Europe must undertake major reforms to protect itself amid the digitalization of economies, communications and security. Critical civilian infrastructure is dangerously exposed to cyberattacks. Actors like Russia, China and North Korea pose increasing threats. The European Union must undergo reforms to defend itself.
With the
tragic
return of history and the re-polarization of the
world into competing civilizational blocs, globalization, as we have known it
for the past 30 years, seems doomed to disappear. A clear demonstration of this
paradigm shift is the continued increase in global defense budgets for the
ninth consecutive year.
In 2023,
the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) estimated global military spending to be
at 2.3 percent of global gross domestic product (GDP), with a clear balance of
power: the United States in the lead, accounting for 37 percent of global
spending ($916 billion), followed by China with 12 percent of global spending
($296 billion). Russia, India and Saudi Arabia rounded out the top five, while
European Union member countries combined to account for about $313 billion, or
13 percent of global spending.
At the same
time, the rapid digitization of economies has buoyed technology companies to
such an extent that they are now responsible for nearly 30 percent of all
global market capitalization, surpassing the energy and financial sectors.
After two decades of the tech sector driving global growth, less than 15
percent of the 500 largest technology
companies are
European, compared to over half of firms coming from the U.S. and about a
quarter from Asian countries.
Intensifying
attacks
It is in
the digital realm – beyond conventional conflicts such as Russia’s war on
Ukraine, civil wars in Myanmar, Syria and Yemen, or Israel’s large-scale
counterterrorism effort against Hamas – that the clashes are becoming
especially fierce. Indeed, the systematic digitalization of our economies,
defense and communications systems has expanded conflict zones and intensified
hybrid warfare, especially with respect to cyberattacks and disinformation.
Although it
may seem abstract at first glance, this emerging form of confrontation – on a
global scale, between nations or regions – has very concrete consequences.
Cyberattacks
have multiplied and intensified, not only in Europe but around the world, at
the hands of Russia and other culprits. These attacks have affected
communications networks, such as Kyivstar, Ukraine’s main mobile operator,
and the Viasat satellite
internet network,
as well as media platforms (with targets like Netflix and TikTok), financial infrastructure
(including the European
Banking Authority)
and cutting-edge tech companies (like Nvidia and Samsung).
Strategic
infrastructure, especially in energy, has also been compromised by
cyberwarfare, as seen in the targeting of 6,000 German and Luxembourgish wind
turbines in March 2022 or the broad assault on Danish critical energy
infrastructure in November 2023.
There have
been large-scale, multi-layered episodes, such as the apparent
Russian attack that hit Sweden in January, a week before Turkey voted to agree to Sweden’s
accession to NATO. Nearly 120 government offices, as well as cinemas,
department stores and other businesses were affected, creating a climate of
fear across the country. Sweden’s Minister of Civil Defense Carl-Oskar
Bohlin said at the
time that
“cybersecurity must be a priority for all of society, both the public and
private sector.”
Cyberattacks
also directly affect military infrastructure, as evidenced by the leak of American and NATO documents
apparently detailing strategies for military support for Ukraine in April 2023.
The global
conflict
China is
not to be outdone in this global confrontation. According to U.S. authorities,
the Chinese “Volt Typhoon” hacking network has infiltrated
critical infrastructure on behalf of Beijing, particularly on the island of
Guam, which hosts an important American military base. It has also been said to
target U.S. civilian targets in communications, transportation and the federal
government.
China
was implicated in February 2024, when the
company I-Soon, posing as a computer security business, managed to infiltrate
NATO and foreign governments, as well as social media accounts, personal
computers and public institutions in Thailand, Taiwan, Vietnam and elsewhere.
North Korea
plays another significant role in this escalating conflict. NATO’s Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence estimates that an army of
6,800 hackers is now at Kim Jong-un’s service. At the same time, a recent
United Nations report identified 58 North Korean
cyberattacks that may have netted the regime nearly 3 billion euros.
To fully
grasp the extent of the cyberwar phenomenon, one must start from a simple
premise often forgotten by Western leaders: Any digitized information or system
operating on a digital basis is, in principle, hackable, and potential
countermeasures can be software, hardware or human in nature.
The U.S.
was quick to realize what is at stake around cybersecurity, cyber defense, and
disinformation in a digital world. Washington relies on highly specialized
agencies employing tens of thousands of people with combined budgets of tens of
billions of dollars – including the Department of Homeland Security, the
National Security Agency, the FBI’s Cyber Division, the U.S. Cyber Command, the
Department of Justice’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section and
the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which coordinates
activities across the intelligence community.
Europe in a
blindfold
Meanwhile,
in this new global reality, the EU seems to be overwhelmed by ever-increasing
barriers posed by its accumulated technological backwardness, industrial
decline and the weakness of its available skills (which was accentuated by
Brexit via the departure of British human capital). But the highest wall, which
now seems insurmountable, remains the ideological basis on which its laws and
policies are based – dating from another era, not to mention another plane of
reality.
EU
competition law promotes the proper functioning of the internal market,
focusing on consumer benefits while neglecting aspects related to production,
competitiveness between different global regions and national interests. This
limited approach has so far prevented the emergence of new digital giants in
Europe and has contributed to the waning influence, or even the disappearance,
of former European leaders in this field.
Unlike
other major geo-economic powers – which treat the digital sector as a strategic
priority and adopt protective and strengthening measures (like
ultra-concentration, massive capitalization, agreements between companies,
state subsidies and protected markets) – the EU has historically opted for a
different strategy. It favors an open, consumer-oriented market, a strict
policy on standards, the prohibition of cartels and mergers that could form
global giants (essential in a sector dominated by a “winner-take-all” logic)
and a preference against state aid.
In a
digitalized world where many global tech giants have gone from serving as soft
power emissaries of their home countries to intelligence agents (or outright
privateers or mercenaries), Europe is dancing blindfolded near the precipice.
While it may seem audacious, this behavior is closer to a form of suicide than
courage, coming in a geopolitical context that is as uncertain as it is
explosive.
Scenarios
The latest
cyberattacks that hit France on March 10-11 affected
several ministries, primarily the inter-ministerial directorate that helps
manage and secure information flows across the government and with third
parties like the European Community network. The attacks demonstrated the absolute
urgency for the EU to reform the very spirit of its policymaking and to adapt
European competition law to the harsh realities of the digitalized,
21st-century world.
The risks
of simultaneous, continent-wide cyberattacks targeting energy, transport,
security and defense infrastructure are no longer science fiction. They are
frighteningly realistic. These attacks would not only cause widespread panic
but could also entirely disrupt European economies and deprive states of
important defense capabilities.
The
European Union must urgently reform itself – abandoning the pretense that it is
not under attack and refashioning its policies and economic and technical
norms, accordingly, so that member states can reconnect with power politics and
sovereignty in strategic areas and assume their security
obligations.
https://www.gisreportsonline.com/e/millon-charles/
***Charles
Millon is a French politician who served as France’s Minister of Defense from
1995 to 1997 in Alain Juppe’s government and French Ambassador to the United
Nations from 2003 to 2007.
He is one
of the leading specialists on Africa.
He is the
founder and trustee of the Thomas More Institute, a European Think Tank in
Brussels, Belgium, and founding partner of the Cabinet Intelstrat firm in
Paris.
Mr. Millon
started his career as a legal counsel and tax consultant, founding Lyon-based
law firm DMG, which is currently the sixth largest law firm in France.
He began a
long political career following his election as Mayor of Belley in eastern
France in 1977.