Ambassador Gafoor, Excellencies,
The ICRC is grateful for the opportunity to address this OEWG on the question of how international law applies to the use of ICTs.
To build on the working group’s precise description of existing ICT threats, the ICRC would like to encourage delegations to also elaborate further on the existing international legal rules that seek to prevent or mitigate the harm caused by malicious ICT activities, in particular during armed conflict.
Over the past 4 years, States have expressed a diversity of views on how international humanitarian law applies to ICT activities during armed conflict. Clearly, further study is needed to build common understandings. Yet, it is encouraging to see that significant progress has been achieved.
Shared understandings on the application of international humanitarian law to ICT activities in situations of armed conflict are found, for example, in common regional positions. In addition, in October 2024 the 34th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent – which brings together all States – adopted by consensus a resolution on ‘ICT activities during armed conflict’, which called on States and parties to armed conflict to uphold international humanitarian law protection for civilian populations, civilian critical infrastructure, medical and humanitarian personnel, facilities and activities, and cultural property, including against the risks arising from ICT activities.
The ICRC agrees that discussions on IHL in the OEWG should not be held in isolation of other rules of international law, in particular the prohibition against the threat or use of force, and the obligation to settle disputes peacefully. In this context, it is important to recall that when in 1977 States codified many of the IHL rules that are most relevant to ICT, delegations were careful to reiterate that nothing in IHL can be construed as legitimizing or authorizing any act of aggression or any other use of force inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations.
This is part of the existing law, and it has been explicitly reiterated with regard to the ICT environment in the 2021 Group of Governmental Experts report.
Against this background, the ICRC strongly commends and supports the proposal by delegations to include in the final OEWG report a clear statement reaffirming that “in situations of armed conflict, IHL rules and principles […] serve to protect civilian populations and other protected persons and objects, including against the risks arising from ICT activities”. In our view, this statement is legally accurate and reflects States’ shared commitment to uphold the existing protection under international law in light of rapidly-evolving armed conflicts.
Likewise, it is today agreed that medical personnel, units and transports, as well as humanitarian operations, must be respected and protected in times of armed conflicts, including with regard to ICT activities.
This agreement is significant, but common understandings should also be built on what this means, for example, for the protection of medical or humanitarian data. To facilitate building common understandings, the ICRC is pleased to share with this working group two short papers explaining the legal protection of medical as well as humanitarian operations against ICT activities during armed conflict.[1]
Reaffirming the principle that cyber operations in times of armed conflict are subject to the existing rules of international law can only be the starting point for further discussion, including in a future institutional mechanism.
The ICRC stands ready to support future discussions on the use of ICTs in situations of armed conflict. In this regard, let me draw your attention to the ICTs Workstream of the Global Initiative on international humanitarian law, which the ICRC and six States have jointly launched last year. In complementarity with other processes, this workstream will provide a humanitarian platform for in-depth exchanges and fostering convergence of views on how IHL protects civilian populations against malicious ICT activities. We hope the outcome of this workstream will also inform future multilateral discussions, including at the UN.
Mr. Chair,
common understandings of how IHL applies to the use of ICTs can be achieved; in fact, they already exist and should be built on. We encourage delegations to reflect these common understandings in the final OEWG report.
Thank you.
We acknowledge Source link for the information.
