Transformation Through Training • Issue No: 10 • September 2017 • 35 complicate the attribution of wrongful acts to the state actually responsible. From that perspective, it is highly likely that cyber operations or cyber-enabled operations will be increasingly utilised in the currently on-going and upcoming crises. It should be underlined, nevertheless, that cyber means and capabilities may be used lawfully, becoming then a significant extension of conventional defence capabilities and a true force multiplier. They can be used to effectively deny or degrade the adversaries C4ISR (Command, Control, Communications, Computer, Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance) capabilities, both as part of a broader military operation69 or independently, eg. blocking of ISIS-related social media accounts in order to degrade the terrorist organisation’s communications capabilities70 . In the Cyber Defence Pledge the Allies confirmed their commitment to develop cyber defence capabilities, recognising the importance of the cyber component in contemporary military operations. Simultaneously, NATO reiterated the intent to operate in cyberspace with respect to international law, to include the Charter of the United Nations, which is a clear indication that cyber operations can and should be conducted lawfully. ■ 1 Active Engagement, Modern Defence. Strategic Concept for the Defence and Security of the Members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Adopted by Heads of State and Government at the NATO Summit in Lisbon 19-20 November 2010, http://www.nato.int/strategic- concept/pdf/Strat_Concept_web_en.pdf (access: 11.03.2017), p. 11. 2 Wales Summit Declaration Issued by the HeadsofStateandGovernmentparticipating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Wales, 5 September 2014, http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_ texts_112964.htm?mode=pressrelease (access: 11.03.2017). 3 Warsaw Summit Communiqué Issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Warsaw 8-9 July 2016, http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_ texts_133169.htm (access 11.03.2017). 4 http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/ official_texts_133177.htm, paragraphs 70-71, (access 11.03.2017). 5 See for instance Paragraph 71 of the Warsaw Summit Communique. 6 See e.g. Mamiit, Aaron (October 30, 2014). "Meet APT28, Russian-backed malware for gathering intelligence from governments, militaries: Report". Tech Times, online, http://www.techtimes.com/ articles/18995/20141030/meet-apt28- russian-backed-malware-for-gathering- intelligence-from-governments-militaries- report.htm, (access 15.05.2017) 7 Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) (merits), 1984 ICJ REP. 392 June 27, 1986, http://www.icj-cij.org/ docket/index.php?sum=367&code=nus&p 1=3&p2=3&case=70&k=66&p3=5 (access 12 March 2017). 8 Responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, as annexed to Resolution No. 56/83 adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 12 December 2001, http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc. asp?symbol=A/RES/56/83 (access 12 March 2017). 9 Christine Gray, International Law and the Use of Force, Oxford University Press 2009, p. 7; 10 Ibidem, p. 30 11 A. Mark Weisburd, Use of Force. The Practice of States since World War II, The Pennsylvania State University Press 1997, pp.3-13, 22-25 12 C. Gray, op. cit., pp. 21-23, 25-29 13 General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV), 1970 14 A. M. Weisburd, op. cit, pp. 209-242 15 Noam Lubell, Extraterritorial Use of Force against Non-State Actors, Oxford University Press 2011, p. 69 16 Oppenheim’s International Law, Volume 1, Peace, edited by Sir Robert Jennings and Sir Arthur Watts, Oxford University Press 2008, pp. 385-390 17 Harold Hongju Koh, Legal Adviser, Department of State, International Law in Cyberspace: Remarks as Prepared for Delivery to the USCYBERCOM Inter-Agency Legal Conference (Sept. 18, 2012), reprinted in 54 HARVARD INTERNATIONAL LAW JOURNAL ONLINE, (Dec. 2012), http://www.harvardilj.org/wp-content/ uploads/2012/12/Koh-Speech-to-Publish1. pdf (access 11 March 2017) 18 Department of Defence Law of War Manual, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Defence, June 2015, pp. 47-48, 1000. 19 Tallinn Manual 2.0 on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations, edited by Michael N. Schmitt, Cambridge University Press 2017, p. 337. 20 H.H. Koh, op. cit., p. 7 21 C. Gray, International Law and the Use of Force, op. cit., pp.228-231. 22 Ibidem, pp. 168-174 23 See e.g. Shane Harris, Inside the FBI’s Fight Against Chinese Cyber- Espionage, posted in foreignpolicy.com on 27 May 2014, http://foreignpolicy. com/2014/05/27/exclusive-inside-the-fbis- fight-against-chinese-cyber-espionage/ (access 13 March 2017); Scott Warren Harold, Martin C. Libicki, Astrid Stuth Cevallos, Getting to Yes with China in Cyberspace, published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif., 2016, http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/ pubs/research_reports/RR1300/RR1335/ RAND_RR1335.pdf (access 13 March 2017); Cyber Espionage And the Theft of U.S. Intellectual Property and Technology, a Statement Before the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations by James A. Lewis, Director and Senior Fellow, Technology and Public Policy Program Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington D.C. 2013, https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/ s3fs-public/legacy_files/files/attachments/ ts130709_lewis.pdf (access 13 March 2017). 24 Shane Harris, Inside the FBI’s Fight…, supra note 19 25 Department of State International Cyberspace Policy Strategy, Public Law 114-113, Division N, Title IV, Section 402, March 2016, p. 11, https://www.state. gov/documents/organization/255732.pdf