Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Regulating a “Cyber Militia” – Some Lessons from Ukraine, and Thoughts about the Future Cover

Regulating a “Cyber Militia” – Some Lessons from Ukraine, and Thoughts about the Future

Open Access
|Jul 2023

References

  1. Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949. (1977, June 8). Retrieved from https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/resources/documents/misc/additional-protocols-1977.htm
  2. Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949. (1977, June 8). Retrieved from https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/resources/documents/misc/additional-protocols-1977.htm
  3. Additional Protocol III to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949. (2005, June 8). Retrieved from https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/apiii-2005
  4. Amnesty International. (2022, August 4). Ukraine: Ukrainian fighting tactics endanger civilians. Retrieved from https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/08/ukraine-ukrainian-fighting-tactics-endanger-civilians/
  5. Bergengruen, V. (2022, April 18). How Ukraine is crowdsourcing digital evidence of war crimes. Time. Retrieved from https://time.com/6166781/ukraine-crowdsourcing-war-crimes/
  6. Brenner, S. W., & Clarke, L. L. (2010). Civilians in cyberwarfare: Conscripts. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 43(4), 10111076.
  7. Bundesgerichtshof [Federal Court of Justice]. (2010, April 16). Case No. 3 BJs 6/10-4.
  8. Busstra, M., & Theeuwen, W. (2020). International law in the context of cyber operations. In Collected papers van de Koninklijke Nederlandse Vereniging voor Internationaal Recht – nr 147 · International Law for a Digitalised World. Asser Press.
  9. Center for Strategic and International Studies. (2022, October 5). NAFO and winning the information war: Lessons learned from Ukraine. Retrieved from https://www.csis.org/analysis/nafo-and-winning-information-war-lessons-learned-ukraine
  10. Commonwealth of Australia. (2021, December). Select committee on foreign interference through social media – First interim report. Retrieved from https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportsen/024741/toc_pdf/FirstInterimReport.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf
  11. Egan, B. (2016, November 10). Remarks on international law and stability in cyberspace. US Department of State. Retrieved from https://2009-2017.state.gov/s/l/releases/remarks/264303.htm
  12. Försvarsmakten. (2022, October 4). Frivilligrörelsen får uppdrag inom cyberförsvar och cybersäkerhet. Retrieved from https://www.forsvarsmakten.se/sv/aktuellt/2022/10/frivilligrorelsen-far-uppdrag-inom-cyberforsvar-och-cybersakerhetfrivilligrorelsen-far-uppdrag-inom-cyberforsvar-och-cybersakerhet/
  13. Försvarsmakten. (n.d.). Swedish Home Guard (“Hemvärnet”). Retrieved from https://www.forsvarsmakten.se/sv/var-verksamhet/det-har-gor-forsvarsmakten/hemvarnet/
  14. Ginsburg, T. (2017). Introduction to symposium on sovereignty, cyberspace, and Tallinn manual 2.0. AJIL Unbound, 111, 205206. DOI: 10.1017/aju.2017.58
  15. Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. (2019, July). Document sent by Minister of Foreign Affairs to Parliament. Retrieved from https://unoda-web.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/appendix-Internaional-law-in-cyberspace-kingdom-of-the-netherlands.pdf
  16. Haataja, S. (2019). Cyber attacks and international law on the use of force: The turn to information ethics. Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9781351057028
  17. Habtom, N. K.-T. (2022). The composition and challenges of foreign fighters in Ukraine. Scandinavian Journal of Military Studies, 5(1), 7990. DOI: 10.31374/sjms.151
  18. Hammes, T. X. (2019). Defending Europe: How converging technology strengthens small powers. Scandinavian Journal of Military Studies, 2(1), 2029. DOI: 10.31374/sjms.24
  19. Institute for the Study of War. (2023, January 5). Russian offensive campaign assessment. Retrieved from https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-january-5-2023
  20. International Court of Justice. (1949, April 9). Corfu Channel case (I.C.J. Reports, 4).
  21. International Court of Justice. (1996). Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, 1996 I.C.J. Rep 226.
  22. Kaitseliit. (2023). Estonian Defence League’s Cyber Unit. Retrieved from https://www.kaitseliit.ee/en/cyber-unit
  23. Kaska, K., Osula, A.-M., & Jan Stinissen, L. T. C. (2013). The cyber defence unit of the Estonian Defence League – Legal, policy and organisational Analysis. NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence. Retrieved from https://ccdcoe.org/uploads/2018/10/CDU_Analysis.pdf
  24. Liles, L. (2014). The civilian cyber battlefield: non-state cyber operators’ status under the law of armed conflict. North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation, 39(4), 10911122.
  25. Maddocks, J. (2019). Outsourcing of governmental functions in contemporary conflict: rethinking the issue of attribution. Virginia Journal of International Law, 59(1), 4796.
  26. Martin, C. (2022, March 2). Ukraine crisis – Cyber realism in a time of war. Lawfare Blog. Retrieved from https://www.lawfareblog.com/cyber-realism-time-war; https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ncas/alerts/aa22-158a
  27. Maurer, T. (2018). Cyber Mercenaries. Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/9781316422724
  28. Mavropoulou, E. (2015). Targeting in the cyber domain: Legal challenges arising from the application of the principle of distinction to cyber attacks. Journal of Law & Cyber Warfare, 4(2), 2393.
  29. Menn, J. (2022, May 1). Hacking Russia was off-limits. The Ukraine war made it a free-for-all. Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/05/01/russia-cyber-attacks-hacking/
  30. Nye, J. S., Jr. (2016). Deterrence and dissuasion in cyberspace. International Security, 41(3), 4471. DOI: 10.1162/ISEC_a_00266
  31. Ottis, R. (2010, July). Proactive defence tactics against on-line cyber militia. Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Information Warfare and Security, Thessaloniki, Greece. Reading Academic Publishing Limited, pp. 233237. Retrieved from https://ccdcoe.org/library/publications/proactive-defence-tactics-against-on-line-cyber-militia/
  32. Ottis, R. (2011). Theoretical Offensive Cyber Militia Models. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Information Warfare and Security, Washington, DC. Reading Academic Publishing Limited, pp. 307313. https://ccdcoe.org/library/publications/theoretical-offensive-cyber-militia-models/
  33. Prosecutor v. Strugar, Case No. IT01-42-A, Appeal Judgement, ¶ 177, 17 July 2008.
  34. Schmitt, M. (2002). Wired warfare: Computer network attack and international law. International Review of the Red Cross, 84(846), 365399. DOI: 10.1017/S1560775500097741
  35. Schmitt, M. (Ed.) (2017). Tallinn manual 2.0 on the international law applicable to cyber operations (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/9781316822524
  36. Shackelford, S. J., & Andres, R. B. (2011). State responsibility for cyber attacks: competing standards for growing problem. Georgetown Journal of International Law, 42(4), 9711016.
  37. Soesanto, S. (2022). The IT Army of Ukraine: Structure, tasking, and ecosystem. Centre for Security Studies. Retrieved from https://css.ethz.ch/en/publications/risk-and-resilience-reports/details.html?id=/t/h/e/i/the_it_army_of_ukraine
  38. Storm Jensen, M. (2018). Sector responsibility or sector task? New cyber strategy occasion for rethinking the Danish sector responsibility principle. Scandinavian Journal of Military Studies, 1(1), 118. DOI: 10.31374/sjms.3
  39. Svantesson, D. J. (2018). “Lagom Jurisdiction”: What Viking drinking etiquette can teach us about internet jurisdiction and Google France. Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology, 12(1), 29. DOI: 10.5817/MUJLT2018-1-2
  40. Svantesson, D. J. (2022, March 23). Legal safeguards for the volunteers of Ukraine’s cyber militia. Verfassungsblog on Matters Constitutional. Retrieved from https://verfassungsblog.de/legal-safeguards-for-the-volunteers-of-ukraines-cyber-militia/
  41. Svantesson, D. J., Azzopardi, R., Bonython, W.E., Crowe, J., Freeland, S. R., Haataja, S., Ireland-Piper, D., & Mark, N. (2021). The developing concept of sovereignty: Considerations for defence operations in cyberspace and outer space. Technology and Jurisdiction Research Team Law Faculty Bond University. Retrieved from https://bond.edu.au/files/5701/The%20Developing%20Concept%20of%20Sovereignty.pdf
  42. Svantesson, D. J., Haataja, S., Ireland-Piper, D., & Chen, K.-W. (2023). On sovereignty. Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology, 17(1), 3385.
  43. Tinker, P. (2015). Dor the common defense of cyberspace: Implications of a US cyber militia on Department of Defense cyber operations [Master’s thesis]. U.S. Army Command and General Staff College. Retrieved from https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA623946.pdf
  44. Tsagourias, N. (2016). Non-state actors, ungoverned spaces and international responsibility for cyber acts. Journal of Conflict and Security Law, 21(3), 455474. DOI: 10.1093/jcsl/krw020
  45. United Nations. (1945). Charter of the United Nations, 1 UNTS XVI.
  46. United Nations. (1970, October 24). General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV), UN Doc A/RES/2625(XXV).
  47. United Nations. (2021a, July 14). Group of Governmental Experts on Advancing Responsible State Behaviour in Cyberspace in the Context of International Security (A/76/135).
  48. United Nations. (2021b, March 5). Report of the 2021 Open Ended Working Group, A/75/816, Annex I.
  49. United Nations. (2022, July 28). Open-ended working group on security of and in the use of information and communications technologies 2021–2025, A/AC.292/2022/CRP.1.
  50. United States Department of the Army and U.S. Department of the Marine Corps Tactics and Operations Group. (2022, July). Urban operations ATP 3-06/MCTP 12-10B. Retrieved from https://irp.fas.org/doddir/army/atp3_06.pdf
  51. Väljataga, A. (2022, March). Cyber vigilantism in support of Ukraine: A legal analysis. NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence. Retrieved from https://ccdcoe.org/uploads/2022/04/Cyber-vigilantism-in-support-of-Ukraine-a-legal-analysis.pdf
  52. Wilson, A. (2017, March 15). Four types of Russian propaganda. Aspen Review. Retrieved from https://www.aspen.review/article/2017/four-types-of-russian-propaganda/
DOI: https://doi.org/10.31374/sjms.195 | Journal eISSN: 2596-3856
Language: English
Page range: 86 - 101
Submitted on: Jan 7, 2023
Accepted on: Jun 30, 2023
Published on: Jul 11, 2023
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2023 Dan Jerker B. Svantesson, published by Scandinavian Military Studies
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.