The Geopolitical Commission: Learning the ‘Language of Power’? College of Europe Policy Brief #2/20 February 2020

The European Commission under President Ursula von der Leyen has branded itself as a ‘geopolitical Commission’. Does this imply a geopolitical turn in the external action of the European Union (EU)? > According to High Representative Josep Borrell, the EU needs to learn the ‘language of power’ so as to translate its resources into geopolitical impact. First fledgling signs of a search for more economic sovereignty, strategic autonomy, leadership and ‘weaponised’ trade have emerged already in recent years. Many of these initiatives still need to be implemented while new ones are being added. > Geopolitical EU external action implies a more integrated external action. It also means reinforcing the EU’s resilience against external pressure, while not neglecting ‘geopolitical cooperation’ in the face of geopolitical competition. The geopolitical Commission will have to find a ‘European way’ to deal with great power challenges in line with the EU’s capabilities and values

Free Movement of Persons as the Cause for Problems to Prevent Threats to National Security

Immigration and free movement of persons has become one of the main questions on the agenda of security institutions all over Europe. These aspects are now taken into consideration when drafting national security conceptions and prevention plans. Experts are defining threats that arise specifically from this phenomena – free movement of persons. Together with this, another problem is outlining – is the current instruments to limit free movement for the cause of national security enough to prevent certain securityrisks? In this paper author is researching the threats to national security caused by the free movement of persons and views the possibilities to limit these threats. The task of the research is to determine whether today we should understand free movement as it was understood previously and what are the current consequences of this phenomena, what new threats to national security it has caused and what could be done to eliminate these threats. In the preparation of the paper author uses number of scientific research methods. Author applies analytical method by analysing available literature, laws and other legal documents. Comparative methodis used to compare different legal and practical studies. To a certain extent author uses statistical method by considering statistics of crime rates and performing expert interviews. The results of the research show that existing instruments available to limit free ovement of persons for the sake of national security are not enough to prevent complex threats. Europe's expectations that immigration and free movement of persons are one of the core instrument to warm the economy have not been met. Thus Europe is flooded by immigrants that are subjects of threat to national security. Hostile third countries are using existing situation for their advantage and challenge Europe's core values. Current situation in the migration field, refugee crisis, lingering to solve immigration problems and create effective instruments to manage the immigration flows are the aspects that should be considered as a favour to hostile countries.Solution in this situation could be rising capacities and intensifying counterespionage. Widening the view on conventional migration issues and strengthening the cooperation could be more appropriate to manage identified threats. Another way to manage alternating situation is to create new instruments to limit free movement of persons for the sake of national security and adjusting or creating common legal basis

Will solar radiation management enhance global security in a changing climate?

No description supplie

The potential harms of online targeting

Despite increasing attention being paid to the potential harms of online targeting over the last year, there is still a lack of clarity over what precisely those harms are. To help address this lack of clarity, this submission focuses on question 1: What evidence is there about the harms and benefits of online targeting? This question was discussed at a workshop we held on “The Methodology and Ethics of Targeting” at the Leverhulme Centre for the Future of Intelligence in May 2019 (organized by the authors of this submission, and attended by some members of the CDEI). Our submission summarises some of these discussions and attempts to map out some of the key researchers, groups, and publications we know are working on various harms of targeting. This is not intended to be comprehensive, but we hope will help highlight areas worthy of more attention for the CDEI.Leverhulme Trust, under Grant RC-2015-067

Risks of Sharing Cyber Incident Information

Incident information sharing is being encouraged and mandated as a way of improving overall cyber intelligence and defense, but its take up is slow. Organisations may well be justified in perceiving risks in sharing and disclosing cyber incident information, but they tend to express such worries in broad and vague terms. This paper presents a specific and granular analysis of the risks in cyber incident information sharing, looking in detail at what information may be contained in incident reports and which specific risks are associated with its disclosure. We use the STIX incident model as indicative of the types of information that might be reported. For each data field included, we identify and evaluate the threats associated with its disclosure, including the extent to which it identifies organisations and individuals. The main outcome of this analysis is a detailed understanding of which information in cyber incident reports requires protection, against specific threats with assessed severity. A secondary outcome of the analysis is a set of guidelines for disciplined use of the STIX incident model in order to reduce information security risk

What is fake news?

Talk of fake news is rife in contemporary politics, but what is fake news, and how, if anything, does it differ from news which is fake? I argue that in order to make sense of the phenomenon of fake news, it is necessary to first define it and then show what does and does not fall under the rubric of ‘fake news’. I then go on to argue that fake news is not a new problem. Rather, if there is problem with fake news it is its centrality in contemporary public debate

Contextual Evolution of Hybrid Warfare and the Complexities

On September 14, 2019, at 4.00 am, Saudi Arabia suffered a deadly attack on its Aramco owned oil facility at Abqaiq and Khurais oil field, with, as has been stated in a version, a swarm of 18 small drones and seven cruise missiles. Very highly protected and fortified facilities, in addition to armed guards, the area had six battalions of Patriot defence systems, Oerlikon GDF 35mm cannons equipped with the Skyguard radar and Surface-to-Air- Missiles (SAMs). The targets were designated with pin-point accuracy and, hence, the strikes were most effective. They destroyed nearly 50 percent of the country's global supply of crude. The crude prices rose sharply in the International market that saw the US Secretary of State proclaiming it was an “act of war”– yet without a declaration of war. By exactitude, the perpetrators were unidentified, even the trajectory of the flights of the missiles and drones could not be ascertained; only remnants of the Yemeni Quds 1 missile were displayed. The conjectures are aplenty – from drone swarms, to cruise missiles, to stealth aircraft, and even ground action! It is also a fallout of the usage of modern war weaponry: plausible deniability! This is a manifestation of the 21st century's hybrid warfare