incendiary and baseless hashtag...at a time when such irresponsible content can provoke and inflame the situation is neither journalistic freedom nor freedom of expression as envisaged under Article 19 of the Constitution of India”.
•Drawing a parallel between the incident at Red Fort in Delhi on Republic Day to the violence at the Capitol Hill in the United States, the Secretary highlighted the differential treatment in the two incidents, expressing a deep sense of disappointment with Twitter’s siding not with freedom of expression but rather with :those who sought to abuse such freedom and provoke disturbance to public order.
•“Lawfully passed orders are binding on any business entity. They must be obeyed immediately. If they are executed days later, it becomes meaningless,” the Secretary stressed.
•MeitY said the Twitter leadership had affirmed its commitment towards following Indian laws and rules. Twitter had also expressed its continuing commitment towards building its services in India, and had requested better engagement between the Government of India and Twitter’s global team.
📰 Supreme Court orders status quo on dismantling of INS Viraat
Petitioners have argued that the decommissioned warship should not be sold as scrap.
•The Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered status quo on the dismantling of the Navy’s decommissioned aircraft carrier, INS Viraat.
•A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Sharad A. Bobde issued notice to the Union of India and Shree Ram Group of Industries, who were arraigned as respondents in the special leave petition filed by Envitech Marine Consultants Private Limited, Vishnukant Sharma and Rupali Vishnukant Sharma.
•“In the meantime, parties are directed to maintain status quo with regard to dismantling/breaking of the subject-ship known as INS Viraat, as on date,” the Supreme Court ordered.
•Envitech had earlier approached the Bombay High Court with a request to buy the decommissioned Viraat so that it could be converted into a maritime museum and a multi-functional adventure centre. The High Court had asked the government to take an appropriate call.
•The warship is currently awaiting dismantling at the ship scrapping yard at Alang in Gujarat.
•“The hull is still intact,” Ms. Rupali Sharma, appearing in person, submitted before the Bench.
•The petitioners have argued that Viraat, which was the oldest serving warship at the time of its decommissioning, should not be sold as scrap.
•In the High Court, the Centre had reportedly said that the 67-year-old ship, which had served the Navy for about three decades, was sold to the Gujarat-based Shree Ram Group, a ship-breaking firm, which won the bid. It had said that communications to various States for proposals on the ship were unanswered. The government, it was reported, had suggested in the High Court that the petitioners could approach the Shree Ram Group with a proposal to purchase the ship.
📰 Coronavirus | ‘School closure has led to loss in foundational abilities’
They form the basis for further learning
•How badly were students, especially those in lower classes, impacted by the sudden and extended closure of schools in March last year as COVID-19 took its toll on society? A field study by Azim Premji University paints a grim picture. Children not only missed out on the regular curricular learning they would have acquired had schools remained open, but are also ‘forgetting’ what they had learned in previous year.
•According to the study, on an average, 92% of students from classes two to six have lost at least one specific foundational ability in languages that they may have acquired in previous years. The corresponding figure for mathematics is 82%.
•As many as 16,067 primary schoolchildren in 1,137 government schools between classes two and six across five States were surveyed for the study titled, ‘Loss of Learning during the Pandemic’. Two thousand teachers and 400 members of the Azim Premji Foundation conducted a comparative field study.
•Foundational abilities are those that form the basis for further learning. The researchers noted that a grasp of concepts in language and mathematics during primary school years forms the basis of a student’s further learning in all subjects. Some examples of foundational abilities include reading a paragraph with comprehension, addition and subtraction.
•In mathematics, foundation abilities include identifying single- and two-digit numbers; performing arithmetic operations; using basic arithmetic operations to solve problems; and reading and drawing inferences from data, among others.
•Anurag Behar, Vice Chancellor of the university, in a press release said, “When schools reopen, teachers have to be given time to cover this deficit and be provided with other support. A carefully synchronised set of measures across States will be required.” Some of the suggestions included eliminating vacations, extending the academic year well into 2021 and perhaps beyond depending on when schools open and reconfiguring the syllabus.
•The report pointed out that the extent and nature of learning loss is serious enough to warrant action at all levels. It suggested supplemental support in the form of bridge courses, extended school hours, community-based engagements and appropriate curricular materials that will help students pick up foundational abilities once they return to school.
•It also said that teachers should be given enough time to compensate for learning loss and must not rush to promote students.
📰 Media as target: On ED searches at NewsClick office
There must be no room for suspicion that agencies are being used for curbing dissent
•Ordinarily, searches and seizures are the legitimate starting point of an investigation, done on the basis of prior information. But the ED’s raids in the office of independent digital news platform NewsClick, and in the residence of its promoter and editor-in-chief, have invited justified condemnation from organisations representing the media. There is every likelihood that this operation is linked to the platform’s in-depth coverage of ongoing protests as well as the various struggles of the people and the grassroot organisations that represent them. Ostensibly arising from an FIR registered by the Delhi police some months ago, the ED is said to be investigating alleged money-laundering to the tune of ₹30 crore. Not much is known about the nature of the police case, but the agency is empowered by the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act to investigate if the proceeds of crime related to a ‘predicate offence’ have been laundered. Whether such a primary offence has been established or not, and if so, whether NewsClick is in any way linked to it, is unclear. However, in the light of the manner in which the central agency is wont to enter the scene to investigate both real and imaginary allegations against anyone vocally critical of the government, it is difficult to brush aside the suspicion that the website is being targeted for its coverage of the farmers’ agitation as well as last year’s country-wide protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act.
•The present regime’s record is quite dismal when it comes to the obvious use of central agencies such as the CBI, ED, IT and even the NIA, to rein in dissenting voices. It is unfortunate that specialised agencies are allowing themselves to be used as force multipliers in political battles against sections of the Opposition. Amidst claims that there are varying kinds of conspiracies against the government and India, it is no surprise that relentless journalistic focus on protests, which are basically steps taken in pursuit of redress for public grievances, is inviting repressive action. Laws that are serious in nature and ought not to be invoked lightly are being used with abandon against those seen to have invited the establishment’s wrath. This may explain the frequency with which the offence of sedition is being invoked for speeches and writings, while allegations of anti-national activity peddled by those groomed to build such narratives lead to action under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. In other instances, cases of promoting social enmity or outraging religious sentiments are also slapped selectively to ‘discipline’ comedians and script-writers. The Supreme Court’s intervention has protected prominent journalists from arrest for defamation for tweets that turned out to be incorrect. It no more behoves a responsible and responsive government to dismiss criticism of its treatment of dissenters, including journalists who do not agree with it, as motivated or inspired by foreign elements.
📰 Taking the long view with China
Both Asian giants can share prosperity and be independent of each other and of the West
•In late January, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar said that while both India and China remained committed to a multipolar world, they should recognise that a “multipolar Asia” was one of its essential constituents. As it moves to becoming the third largest economy in the world, India needs to have a clear-eyed world view and strategy as it makes hard choices. It needs to reject the developing country regional mindset that has hobbled national aims and foreign policy.
•The Year End Review of the Ministry of Defence pertinently refers to the “sanctity of our claims in Eastern Ladakh” instead of the term “border” used since 1954, opening space for a settlement. We are now confidently moving out of the predicament that Jawaharlal Nehru placed us in Kashmir, fully integrating it into the Indian Union and consolidating our claim line.
•The External Affairs Ministry is also now more forthright. We have a “special and privileged strategic partnership” with Russia, which provides more than three-quarter of India’s military equipment, and a “comprehensive global strategic partnership” with the U.S. despite the United States Strategic Framework for the Indo-Pacific, 2018, wishing that India sees the U.S. as its preferred partner on security issues. India’s relationship with the U.S.-led Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), where the others are military allies, has rightly been cautious, as U.S. President Joe Biden sees China as a ‘strategic competitor’ rather than a ‘strategic rival’. Realism dictates that India does not need to compromise on its strategic autonomy.
Diplomatic challenge
•The foreign policy challenge for India is really two sides of the China conundrum: defining engagement with its neighbour which is consolidating an expanding Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) while remaining involved with the strategic, security and technological concerns of the U.S. located across the vast Pacific Ocean. The U.S. ‘Annual Report to Congress: Military and Security Developments involving the People’s Republic of China’ cautions that U.S. aircraft carriers, symbols of the country’s military hegemony, may not enjoy unquestioned dominance for much longer. Former President Barack Obama’s military pivot to Asia failed to overawe China in the South China Sea and the costs of former President Donald Trump’s trade tariffs were borne by American consumers and companies.
•In the financial sphere, there is the real possibility of the Chinese renminbi becoming a global reserve currency or e-yuan becoming the digital payments currency. China is the world’s largest trading economy. It could soon become the world’s largest economy — the Fortune Global 500 list of the world’s largest companies by revenue for the first time contains more companies based in China, including Hong Kong, than in the U.S. The BRI countries are using the renminbi in financial transactions with China, and can be expected to use it in transactions with each other. Even the European Union, smarting under Mr. Trump’s sanctions, created its own cross-border clearing mechanism for trade. China has stitched together an investment agreement with the EU and with most of Asia. Relative attractiveness will determine when the dollar goes the way of the sterling and the guilder. China, facing technological sanctions from the U.S., may well put in the hard work to make this happen soon.
Policy elements
•Some form of the EU’s China policy of seeing the emerging superpower as a partner, competitor, and economic rival depending on the policy area in question is going to be the global norm. The EU’s reaching out to China despite misgivings of the U.S. means the West has given up on containing the rise of China. This broad perspective is also reflected in India’s participation in both the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, led by Beijing and Moscow and designed to resist the spread of Western interests, and in the U.S.-led Quad, with its anti-China stance. Within the United Nations, India’s interests have greater congruence with China’s interests rather than the U.S.’s and the EU’s; sharing the COVID-19 vaccine with other countries distinguishes India, and China, from the rest.
•The congruence between India and the U.S. lies in the U.S.’s declared strategic objective of promoting an integrated economic development model in the Indo-Pacific as a credible alternative to the BRI, but with a caveat. China opening new opportunities for countries in the Eurasian landmass means that ASEAN will not easily move out of the BRI infrastructure, digital, finance and trade linkages; Sri Lanka is a recent example. The China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank has increased its membership to 100 countries. China is now the second-biggest financial contributor to the UN and has published more high-impact research papers than the U.S. did in 23 out of 30 “hot” research fields and enhancing its ‘soft power’ nearly to levels achieved by the U.S. earlier.
•Instead of an alternate development model, India should move the Quad towards supplementing the infrastructure push of the BRI in line with other strategic concerns in the region. For example, developing their scientific, technological capacity and digital economy, based on India’s digital stack and financial resources of other Quad members, will resonate with Asia and Africa.
Policy evolution
•Another area where India can play a ‘bridging role’ is global governance whose principles, institutions and structures now have to accommodate other views for issue-based understandings. President Xi Jinping’s “community with shared future for mankind”, and Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s “climate justice” and asking how long India will be excluded from the UN Security Council, challenge the frame of the liberal order without providing specific alternatives. With respect to digital data, the defining issue of the 21st century, India has recently expressed that there must be reciprocity in data sharing, and this is the kind of ‘big idea’ for sharing prosperity that will gain traction with other countries.
•India’s recent policies are gaining influence at the expense of China and the West, and both know this trend will accelerate. The steps to a $5 trillion economy, shift to indigenous capital military equipment, and a new Science, Technology and Innovation Policy underline impact, capacity and interests. ASEAN remains keen India re-join its trade pact to balance China. It is being recognised that India’s software development prowess could shape a sustainable post-industrial state different to the U.S. and China model.
•As in the historical past, Asia is big enough for both Asian giants to have complementary roles, share prosperity and be independent of each other and of the West.
📰 Denying women the right over their bodies
Neither the state nor doctors have any right to deny a woman a safe abortion
•Recently, Argentina’s Congress legalised abortions up to the 14th week of pregnancy. The Indian Parliament too will consider an amendment to our abortion laws this Budget Session but unlike the Argentina law which is touted as being historic, the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (Amendment) Bill, 2020 (MTP Bill), will not translate into greater autonomy for women over their own bodies.
History of the law
•The MTP Act of 1971 was framed in the context of reducing the maternal mortality ratio due to unsafe abortions. It allows an unwanted pregnancy to be terminated up to 20 weeks of pregnancy and requires a second doctor’s approval if the pregnancy is beyond 12 weeks. Further, it only allows termination when there is a grave risk to the physical or mental health of the woman or if the pregnancy results from a sex crime such as rape or intercourse with a mentally challenged woman.
•Therefore, the law is framed not to respect a woman’s right over her own body but makes it easier for the state to stake its control over her body through legal and medical debates. Suppose a woman has had voluntary sex and she decides, for personal reasons, to end her pregnancy. If she is 24 weeks pregnant, then this would be a criminal offence. So, she moves the court under the condition that the pregnancy was affecting her mental health. However, here the court can refuse her despite the woman’s choice to end it.
•In one such case, a State government had argued that there were no grounds for an abortion since the pregnancy was the outcome of a voluntary act and she was “very much aware of the consequence” and the court agreed.
•In such circumstances, women usually resort to unsafe methods of abortion. Unsafe abortions are the third largest cause of maternal deaths in India.
•The amendment too continues this legacy of hetero-patriarchal population control, which does not give women control over their own bodies. The proposed amendment still requires one doctor to sign off on termination of pregnancies up to 20 weeks old, and two doctors for pregnancies between 20 and 24 weeks old. Thus, it is not based on any request or isn’t at the pregnant person’s will but on a doctor’s opinion.
Personal beliefs
•The Bill also mandates the government to set up a medical board in every State and UT. Medical boards can rely on the facts of the case but personal beliefs could impact the medical board’s opinion, which is one of the biggest challenges in having a third-party opinion on a decision which is very personal. For instance, the Madhya Pradesh High Court denied permission for terminating a 26-week-old pregnancy to a 13-year-old rape survivor with the psychiatrist on the medical board arguing against the mental and emotional trauma that the survivor would go through. The psychiatrist stated that while the survivor was “feeling anxiety at times”, she was “not suffering from delusion and hallucination”.
•While the current Bill provides that safe abortions can be performed at any stage of the pregnancy in case of foetal “abnormalities,” it fails to consider any other reason such as personal choice, a sudden change in circumstances due to separation from or death of a partner, and domestic violence.
•Last, the proposed amendment uses the word “women” throughout, denying access to safe abortion to transgender, intersex and gender diverse persons.
•Abortion rights are central to a woman’s autonomy to determine her life’s course. Neither the state nor doctors have any right to deny a woman a safe abortion. Doing so means that women are not being treated properly as adults who are responsible for their own choices.
📰 Disinformation is a cybersecurity threat
Society needs to be protected from infodemics, to prevent the possibility of a breakdown, interruptions and violence
•Cybersecurity focuses on protecting and defending computer systems, networks, and our digital lives from disruption. Nefarious actors use attacks to compromise confidentiality, the integrity and the availability of IT systems for their benefit. Disinformation is, similarly, an attack and compromise of our cognitive being. Nation-state actors, ideological believers, violent extremists, and economically motivated enterprises manipulate the information ecosystem to create social discord, increase polarisation, and in some cases, influence the outcome of an election.
•There is a lot of similarity in the strategies, tactics and actions between cybersecurity and disinformation attacks. Cyberattacks are aimed at computer infrastructure while disinformation exploits our inherent cognitive biases and logical fallacies. Cybersecurity attacks are executed using malware, viruses, trojans, botnets, and social engineering. Disinformation attacks use manipulated, miscontextualised, misappropriated information, deep fakes, and cheap fakes. Nefarious actors use both attacks in concert to create more havoc.
•Historically, the industry has treated these attacks independently, deployed different countermeasures, and even have separate teams working in silos to protect and defend against these attacks. The lack of coordination between teams leaves a huge gap that is exploited by malicious actors.
Cognitive hacking
•Cognitive hacking is a threat from disinformation and computational propaganda. This attack exploits psychological vulnerabilities, perpetuates biases, and eventually compromises logical and critical thinking, giving rise to cognitive dissonance. A cognitive hacking attack attempts to change the target audience’s thoughts and actions, galvanise societies and disrupt harmony using disinformation. It exploits cognitive biases and shapes people by perpetuating their prejudices. The goal is to manipulate the way people perceive reality. The storming of the U.S. Capitol by right-wing groups on January 6, 2021, is a prime example of the effects of cognitive hacking.
•The implications of cognitive hacking are more devastating than cyberattacks on critical infrastructure. The damage wrought by disinformation is challenging to repair. Revolutions throughout history have used cognitive hacking techniques to a significant effect to overthrow governments and change society. It is a key tactic to achieve major goals with limited means.
•For example, QAnon spread false information claiming that the U.S. 2020 presidential election was fraudulent, and conspiracy theorists (in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Ireland, Cyprus and Belgium) burned down 5G towers because they believed it caused the novel coronavirus pandemic. COVID-19 disinformation campaigns have prevented people from wearing masks, using potentially dangerous alternative cures, and not getting vaccinated, making it even more challenging to contain the virus.
Spreading disinformation
•Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) is a well-coordinated cybersecurity attack achieved by flooding IT networks with superfluous requests to connect and overload the system to prevent legitimate requests being fulfilled. Similarly, a well-coordinated disinformation campaign fills broadcast and social channels with so much false information and noise, thus taking out the system’s oxygen and drowning the truth.
•The advertisement-centric business modes and attention economy incentivise malicious actors to run a sophisticated disinformation campaign and fill the information channels with noise to drown the truth with unprecedented speed and scale.
•Disinformation is used for social engineering threats on a mass scale. Like phishing attacks, to compromise IT systems for data extraction, disinformation campaigns play on emotions, giving cybercriminals another feasible method for scams.
•A report released by Neustar International Security Council (NISC) found 48% of cybersecurity professionals regard disinformation as threats, and of the remainder, 49% say that threat is very significant; 91% of the cybersecurity professionals surveyed called for stricter measures on the Internet.
•Deep fakes add a whole new level of danger to disinformation campaigns. A few quality and highly targeted disinformation campaigns using deepfakes could widen the divides between peoples in democracies even more and cause unimaginable levels of chaos, with increased levels of violence, damage to property and lives.
Lessons from cybersecurity
•Cybersecurity experts have successfully understood and managed the threats posed by viruses, malware, and hackers. IT and Internet systems builders did not think of security till the first set of malicious actors began exploiting security vulnerabilities. The industry learned quickly and invested profoundly in security best practices, making cybersecurity a first design principle. It developed rigorous security frameworks, guidelines, standards, and best practices such as defense-in-depth, threat modelling, secure development lifecycle, and red-team-blue-team (self-attack to find vulnerabilities to fix them) to build cybersecurity resilience. ISACs (Information sharing and analysis centers) and global knowledge base of security bugs, vulnerabilities, threats, adversarial tactics, and techniques are published to improve the security posture of IT systems.
•We can learn from decades of experience in the cybersecurity domain to defend, protect and respond, and find effective and practical solutions to counter and intervene in computational propaganda and infodemics. We can develop disinformation defence systems by studying strategy and tactics to understand the identities of malicious actors, their activities, and behaviours from the cybersecurity domain to mitigate disinformation threats. By treating disinformation as a cybersecurity threat we can find effective countermeasures to cognitive hacking.
•Defense-in-depth is an information assurance strategy that provides multiple, redundant defensive measures if a security control fails. For example, security firewalls are the first line of defence to fend off threats from external systems. Antivirus systems defend against attacks that got through the firewalls. Regular patching helps eliminate any vulnerabilities from the systems. Smart identity protections and education are essential so that users do not fall victim to social engineering attempts.
•We need a defense-in-depth strategy for disinformation. The defense-in-depth model identifies disinformation actors and removes them. Authenticity and provenance solutions can intervene before disinformation gets posted. If the disinformation still gets by, detection solutions using humans and artificial intelligence, internal and external fact-checking can label or remove the content.
•Today, the response to disinformation is in silos of each platform with little or no coordination. There is no consistent taxonomy, definitions, policy, norms, and response for disinformation campaigns and actors. This inconsistency enables perpetrators to push the boundaries and move around on platforms to achieve their nefarious goals. A mechanism like ISACs to share the identity, content, context, actions, and behaviours of actors and disinformation across platforms is needed. Information sharing will help disinformation countermeasures to scale better and respond quickly.
Education is key
•A critical component of cybersecurity is education. Technology industry, civil society and the government should coordinate to make users aware of cyber threat vectors such as phishing, viruses, and malware. The industry with public-private partnerships must also invest in media literacy efforts to reach out to discerning public. Intervention with media education can make a big difference in understanding context, motivations, and challenging disinformation to reduce damage. The freedom of speech and the freedom of expression are protected rights in most democracies. Balancing the rights of speech with the dangers of disinformation is a challenge for policymakers and regulators. There are laws and regulations for cybersecurity criminals. More than 1,000 entities have signed the Paris Call for Trust and Security in Cyberspace, for stability and security in the information space. Similarly, 52 countries and international bodies have signed the Christchurch Call to Action to eliminate terrorist and violent extremist content online.
•The disinformation infodemic requires a concerted and coordinated effort by governments, businesses, non-governmental organisations, and other entities to create standards and implement defences. Taking advantage of the frameworks, norms, and tactics that we have already created for cybersecurity is the optimum way to meet this threat. We must protect our society against these threats or face the real possibility of societal breakdown, business interruption, and violence in the streets.
