What do you think of Bruno Kahl's statements that Russia’s ongoing hybrid attacks/sabotages might invoke NATO's Article 5? Kahl also said Russia's military would likely be capable of attacking NATO by the end of the decade?
Doesn't summarize article 5 properly. Also doesn't mention article 4. That would be far more likely to be an article 4, consult than article 5. But Russia's cyber capabilities are pretty rubbish. Doesn't need anything over the existing cooperation to fight cyber.
So I can't see it even needing article 4. For article 5 - that is defensive - it does not mean retaliation. And it also is requested by a country not triggered or automatic.
For instance if Poland got stray drones fly into it, it can likely easily shoot them down. But if tiny Estonia didi - it might struggle. So Estonia would call article 5. The other countries would send it some system to shoot down the drones.
It does NOT mention nukes.
And any country that invokes article 5 has access to up to 40,000 soldiers immediately with all their equipment, with about 20,000 or so gets there within days That is the automatic response.
Apart from that it is up to countries, they do NOT need to do any other response. In most small-scale situations the rapid response force would sort it out if it's ever needed.
So - this is very much misunderstood and the Reuters article doens't help to clarify it.
BLOG: It is impossible to win with a nuclear first strike - and NATO’s article 5 is defensive not retaliatory - IMHO much of the Twitter / social media panic is based on not understanding these points
If Estonia had really bad cyber attacks maybe it would call article 5 - but the response wouldn't be weapons it would be cyber-experts beefing up its cyber security.
Russia turned out to be far weaker than expected. It couldn't use cyber to attack Ukraine significantly even in the middle of bombing campaigns destroying its infrastructure physically.
Russia has been trying to hack he Ukrainian power grid at the same time as dropping bombs on it destroying power stations and substations. They have destroyed all of Ukraine's fossil fuel power stations with bombs. They destroy the substations over and over as they are repaired.
But they can't turn off the Ukrainian power grid. It is really really hard to hack a power grid. Russia hasn't been able to do it more than 2 years into the Ukrainian war with the ability to bomb it at the same time as hacking it.
If they ever succeeded the country with access to the grid can easily fix it by replacing / rebooting the hacked equipment.
This was a similar earlier story
QUOTE STARTS
Hundreds of Russian cyberattacks against Ukrainian power plants and energy infrastructure have been repelled since the beginning of the year, the head of the Ukraine’s SBU security service Cyber Security Department, Illya Vityuk, said in an interview on Ukrainian television on Dec. 27.
"Missile strikes against Ukrainian energy infrastructure are often accompanied by cyber-attacks,” he revealed.
“We were expecting to deal with this scenario, so none of them have been effective.”
He noted that out of all of the attacks, only 30 ever posed a critical risk to the country, though dozens of cyberattacks are launched on a daily basis.
"There were specific attempts to turn off power and destroy the digital infrastructure of some regional power distribution companies and thermal power plants,” Vityuk stated.
"Luckily, we managed to prevent it.”
The SBU's cyber department has significantly developed since the previous year, the official added.
Also, any hack on actual infrastructure would be short term as the software can be rebooted, reinstalled, -components replaced etc, it's the sort of thing an enemy might do during a war where even a few hours of power cuts might make a big difference.
At 4:23
“The optimistic view on cyberattacks is it’s difficult to cause lasting damage. So even though you can infiltrate some of these networks, you can destroy data, in the face of determined defenders, they’re likely to bring back those networks and get them back to operational status within hours, days at the outset. So keeping something down for weeks or months is really hard in cyberspace.
BLOG: Russia probed US websites - but cyber expert says difficult to imagine an attack - Russia has no success trying to cyber-attack far weaker Ukraine - do continue to take standard measures to protect your website
Also all those stories about Russia being capable of attacking NATO - it was capable of doing that on Feb 2022 - of losing quickly as we now know, but it could have tried.
It couldn't right now, couldn't get together enough spare soldiers for a credible attack. It can't even get together enough soldiers after 3 months of fighting to push the Ukrainians out of Kursk oblast in Russia. It has an army of over a million but can't spare even 10,000 for anywhere else, they are all committed to the max in Ukraine. It had to go to NK of all places to find an extra 11,000 soldiers for Kursk oblast
And after the war is over NATO will increase that rapid response force to 300,000. And though Russia MIGHT rebuild, NATO is way ahead of it in numbers of soldiers and far more importantly in equipment. So it can't ever attack NATO.
What do you think of Bruno Kahl's statements that Russia’s ongoing hybrid attacks/sabotages might invoke NATO's Article 5? Kahl also said Russia's military would likely be capable of attacking NATO by the end of the decade?
Link to news article:
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russian-hybrid-attacks-may-lead-nato-invoking-article-5-says-german-intel-chief-2024-11-27/
Doesn't summarize article 5 properly. Also doesn't mention article 4. That would be far more likely to be an article 4, consult than article 5. But Russia's cyber capabilities are pretty rubbish. Doesn't need anything over the existing cooperation to fight cyber.
So I can't see it even needing article 4. For article 5 - that is defensive - it does not mean retaliation. And it also is requested by a country not triggered or automatic.
For instance if Poland got stray drones fly into it, it can likely easily shoot them down. But if tiny Estonia didi - it might struggle. So Estonia would call article 5. The other countries would send it some system to shoot down the drones.
It does NOT mention nukes.
And any country that invokes article 5 has access to up to 40,000 soldiers immediately with all their equipment, with about 20,000 or so gets there within days That is the automatic response.
Apart from that it is up to countries, they do NOT need to do any other response. In most small-scale situations the rapid response force would sort it out if it's ever needed.
So - this is very much misunderstood and the Reuters article doens't help to clarify it.
BLOG: It is impossible to win with a nuclear first strike - and NATO’s article 5 is defensive not retaliatory - IMHO much of the Twitter / social media panic is based on not understanding these points
https://debunkingdoomsday.quora.com/It-is-impossible-to-win-with-a-nuclear-first-strike-and-NATO-s-article-5-is-defensive-not-retaliatory-IMHO-much-of-t
If Estonia had really bad cyber attacks maybe it would call article 5 - but the response wouldn't be weapons it would be cyber-experts beefing up its cyber security.
Russia turned out to be far weaker than expected. It couldn't use cyber to attack Ukraine significantly even in the middle of bombing campaigns destroying its infrastructure physically.
Russia has been trying to hack he Ukrainian power grid at the same time as dropping bombs on it destroying power stations and substations. They have destroyed all of Ukraine's fossil fuel power stations with bombs. They destroy the substations over and over as they are repaired.
But they can't turn off the Ukrainian power grid. It is really really hard to hack a power grid. Russia hasn't been able to do it more than 2 years into the Ukrainian war with the ability to bomb it at the same time as hacking it.
If they ever succeeded the country with access to the grid can easily fix it by replacing / rebooting the hacked equipment.
This was a similar earlier story
QUOTE STARTS
Hundreds of Russian cyberattacks against Ukrainian power plants and energy infrastructure have been repelled since the beginning of the year, the head of the Ukraine’s SBU security service Cyber Security Department, Illya Vityuk, said in an interview on Ukrainian television on Dec. 27.
"Missile strikes against Ukrainian energy infrastructure are often accompanied by cyber-attacks,” he revealed.
“We were expecting to deal with this scenario, so none of them have been effective.”
He noted that out of all of the attacks, only 30 ever posed a critical risk to the country, though dozens of cyberattacks are launched on a daily basis.
"There were specific attempts to turn off power and destroy the digital infrastructure of some regional power distribution companies and thermal power plants,” Vityuk stated.
"Luckily, we managed to prevent it.”
The SBU's cyber department has significantly developed since the previous year, the official added.
From: Hundreds of cyberattacks against Ukrainian energy infrastructure repelled, reports SBU https://english.nv.ua/nation/hundreds-of-cyberattacks-against-energy-system-repelled-by-ukraine-news-50293822.html
Also, any hack on actual infrastructure would be short term as the software can be rebooted, reinstalled, -components replaced etc, it's the sort of thing an enemy might do during a war where even a few hours of power cuts might make a big difference.
At 4:23
“The optimistic view on cyberattacks is it’s difficult to cause lasting damage. So even though you can infiltrate some of these networks, you can destroy data, in the face of determined defenders, they’re likely to bring back those networks and get them back to operational status within hours, days at the outset. So keeping something down for weeks or months is really hard in cyberspace.
At 4:23 into this video:
https://x.com/YahooFinance/status/1506260108925452298
More on all this here:
BLOG: Russia probed US websites - but cyber expert says difficult to imagine an attack - Russia has no success trying to cyber-attack far weaker Ukraine - do continue to take standard measures to protect your website
https://debunkingdoomsday.quora.com/Russia-is-probing-US-websites-but-cyber-expert-says-difficult-to-imagine-an-attack-despite-what-the-president-said-d
Also all those stories about Russia being capable of attacking NATO - it was capable of doing that on Feb 2022 - of losing quickly as we now know, but it could have tried.
It couldn't right now, couldn't get together enough spare soldiers for a credible attack. It can't even get together enough soldiers after 3 months of fighting to push the Ukrainians out of Kursk oblast in Russia. It has an army of over a million but can't spare even 10,000 for anywhere else, they are all committed to the max in Ukraine. It had to go to NK of all places to find an extra 11,000 soldiers for Kursk oblast
And after the war is over NATO will increase that rapid response force to 300,000. And though Russia MIGHT rebuild, NATO is way ahead of it in numbers of soldiers and far more importantly in equipment. So it can't ever attack NATO.
Thank you for your reply. However, what do you think of this awnser to similar queiston in Quora:
https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-think-of-Bruno-Kahls-statements-that-Russia-s-ongoing-hybrid-attacks-sabotages-might-invoke-NATOs-Article-5-Kahl-also-said-Russias-military-would-likely-be-capable-of-attacking-NATO-by-the-end-of-the/answer/Mats-Andersson-16