Russia’s hybrid war and its implications for defence and security in the United Kingdom

This article uses the example of Russia’s aggressive action against Ukraine as an example of a new form of contemporary war fighting, namely hybrid war, and discusses how Russia has been successful in exploiting vulnerabilities of its opponents. The article reports on the United Kingdom as a case study to discuss potential threats and how these can be countered. While using the United Kingdom as an example, the ramifications of such a hybrid approach also apply to South Africa as a state which is vulnerable in respect to economic warfare, cyberattacks and its energy sector. The suggested counteractions could also be seen as lessons learned for a future South African scenario. It is a further development of a short submission to the Defence Select Committee of the UK House of Commons

Pull and Push'- Implementing the Complementarity Principle of the Rome Statute of the ICC within the AU: Opportunities and Challenges

The complementarity principle of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) is an international legal principle that governs the relationship between two; sometimes; contrasting international principles of law; namely sovereign equality of States and the international community’s duty to end impunity for international core crimes. Article 17 of the Rome Statute envisages that States maintain primary jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute international crimes; while the ICC’s jurisdiction to prosecute when States are unwilling or genuinely unable to carry out such investigations or prosecutions constitutes the exception. This article provides an analysis of this principle in the context of the institutional; normative; and policy framework for its domestic implementation within the African national legal orders. This article contends that at times of increasing tensions between the African Union (AU) and the ICC; AU States signatory to the ICC must become proactive in terms of furthering their commitments to fully cooperate with the ICC and the international community. Building on the evidence in literature; this article elaborates on how complementarity can ideally function in practice in an AU context; thus creating a tension-free relationship between the ICC and national legal systems in Africa. It suggests that the relationship should be conceived as one of complementarity and interdependence; with an assured acknowledgement of the cultural specificities of today’s Africa

Pull and Push\u27- Implementing the Complementarity Principle of the Rome Statute of the ICC within the AU: Opportunities and Challenges

The complementarity principle of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) is an international legal principle that governs the relationship between two; sometimes; contrasting international principles of law; namely sovereign equality of States and the international community’s duty to end impunity for international core crimes. Article 17 of the Rome Statute envisages that States maintain primary jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute international crimes; while the ICC’s jurisdiction to prosecute when States are unwilling or genuinely unable to carry out such investigations or prosecutions constitutes the exception. This article provides an analysis of this principle in the context of the institutional; normative; and policy framework for its domestic implementation within the African national legal orders. This article contends that at times of increasing tensions between the African Union (AU) and the ICC; AU States signatory to the ICC must become proactive in terms of furthering their commitments to fully cooperate with the ICC and the international community. Building on the evidence in literature; this article elaborates on how complementarity can ideally function in practice in an AU context; thus creating a tension-free relationship between the ICC and national legal systems in Africa. It suggests that the relationship should be conceived as one of complementarity and interdependence; with an assured acknowledgement of the cultural specificities of today’s Africa

The Need for An Australian Regulatory Code for the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Military Application

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is enabling rapid technological innovation and is ever more pervasive, in a global technological eco-system lacking suitable governance and absence of regulation over AI-enabled technologies. Australia is committed to being a global leader in trusted secure and responsible AI and has escalated the development of its own sovereign AI capabilities. Military and Defence organisations have similarly embraced AI, harnessing advantages for applications supporting battlefield autonomy, intelligence analysis, capability planning, operations, training, and autonomous weapons systems. While no regulation exists covering AI-enabled military systems and autonomous weapons, these platforms must comply with International Humanitarian Law, the Law of Armed Conflict, and the Use of Force. This paper examines comparative international regulatory approaches across major allied nations in the US, UK, and Europe and suggests future direction for Australian regulation of AI in lethal application

Hybrid warfare and disinformation: A Ukraine war perspective

Misinformation, disinformation and mal information are part of the information disorder construct, dominating the information warfare domain. These are key enablers associated with grey zone operations, and an integral part of current adversaries\u27 and competitors\u27 hybrid warfare tool kit. Disinformation, in combination with influence operations, also plays an important role within the concept of hybrid warfare; both from a threat–and own resilience perspective. This article reflects on these information warfare tools and their application by Russia in the current Russo-Ukraine war, offering potentially considerable force multipliers in the information domain for the Russian aggressor. Hybrid warfare and associated threats, specifically focusing on aspects of information warfare, disinformation, deception (typically within the context of political activity or warfare so commonly associated with Russian active measures) and as part of an adversary\u27s grey zone operations approach are all discussed raising awareness towards building resilience by means of a comprehensive approach to counter such threats to national security

Ransomware 2.0: An emerging threat to national security

The global Covid-19 pandemic has seen the rapid evolution of our traditional working environment; more people are working from home and the number of online meetings has increased. This trend has also affected the security sector. Consequently, the evolution of ransomware to what is now being described as ‘Ransomware 2.0’ has governments, businesses and individuals alike rushing to secure their data

Mass Migration as a Hybrid Threat? – A Legal Perspective

Migration as a weapon sounds like a policy statement by resurgent nationalistic parties (and governments) in the West. However, politics and the human cost aside, what if an adversary (both state and non-state actor) does exploit the current global crisis of mass migration due to globalization, war, and political unrest? This article will look at the ongoing mass migration to the European Union within the wider security context of the so-called hybrid threats and/or ‘grey zone’ tactics. It looks at the various legal categories of migration as how the law can be weaponized as so-called ‘lawfare’ to undermine the existing legal frameworks distinguishing between legal and illegal migration. The authors recognize the possibility that this article will be used as an argument by the political actors involved for their nationalistic and anti-migration politics and policies. Yet, we believe that the potential of abusing the current vacuum for political gains along ideological party lines makes it necessary to provide a wider legal-security focused perspective on mass migration

Pull and Push\u27- Implementing the Complementarity Principle of the Rome Statute of the ICC within the AU: Opportunities and Challenges

The complementarity principle of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) is an international legal principle that governs the relationship between two; sometimes; contrasting international principles of law; namely sovereign equality of States and the international community’s duty to end impunity for international core crimes. Article 17 of the Rome Statute envisages that States maintain primary jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute international crimes; while the ICC’s jurisdiction to prosecute when States are unwilling or genuinely unable to carry out such investigations or prosecutions constitutes the exception. This article provides an analysis of this principle in the context of the institutional; normative; and policy framework for its domestic implementation within the African national legal orders. This article contends that at times of increasing tensions between the African Union (AU) and the ICC; AU States signatory to the ICC must become proactive in terms of furthering their commitments to fully cooperate with the ICC and the international community. Building on the evidence in literature; this article elaborates on how complementarity can ideally function in practice in an AU context; thus creating a tension-free relationship between the ICC and national legal systems in Africa. It suggests that the relationship should be conceived as one of complementarity and interdependence; with an assured acknowledgement of the cultural specificities of today’s Africa

The Need for An Australian Regulatory Code for the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Military Application

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is enabling rapid technological innovation and is ever more pervasive, in a global technological eco-system lacking suitable governance and absence of regulation over AI-enabled technologies. Australia is committed to being a global leader in trusted secure and responsible AI and has escalated the development of its own sovereign AI capabilities. Military and Defence organisations have similarly embraced AI, harnessing advantages for applications supporting battlefield autonomy, intelligence analysis, capability planning, operations, training, and autonomous weapons systems. While no regulation exists covering AI-enabled military systems and autonomous weapons, these platforms must comply with International Humanitarian Law, the Law of Armed Conflict, and the Use of Force. This paper examines comparative international regulatory approaches across major allied nations in the US, UK, and Europe and suggests future direction for Australian regulation of AI in lethal application